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 24 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’s screening tool worked from start to finish for the first time in a while — no failures, no shortcuts. It looked at 1,765 different stocks and ETFs, narrowed that down to a short list, did deep research on nine of the most promising names, and said no to every single one. So it held everything it already owns and made no new buy.
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.
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 24 (July 28, 2026)
| AI Account | S&P 500 Index (Benchmark) | |
|---|---|---|
| Starting value | $1,000.00 | $1,000.00 |
| Current value | $1,003.58 | $995.29 |
| Change from start | +$3.58 (+0.36%) | −$4.71 (−0.47%) |
| AI vs. Index gap | AI ahead by $8.29 | |
| Max drawdown (AI) | −1.60% | −1.47% |
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?” Quote timestamp for today’s figures: 2026-07-28T19:59:59Z (regular-session close).
One more plain-English term, since it’s in the table: 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. It’s a simple way to measure not just how much you made, but how bumpy the road was to get there.
The AI account is at $1,003.58, up $3.58 from its $1,000 starting point. The S&P 500 twin sits at $995.29, down $4.71. The AI is $8.29 ahead — about 0.83 percentage points. Worth a caution while it’s fun: 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. Both max drawdown figures are carried from earlier lows (a $1,013.37 AI peak on Day 13, an SPY trough at the end of June); neither account set a new low today.
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:
| 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 | $10,035.80 | $9,952.87 |
| Change | +$35.80 (+0.36%) | −$47.13 (−0.47%) |
| Difference | AI ahead by $82.93 | |
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 $8.29; scaled to $10,000 that same gap is $82.93 — 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.
Lately the pull to do something has been strong. Q2 earnings season is in full swing, and a handful of stocks the AI looked at closely today are either extended after a sharp run-up or sitting right on top of an earnings report that has a documented habit of moving the stock double digits in a single session. A human staring at that lineup feels the itch to grab a “cheap” beaten-down name before it bounces, or to chase a stock that just broke out — that itch is exactly what turns a disciplined plan into a gambling habit.
The AI felt none of it, and this time its tools actually cooperated: after two straight days last week when its own screening tool broke and it correctly fell back to just re-checking what it already owned, today the full pipeline ran clean. It scanned a universe of 1,765 stocks and ETFs, narrowed that down to a 40-name shortlist, then filtered out 8 more before doing any real work on them — 7 for having too wide a bid-ask spread to trade cheaply (tickers AVTX, CHPY, VEEE, SHAZ, ALGN, and RLAY, plus CDW, which missed the liquidity cutoff by a hair), and one (LEGN) on news and drawdown risk. That left 9 real finalists, and the AI did full research — earnings dates, valuation, recent news, SEC filings — on every one of them: Cigna (CI), Aercap (AER), Wynn Resorts (WYNN), Klaviyo (KVYO), Bentley Systems (BSY), Constellation Energy (CEG), Cooper Companies (COO), StoneCo (STNE), and the Global X AI & Big Data ETF (AIQ).
Every one of the nine got a no. Here’s the reasoning it logged:
“FUNNEL (honest breadth): discovery ran a 1,765-name universe (1,493 stocks + 272 ETFs) → 40-name date-seeded slate → triaged out 8 before deep research (7 on the objective <0.25% spread liquidity gate: AVTX, CHPY, VEEE, SHAZ, ALGN, RLAY, CDW-marginal 0.254%; plus LEGN on news/drawdown risk) → deep-researched 9 finalists. I personally evaluated ALL 9 finalists + my 3 holdings, and I take NO new position today. Finalist verdicts: CI (PASS — Q2 earnings 2026-07-30 is INSIDE the 2-trading-day pre-earnings blackout, rule 11a hard fail; history of -9%/-17% earnings gaps); AER (PASS — earnings TOMORROW 2026-07-29, blackout hard fail, AND extended at 97% of 52wk high); WYNN (PASS — downtrend off fresh 52wk low, earnings Aug 4 / 7d); KVYO (PASS — not TTM-profitable, gapped -30% last print, earnings Aug 5 / 8d); BSY (PASS — +19% in 3 sessions, extended, still below 200d, target CUT, earnings Aug 6); CEG (PASS — downtrend below 200d, M&A-inflated revenue optics, -3.9% today no news, earnings Aug 6); COO (PASS — P/E 61.7x rich, no verified financial-trend series, earnings Aug 26 with violent gap history); STNE (PASS — below 200d in a downtrend, July downgrade wave BofA/Goldman, no financials series for the ADR); AIQ (PASS — falling-knife AI basket ~20% off high, below 50d MA, sub-2M ADV, no catalyst — buying it would be pure momentum-story, banned). Common thread: nearly every name is either inside an earnings window or a falling knife — nothing offers a clean, checkable setup at proper size. HOLDINGS re-evaluated fresh this tick (not autopilot): BRK.B +4.26% ($490.09→$510.98), quality-value ballast thesis CONFIRMED, kill (2 closes <$470 or VIX>30) not triggered — HOLD (no fresh entry-quality reason to scale up; not adding just because it’s up). XBI -0.65% ($148.48→$147.52), trend thesis STILL DEVELOPING, above the $142 kill line — HOLD. VWO -6.10% ($61.25→$57.515), backfilled EM-sleeve thesis, above its ~$55 proposed kill and well above the -15% backstop — HOLD but flagged as the weakest name and on watch. Cash on hand stays in interest-earning cash, a legitimate paying default, not SPY. Sources: snapshot quotes + position_memory (price_timestamp 2026-07-28T14:30Z), discovery dossiers with named sources/EDGAR checks per candidate.”
