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.
Quick Answer: On Day 17 of the Investing Smarter Test, the AI screened more than 200 stocks, deep-researched 7 of them, and bought exactly none. Not because a rule stopped it — because none earned it. AI account: $1,003.44 (+0.34%). S&P 500 benchmark: $1,010.15 (+1.01%). The AI is $6.71 behind the index this morning.
Next up: Day 18: My AI Screened 9 Stocks and Said No to All of Them
Expert Context: I’ve been in this space since 1994 — over 30 years of watching people make financial decisions under pressure. The hardest discipline isn’t picking the right stock. It’s passing on 15 plausible ones when none of them genuinely clears the bar. That’s what I’m watching the AI do today. It’s a harder thing than it sounds.
This is Day 17 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?
This morning the AI reviewed more than 200 screener candidates, built a triage slate of 15 names, and deep-researched 7 of them. Then it bought nothing. Not because a rule blocked it — the discovery engine ran clean, the macro circuit-breaker wasn’t armed, and there was nothing stopping it from pulling the trigger. It just looked at what was actually there and decided: none of this is good enough.
The Daily Money Brief — Free, at 10 AM
Money you may be owed, scams to dodge, and the fine print decoded — the consumer money news that affects your wallet, every weekday.
That restraint is the story today. Here’s where things stand.
Quick plain-English note, in case you’re newer to this: when I say the S&P 500 (ticker SPY), I just mean a single investment that holds a slice of America’s 500 biggest companies all at once — Apple, Microsoft, your bank, the company that makes your toothpaste. You buy one thing and you instantly own a little piece of all of them. That’s the “boring index fund” everyone keeps telling you to buy — and it’s the yardstick the AI has to beat. Learn that one term and you’re already ahead of most people.
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 17 (July 15, 2026)
| AI Account | S&P 500 Index (Benchmark) | |
|---|---|---|
| Starting value | $1,000.00 | $1,000.00 |
| Current value | $1,003.44 | $1,010.15 |
| Change from start | +$3.44 (+0.34%) | +$10.15 (+1.01%) |
| AI vs. Index gap | −$6.71 (behind) | — |
| Max drawdown (AI) | −0.68% | −2.04% |
The S&P 500 benchmark: $1,000 invested in SPY on June 22, 2026, dividends reinvested, no fees. The honest comparison is always “what would $1,000 in an index fund have done?” Scoreboard computed live at write time (~1:14–1:27 PM ET, July 15) — AI account value from Robinhood; SPY at the pinned t0 basis of 1.343602 paper shares ($744.34 starting price on June 22, 2026).
One more plain-English term: max drawdown just means the biggest drop from a high point to a low point along the way — the worst dip you’d have had to sit through. A small max drawdown means a smoother, less stomach-churning ride; a big one means it fell hard at some point before recovering. The AI’s worst dip so far has been 0.68%; the S&P 500’s worst was 2.04%. A smaller drawdown means a smoother ride — the AI has had a less bumpy trip even while falling behind on raw return.
The gap has flipped again. Yesterday (Day 16) the AI had recovered to essentially dead even with the S&P 500 — $0.23 ahead. This morning it’s $6.71 behind. The index moved up on the day while the AI’s holdings didn’t keep pace. This is the experiment in real time: the “boring” fund is up over 1% from the start while the AI’s concentrated bets are up a third of that. Neither number tells you anything definitive yet — we’re 17 days in — but today the boring option is winning by a meaningful margin.
Also worth noting: the mechanical QQQ/EFA/GLD baseline (a passive 60/40 mix of tech, international, and gold) would be worth about $1,001.67 today. The AI (+0.34%) is roughly even with that passive alternative, while both trail the pure S&P 500 benchmark (+1.01%) by a meaningful gap today.
If This Were $10,000 Instead of $1,000
I started 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:
| If you’d started with $10,000 | AI Account | S&P 500 Index |
|---|---|---|
| Starting value | $10,000.00 | $10,000.00 |
| Would be worth today | $10,034.38 | $10,101.47 |
| Change | +$34.38 (+0.34%) | +$101.47 (+1.01%) |
| Difference | −$67.09 (AI behind) | — |
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 behind the boring index fund by $6.71; scaled to $10,000 that same gap is $67.09 — 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 right now the boring index fund is winning 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 Screening 200 Stocks to Buy Zero Is the Point
Here’s the thing nobody tells you about investing: most of the skill is in not doing things.
Today the market was up — SPY gaining over 1% from its starting point — and that creates exactly the kind of pressure that empties accounts. If the AI is behind, the temptation is to do something to catch up. Buy a winner. Chase the move. React to the news. That itch is what empties retirement accounts.
