Investment thesis tracking
Find what could change your view. Connect the questions, evidence and reasoning behind your investment decisions.
One thesis. One team. Workspace access by invitation.
Three pathways. See the assumptions that separate them.
A saved scenario and its assumptions, with unassessed components left visible.
Saved view · Forecasts unassessed
The scenario capture has 0 component forecasts; model consensus is unassessed. These are saved records, not live data.
Product screenshots with guided motion. Open a full product view to inspect its saved status and context.
What would change our view?
The duration thesis depends on inflation easing and room for lower policy rates. These are separate questions to examine.
Inflation
Evidence needed: the relevant release, series, date and comparison period.
Policy
Evidence needed: the policy outlook and the assumptions supporting it.
Authored illustration · No current evidence or probabilities assessed
An example of the review structure. This is not a live assessment or investment recommendation.
How Crene works
A conversation is a starting point. A useful review keeps the question, evidence and decision connected.
Illustrative reasoning only. No current evidence, model assessment or saved decision is represented.
Frame the view, horizon and supporting questions. Review the proposed definition before saving it.
Does easing inflation still support our duration view?
Inspect dated evidence and available saved model reasoning. Compare assumptions and keep missing evidence visible.
Suppose inflation surprises higher while hiring weakens. The same release can raise different questions.
Maintain, revise or retire the view with the rationale attached. Preserve the history for the next review.
Revisit the unresolved assumption. Keep a team decision separate from a forecast or recorded outcome.
Built around the review
Bring the people, evidence and rationale into the same review. Follow one thesis from its starting assumptions to the next decision.
A review, connected
What changed since our last review?
Define the thesis, its horizon and the assumptions behind it. Give the team a clear starting point for the next review.
Authored example. Your team’s decision stays separate from a forecast, a model estimate or a recorded outcome.
Easing inflation could support a duration overweight through the next review.
Hypothetical thesisWould persistent inflation weaken the original policy-rate assumption?
Inspect the relevant releases before revisiting the view.
Authored example. No actual team decision or event outcome is represented.
Before you start
A scoped six-week review for one thesis and one team. Define the thesis, examine evidence and model disagreement, and retain the team’s review decisions. Workspace access is arranged by invitation after the scope review.
They show available models’ saved assessments of a defined question, with reasoning and dates. Differences help a team examine competing assumptions. Disagreement is not proof of forecast accuracy or a confidence interval.
Requests depend on workspace access, selected models and usage limits. On-demand assessments show a cost preview and require confirmation. Opening a saved result does not run another assessment.
Private review
One thesis. One team. Six weeks to examine the assumptions and preserve the decisions.
Inside a private review
Where do we begin?
Start with a non-confidential summary. Define the question, horizon and assumptions for a scoped six-week private review.
One thesis.
One team.
A clearer record.