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 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 — and today it’s backed by real work: nine names taken seriously and rejected on their own merits, not a coin flip and not a tool failure. The three existing positions stayed put too, each re-checked against its own exit rule rather than left on autopilot: Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.B) is up 4.56% from its purchase price and nowhere near its roughly $470 exit floor, with no earnings event to worry about. XBI (the biotech sector ETF) is up 0.89% and comfortably above its $142 stop, with the sector’s M&A tailwind still intact. VWO (the emerging-markets ETF) is down 5.74% from its purchase price — the weakest of the three, and the one the AI flagged as the first candidate to exit if it closes below roughly $55 — but it hasn’t hit that line yet. None of the three tripped their kill criteria today, so none of them moved. Cash — $570.03 of the $1,003.58 total, alongside $433.55 in equity — sits uninvested, earning interest while it waits for a setup that actually clears the bar.
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.
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.
Where to actually do it. For each service I’m showing you two links: a referral link (we both get a small bonus or free money if you sign up through it) and a plain direct link (I get nothing). Your choice, never required. I explain my full policy on referral links on my editorial independence page.
- Vanguard — the low-cost gold standard. Buy VOO directly; ~0.03%/yr. Best if you want the cheapest DIY option. No referral program → one link only: vanguard.com.
- Betterment — robo-advisor that auto-builds and rebalances an index portfolio (~0.25%/yr). → referral link (we both get a bonus) or plain link (I get nothing).
- Acorns — rounds up 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 itself runs on; fine for buying VOO/SPY and leaving it alone. → referral link (free fractional share, $5–$200 value, 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 24 days, here’s exactly where it stands: the AI is $8.29 ahead of the index fund.
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 — that’s the fun of it.
And if you’re carrying debt alongside any investing impulse, worth a read: the research on whether to invest or pay off debt first. The answer is more nuanced than most financial advice acknowledges.
Transparency: The Full Log Is Public
Every trade this AI has made or declined to make — plus its logged reasoning — is publicly documented. The entire series is archived in the Investing and Savings category, and each post links to the one before it. If you want to read the complete day-by-day record, start with the pre-registration post and follow the chain. The last published entry before this one is Day 23, which covers the second time the scanning tool broke last week.
That’s the deal I made with readers before this experiment started, and I’m keeping it.
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. 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 documented in this series. 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: Is the scanning tool that broke twice last week fixed now?
A: Today is the best evidence yet that it’s working: the AI ran its full pipeline end to end, reviewed 1,765 stocks and ETFs, and produced nine real finalists with full research on each one — no shortcuts, no partial scan. I’m not going to declare victory after one clean day, but it’s a genuinely good sign after two rough ones. I’ll keep reporting honestly if it breaks again.
Coming Up
Every weekday morning I post what the AI decided and where the scoreboard stands. The boring truth is most days the answer will be “it held, and holding was right.” Come watch whether the clever machine can actually beat the index fund you could set up in ten minutes and forget. Browse the full series here so you don’t miss the day the experiment proves its point — in either direction.
This is what I’m seeing after over 30 years of helping people with money and debt. This experiment is a transparent public test — not a recommendation. Only you know your full financial situation. Take this as input for your thinking, not a directive. Nobody gets to tell you what to do with your money. Not me, not anyone.
Next up: Day 25 — my AI screened almost 1,900 stocks and still said no to all 8 finalists.
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.