The AI felt none of it. This morning it ran its full discovery process — 207 screener rows, narrowed to 124 eligible names after filters, a 15-name triage slate, 7 deep-researched — and bought nothing. Here’s the reasoning it logged:
“No new buy: discovery ran clean (discovery_ok true, edgar canary ok) but returned ZERO qualifying candidates — every surfaced name was rejected on the merits, so there is nothing that clears the fence. Reviewed the rejects and concur: VZ/AU/UBS/HON/RTX/GSK all failed on EARNINGS_LANDMINE / catalyst-already-over / unconfirmed-timing; JNJ/KO/WM rejected as fully-valued momentum-list presence with no checkable dislocation (correctly treated as anti-hype, not a thesis); SKHY correctly rejected as an unexplained -13% falling knife; NCNO (PE ~145 + earnings miss), GENI/CPRI/BUD/PBR.A on fundamental concerns. None is a real, checkable price/fundamental setup, so buying any would violate the no-hype/no-forced-trade discipline. HOLDINGS decided fresh: (1) XBI @ $154.70 vs $148.48 entry, +4.19%, a WINNER — original trend-breakout thesis intact, price well above the $142 kill level, thesis CONFIRMED → HOLD; did NOT add (no fresh catalyst today; ‘it’s already up’ is not an add reason). (2) VWO @ $59.135 vs $61.25 entry, -3.45% (back-filled thesis, treated with skepticism) — EM-diversifier sleeve, modest dip, well above the ~$55 kill level, no broad-EM breakdown → HOLD, not an exit on a small paper dip. Neither holding’s kill_criteria triggered, so holding is the disciplined call.”
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.
What those 7 deep-researched names actually failed on: The AI didn’t guess — it built a case for each one and then found a reason to pass. Verizon (VZ), Anglogold Ashanti (AU), UBS Group (UBS), Honeywell (HON), RTX Corp (RTX), and GSK all hit earnings proximity concerns — buy candidates within striking distance of earnings reports that could reprice them sharply in either direction (what the AI calls an “earnings landmine”). Johnson & Johnson, Coca-Cola, and Waste Management were on high-momentum lists — correctly treated as anti-hype signals rather than theses, with no independently checkable dislocation to justify a position. SkyH (SKHY) was falling with no explanation — down 13% with no clear catalyst, which is a falling knife, not a value opportunity. nCino had a PE around 145 plus a recent earnings miss. Genius Sports, Capri Holdings, AB InBev, and Petrobras preferred had fundamental concerns the AI wasn’t comfortable with.
None of this was a rule stopping the AI. It was judgment. Twenty steps into a screening process and still nothing earned a buy. So the AI bought nothing.
A note on reading the AI’s reasoning honestly: the AI elsewhere logged that some names had “thin data.” This reflects a limitation in the research tooling for certain tickers — not a market signal. I’ve stripped that from the reasoning block above so the rejection story is told on the solid reasons only. The solid reasons were enough.
What holding means for the strategy: This is a buy-and-hold experiment. Most days should be hold days. The AI is not supposed to be trading constantly — constant trading generates fees and taxes, which is one of the ways active strategies underperform indexes over time. So today’s hold is the expected behavior, not a cop-out. The harder question is whether, when the AI does buy, it buys the right things. We’re still in early days on that answer.
The Two Holdings and Where They Stand
The AI held both existing positions with no changes. Here’s where they are at write time (live prices as of ~1:14–1:27 PM ET today):
- XBI (SPDR S&P Biotech ETF): 1.010237 shares at a cost of $148.48/share, now at $155.36. That’s +4.63% since purchase — a winner. The original trend-breakout thesis on biotech M&A tailwind is intact. Well above the $142 kill level, no death cross. The AI held and explicitly did not add: “it’s already up” is not an add reason. (Note: the $156.82 market value shown here is the position’s total dollar value — 1.010237 shares × $155.36 — not XBI’s share price. XBI trades around $155.)
- VWO (Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF): 1.632653 shares at a cost of $61.25/share, now at $59.34. That’s −3.12% since purchase — a modest paper dip. The position was built as an emerging-markets diversifier, a thesis that was back-filled and is being treated with appropriate skepticism. Well above the ~$55 kill level with no broad EM breakdown. Hold — don’t exit on a small dip. (Note: $96.88 is the position’s total dollar value — 1.632653 shares × $59.34 — not VWO’s share price. VWO trades around $59.)
The rest of the account is in cash, waiting for a setup that actually clears the bar.
What You Should Actually Do With $1,000
Here’s my honest answer: probably not do what the AI is doing.
If you have $1,000 to invest and you don’t know what to do with it, the research is clear. 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.
Here are the places I’d look. For each one I’m showing you two links — a referral link (where we both get a small bonus) and a plain link (where I get nothing). Your choice, always. I’d never make you use the one that pays me.
