Day 3: The AI Held. The Index Fell Further. Here’s the Score.

I am not a licensed financial advisor. This is a documented public experiment, not investment advice. Every trade, every hold, and every dollar amount is logged and publicly verifiable. See the pre-registration post for the full rules of this experiment.

This is Day 3 of the Investing Smarter Test — a 12-month experiment where I gave an AI $1,000 in a real Robinhood account and let it trade on its own. The only question I’m trying to answer: can an AI beat the simplest thing a person could do with $1,000, which is drop it in an S&P 500 index fund and walk away?

The broad market dropped again this morning — a second down day in a row. The AI looked at two energy stocks that, on paper, were genuinely tempting buys — and passed on both. No new trade today. Whether that “no” was disciplined or a missed chance, we won’t know for a while; what I can show you now is exactly how it decided. Here’s where things stand.

What This Does NOT Prove

Before I show you the scoreboard, a word about what you’re looking at.

This is one account. One run. One AI. Twelve months. A $1,000 account doesn’t have enough room to truly blow up — and it doesn’t have enough room to meaningfully beat the market either. Statistics require sample sizes. One experiment is a story, not a proof.

If the AI is up right now, that doesn’t prove AI investing works. If it’s down, that doesn’t prove it can’t. What it does prove is whether this specific AI, following this specific strategy, beat or lost to the simplest available alternative — a plain index fund — over this particular stretch of time.

I’m publishing every day, win or lose. If the AI blows up, you’ll see it here. That’s the point.

The Investing Smarter Test Scoreboard — Day 3 (June 24, 2026)

The S&P 500 benchmark: $1,000 invested in SPY on June 22, 2026 — the day the AI account placed its first real trade — with dividends reinvested and no fees. The honest comparison is always “what would $1,000 in an index fund have done?” (These are the values around mid-morning Eastern; markets move all day, so a snapshot is just that — a snapshot. “Drawdown so far” means the worst dip to date, which on a three-day-old account isn’t a meaningful stress test yet.)

So here’s the plain version: the AI is down about a dollar; the index fund is down about eight. That puts the AI roughly $6.85 ahead on a day the broad market fell. I’ll be honest that I’m pointing at a tiny lead here, so take the caution seriously: this is a tiny account over a short stretch, and a lead this small can just as easily be luck as anything else — so I wouldn’t read too much into it yet, in either direction.

If This Were $10,000 Instead of $1,000

I started this with $1,000 because that’s a real, relatable amount and it’s what I was willing to hand an AI. But a lot of you are thinking about more than that — so here’s the same result scaled up. Same trades, same percentages, just 10× the starting money:

The point of showing both isn’t “look what the AI could have made you.” It’s the gap. At $1,000 the AI is ahead of the boring index fund by $6.85; scaled to $10,000 that same gap is about $68.50 — same story, bigger numbers. Whether it’s $1,000 or $10,000 or $100,000, the question is identical: did the clever thing beat the boring index fund? — and notice the boring index fund’s number scales just as cleanly without anyone having to watch it every day. (This is illustrative scaling of an already-tiny sample — not a projection, not a promise. Past performance is not future performance.)

Why the AI Held — And Why That’s the Whole Point

Here’s the thing nobody tells you about investing: most of the skill is in not doing things.

The broad market dropped for a second straight day, and two energy stocks the AI surfaced this morning looked genuinely good on paper — Valero (VLO), a refiner trading at a low price-to-earnings ratio with a real cost-savings catalyst, and EOG Resources (EOG), an oil-and-gas producer with the lowest P/E of the bunch and a giant share-buyback program. A human staring at two “cheap, quality” names on a red day feels the itch to do something — grab the dip before it bounces.

The AI didn’t. Now, I want to be careful here: passing on those two might turn out to be disciplined, or it might turn out to be a missed opportunity — if VLO or EOG runs 15% next month, the AI’s “no” will look like a mistake, and I’ll show you that too. We won’t know for a while. What I can tell you today is how it said no, and that’s the part worth watching.