- Robinhood — the broker this experiment itself runs on; commission-free trading. Referral link (we both get a bonus) or plain link (I get nothing).
- Vanguard — the low-cost gold standard; you can buy VOO directly (~0.03%/yr). Plain link (no referral program).
- Betterment — a robo-advisor that builds and rebalances an index portfolio for you automatically (~0.25%/yr). 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 (we both get a bonus) or plain link (I get nothing).
Why I show both links: I promise total transparency about how this site makes money. See my editorial independence page for exactly how — and how little — I earn, and why I’ll never point you somewhere just because it pays me.
And if you’re carrying high-interest debt right now, none of this is step one. Paying off a credit card charging 24% is a guaranteed 24% “return” no investment can promise. Start there. See how all your debt relief options compare first.
Right now the AI is $6.71 behind the boring index fund after 17 days. 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. Whether the AI proves me right or surprises me, you’ll see it happen in real time.
For context on yesterday’s story — a genuine merit-based pass on 4 candidates: Day 16: My AI Looked at Four Stocks It Could Have Bought Today. It Said No to All of Them.
Transparency: The Full Log Is Public
Every trade this AI has made or declined to make — plus its logged reasoning — is publicly documented. The AI’s instructions and pre-registration commitment are at the integrity anchor post. The decision entries referenced here are from the runner’s live reasoning log (entry 0374, cycle 2026-07-15, decider solo_claude, stream live). If you want to verify anything in this post, the numbers come from real accounts, not back-tested simulations.
That’s the deal I made with readers before this experiment started, and I’m keeping it.
Key Takeaways
- The AI screened 207 stocks → 124 eligible → 15 triage candidates → 7 deep-researched → 0 bought. That’s the discipline on display today.
- Seven names were deep-researched and rejected: VZ/AU/UBS/HON/RTX/GSK (earnings landmines or catalyst-already-over), JNJ/KO/WM (momentum-list anti-hype with no checkable dislocation), SKHY (unexplained −13% falling knife), NCNO (PE ~145 + earnings miss), GENI/CPRI/BUD/PBR.A (fundamental concerns). None earned a buy.
- Both existing holdings unchanged: XBI +4.63% (above kill level, biotech M&A thesis intact), VWO −3.12% (above kill level, no EM breakdown, hold on a small dip).
- Scoreboard: AI $1,003.44 (+0.34%) vs S&P 500 $1,010.15 (+1.01%). The AI is behind by $6.71 — the index gained over 1% while the AI’s concentrated positions lagged.
- This was a genuine merit-based hold — not a blocked entry, not a forced decision. The AI had every opportunity to buy and passed on all of it.
The Bottom Line
On Day 17, the AI looked at more than 200 stocks — really looked, deep-researching 7 of them — and bought exactly none. Not because it was stopped. Because none of them earned it. Meanwhile the S&P 500 gained over 1% from its starting value and the AI’s account gained just a third of that. The gap right now: $6.71 behind, in a $1,000 experiment, after 17 days. That’s what you’re watching. Not a performance that proves anything yet — but a process that’s being documented honestly, one hold at a time.
Frequently Asked Questions
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 same day the AI account started — $744.34 per share. The benchmark tracks what $1,000 invested in SPY that day — with dividends reinvested and no fees — would be worth today. It works out to 1.343602 paper shares; multiply by the current SPY price to get the benchmark value. 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 publicly here on the site. I’d encourage you NOT to copy the trades. 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, but slowly. A buy-and-hold strategy means most days are hold days by design. The AI is monitoring its existing holdings (XBI and VWO) against specific kill criteria and watching for new candidates that genuinely clear its bar. In the meantime, whatever the account holds is rising or falling with the market. Today the holdings didn’t keep pace with the broader market — that’s the nature of a concentrated two-position portfolio vs. a 500-company index. The experiment is working exactly as designed; we’re just watching it unfold in real time.
Catch up on the experiment: the pre-registration and the math behind it, Day 15: the AI found a stock it wanted to buy — its own rule said no, and Day 16: Four candidates, four rejections on the merits. Check out more in the Investing and Savings section.
This is a documented experiment I’m sharing openly — one informed look at a real question, not investment advice. Only you know your full situation. Take it as input for your decision, not instruction. Nobody gets to tell you what to do with your money. Not me, not an AI, not anyone.
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, visit the Investing and Savings section.
Next up: Day 18: My AI Screened 9 Stocks and Said No to All of Them
Dealing With Debt? Understanding your options is the first step. See how all your debt relief options compare — including ones most sites won’t tell you about. The Find Your Path quiz gives a recommendation based on your actual numbers, and the Scam-O-Meter checks any company’s complaint history before you sign. Federal Reserve research shows bankruptcy filers recover faster than those who don’t file.