The AI looked at both, wrote out exactly why each one was tempting — and then passed on both. Here’s the reasoning it logged this morning, word for word:

“HOLDINGS REVIEW: (1) AAPL $0.99 position, −0.31% — fractional dust, no action warranted. HOLD. (2) VWO $96.53, −3.47% from $61.25 avg — EM ETF near 52wk high $61.52, pullback is post-ex-div noise, EM inflows positive per discovery. Thesis intact, well within −15% backstop. HOLD. (3) XBI $152.44, +1.62% from $148.48 avg — NEW 52wk HIGH TODAY ($151.10), biotech M&A tailwind intact, above entry, original trend thesis confirmed not falsified. Kill criteria ($142 close x2, sector collapse, death cross) NOT triggered. HOLD winner at momentum high. CANDIDATES REVIEWED: VLO (mean_reversion, $242, PE 17.7, 9% off highs, California carbon catalyst) — solid fundamentals but mean-reversion mode requires oversold bounce from support; current price is mid-range pullback not technical capitulation, no clear support level defined, thesis is ‘buy the dip’ without the dip being complete. PASS. EOG (trend, $134, PE 13.3, 12% off highs, $20B buyback) — attractive value but 12% off 52wk high is NOT a trend entry (trend mode = buy breakouts/new highs, not pullbacks); this is a mean-reversion setup mislabeled as trend. No confirmed uptrend breakout, just a pullback in a range. PASS. Neither candidate clears the named-mode discipline cleanly — VLO lacks a defined support bounce, EOG lacks a trend breakout. Current holdings are performing (XBI +1.6%, VWO within normal range). No action superior to holding.”

(Quick translation, since the AI writes in shorthand: the dollar figures next to each holding — $0.99, $96.53, $152.44 — are how much that position is worth right now, not the price of one share. So VWO is a roughly $96 chunk of the account that’s down 3.47% from what I paid; XBI is a roughly $152 chunk that’s up 1.62%. “EM” means emerging markets; “ex-div” means just after a dividend was paid, which nudges a fund’s price down; “52wk high” is the highest price in a year. And the $151.10 the AI cites for XBI is the previous one-year high — the new high it hit today is above that.)

A note on reading that: the AI will always write a confident explanation. Confident reasoning is not the same as correct reasoning. I’m logging it exactly as written so we can look back later and see whether it was right — or whether it just sounded right. The thing I want you to notice isn’t whether the AI was smart about Valero and EOG. It’s that it had a rule — “only buy a pullback when there’s an actual bottom to buy, only call something a breakout when it’s actually breaking out” — and it stuck to the rule instead of the feeling. Sticking to a rule when a trade looks tempting is the boring habit that tends to protect real money over time. Whether this particular “no” was the right call, we’ll find out together.

An honest look at what the account is holding: it’s not all green. The one position carried over from the start, an emerging-markets fund (VWO), is down about 3.5% from where it was bought. The AI’s read is that this is ordinary noise after a dividend payout, not a broken idea, so it’s holding — with a hard stop-loss in place if it’s wrong. The biotech fund it bought on Day 2 (XBI) is up a bit and hit a new high today. I’m showing you both because a real experiment shows the losers, not just the winners.

What holding means for the strategy: this is a low-turnover experiment. Most days should be hold days. The AI is not supposed to be trading constantly — constant trading is one of the quiet ways active strategies fall behind a plain index over time. So today’s “no” is the expected behavior, not a cop-out. The discipline was the decision.

What You Should Actually Do With $1,000

I get this question every time I write about investing experiments: “Should I do what the AI is doing?”

Here’s my honest answer: probably not — and the reason has nothing to do with whether the AI beats the index. It might! It might not! I genuinely don’t know. The reason is the shape of this account: it’s one $1,000 experiment concentrated in a handful of positions, which is not a sound way for any regular person to invest their own money no matter how it turns out. You’d be copying the structure, not just the result, and the structure is the problem.

If you have $1,000 to invest and you don’t know what to do with it, decades of investing research point the same direction. Put it in a low-cost S&P 500 index fund — something like SPY, VOO, or FSKAX. Set it up as automatic monthly contributions if you can. Don’t check it daily.

Where to actually do it. For each of these I show you two links: a referral link, where you and I both get a small bonus or some free money, and a plain link, where I get absolutely nothing. Your choice — the referral is never required, and I’d rather you start investing than worry about which link you clicked. (Why I’m so careful about this is spelled out on my editorial independence page.)

• Vanguard — the low-cost gold standard. Buy VOO directly; about 0.03%/year. Best if you want the cheapest do-it-yourself option. No referral program, so there’s just one link: vanguard.com.
• Betterment — a robo-advisor that builds and rebalances an index portfolio for you automatically (about 0.25%/year). Referral link (we both get a bonus) or plain link (I get nothing).
• Acorns — rounds up your spare change and invests it; best for building the habit. Referral link ($5 for you after you invest) or plain link (I get nothing).
• Robinhood — the commission-free broker this experiment runs on; perfectly fine for buying VOO or SPY and leaving it alone. Referral link (free fractional share for both of us) or plain link (I get nothing).

That’s it. That’s the boring, reliable thing. The entire point of this experiment is to find out whether a sophisticated AI can actually beat that boring, reliable thing — and after 3 days, here’s exactly where it stands: the AI is $6.85 ahead of the index fund, after a couple of down days for the market. We’re a long way from knowing whether that’s skill or just a few days of luck.

Before I gave the AI a dollar, I laid out the whole case for why this is a genuinely hard thing to do — the pre-registration post I wrote before it started. I made my reasoning public on day zero so nobody could accuse me of writing the ending afterward — and to be clear, I genuinely don’t know how this ends. You can also read Day 2, when the AI made its first real trade. However it turns out, you’ll see it happen in real time — that’s the fun of it.

Transparency: The Full Log Is Public

Every trade this AI has made or declined to make — plus its logged reasoning — is documented in an append-only, timestamped reasoning log. Today’s hold decision, and the full list of the names it considered and rejected, was written and time-stamped before this post existed. If you want to verify anything here, the log is the source of truth.

FAQ

Q: How is the S&P 500 benchmark calculated?
A: I recorded the price of SPY (the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust) on June 22, 2026, the day the AI account placed its first real trade. The benchmark tracks what $1,000 invested in SPY that day — with dividends reinvested and no fees — would be worth today. It’s the simplest honest comparison: what would doing nothing have gotten you?

Q: Can I follow along or copy the AI’s trades?
A: You can follow along — every trade and hold decision is logged. I’d encourage you NOT to copy the trades, though. This is one $1,000 experiment, not a recommendation — a single concentrated account isn’t a sound way for anyone to invest their own money, no matter how it ends up doing. The better move is the boring one above: a low-cost index fund, left alone. Follow the experiment for the story; don’t follow it as a strategy.

Q: If the AI isn’t trading, is anything actually happening?
A: Yes — quite a bit, even on a “nothing” day. This morning the AI scanned several watchlists, surfaced two energy stocks (Valero and EOG) as serious candidates and pulled their fundamentals and recent SEC filings, screened out a longer list of names it judged overhyped (a few popular tech and uranium stocks), and separately re-checked all three positions it already owns — then decided none of it beat simply holding. A hold isn’t the AI asleep at the wheel; it’s the AI looking hard and concluding the move is to wait. Most days in a sound strategy look exactly like this.

And if you found your way here because debt — not investing — is the heavier weight on you right now, that comes first. You can’t out-invest a pile of high-interest debt, and there’s no shame in starting there.

Steve Rhode is not a licensed financial advisor. The Investing Smarter Test is a documented public experiment, not investment advice. All trades and decisions are logged publicly. Do not make financial decisions based on this experiment. For guidance on your own money, talk to a fee-only fiduciary financial advisor.

Steve Rhode The Get Out of Debt Guy | Consumer Debt Expert

Consumer debt expert & investigative writer. Personal bankruptcy survivor (1990). Washington Post award-winning author. Exposing debt scams since 1994.

See Full Bio

How to Get out of Debt Money Troubles Money Personalities Budgeting Behavioral Economics Motivation Inspiration Money Management The History of Credit and Debt Getting Out of Debt Get Out of Debt Debt Settlement Credit Counseling Loan & Debt Relief Scams Debt Relief Industry Practices Exposing Deceptive Financial Services Helping Consumers Navigate Financial Hardship Consumer Advocacy Consumer Debt Expert Consumer Protection Debt Relief Scam Student Loan Bankruptcy Debt Validation Debt and Mental Health Student Loans Debt Consolidation Debt in the Military Bankruptcy Consumer Debt Credit Card Debt Debt Relief Scams Personal Finance YMYL Financial Content Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Medical Debt Student Loan Debt Consumer Bankruptcy Financial Fraud Exposure Collections Investigative Writing Fraud investigation True Crime Research