Research Desk v1.0  ·  US-listed equities

An analyst desk that refuses to guess.

Signal Bridge reads filings, transcripts, fundamentals, consensus and news for the names you cover, and answers in plain English — with every figure tagged to the source it came from. When the filing doesn't say, it tells you that instead of writing a number.

Free through the beta · founding rate locked at launch · no procurement cycle

ORCL coverage RUNNING 0.0s

SEC filings

Q1 FY2027 revenue +30%

Financials

Gross margin 72.85% → 65.20%

Earnings call

Multicloud DB growth 531%

Consensus

Avg PT $213 vs. $150 spot

Fundamentals

Net debt / EBITDA 3.19×

News

10b5-1 plan, up to 50M shares

Reading filings, transcript and market data — then weighing them
Does it shift the thesis? Not structurally, but it adds a near-term risk premium. Margin compression is consistent across four reported years Financials and negative FCF at this capex level makes the thesis dependent on the revenue ramp landing on schedule.
FilingsFundamentalsFinancials ConsensusPeersTranscript News
Seven licensed sources read, one cited answer · every figure keeps the source it came from
7Licensed data sources, resold inside one seat
27Computed panels behind every company workup
17Written sections in the generated research note
5Investor lenses, calculated before any AI runs
$399Per seat, per month — published, not quoted
The rule that runs through everything

Every figure carries the source it came from.

The private rule every analyst already has — re-check each number before it goes anywhere — is built into the product instead of into your evening. Source tags are clickable, not decoration, and the model is never the thing that produces a figure.

SEC filings Filings

10-K and 10-Q passages, retrieved and quoted.

Fundamentals Fund.

Quote, TTM ratios, key metrics, solvency scores.

Financials Financials

Four years of income statement, plus latest balance sheet and cash flow.

Consensus Consensus

Analyst estimates, price targets, rating mix.

Peers Peers

Industry peers on the same metrics as the subject.

Earnings call Transcript

Passages from the latest call, picked against your question.

News News

Company news, with litigation PR filtered out.

Bring your own

Connect a feed your firm already licenses. Your contract, your entitlement — verification applies identically.

research-desk / chat  ·  ORCL medium-term thesis check

Medium-term thesis check

FactorBull caseBear case
Revenue ramp Consensus FY2029E $180B, FY2031E $262B Consensus $67B base — 4× in five years requires flawless execution
Cloud momentum 121% infra growth; multicloud live across AWS, GCP and Azure Transcript Gross margin fell 72.85% (FY2023) → 65.20% (FY2026) Financials — capex-heavy infra dilutes mix
Free cash flow Operating CF $32B Financials Capex −$55.7B → FCF −$23.7B Financials; FCF yield −6.6% Fundamentals
Balance sheet $31.3B cash Financials $156B gross debt; net debt / EBITDA 3.19× Fundamentals
Valuation P/E 23.17× · EV/EBITDA 14.72× Fundamentals — cheap against peers Peers Average PT $213 Consensus vs. $150 spot — either the target is stale or the stock is pricing dilution risk
Insider signal Plan is 10b5-1 — pre-scheduled, not reactive News $7.5B of potential supply; sentiment overhang likely persists
The same answer, further down. Both columns are argued from the same tagged figures — the desk does not pick a side by hiding the other one.
Silence is an answer

When the filing doesn't say, it says so.

Ask for something the retrieved context genuinely doesn't contain and the desk declines, names what it does have, and tells you which filing would carry the rest. No plausible-looking number appears to fill the gap.

  • Calculated first, written second — the model weighs figures assembled in code, never invents them
  • Every workup states filing date, period end, currency and accession key
  • Source tags are clickable, so a disputed figure is one click from its filing
research-desk / chat  ·  NVDA segment revenue
How did NVDA's data center revenue trend over the last four quarters?
Read 7 sources for NVDA

The context does not contain a quarterly revenue breakdown by segment for the last four quarters. The Financials block provides only annual figures, and the Transcript excerpt covers only Q3 2026 commentary.

What the context does support: annual direction FY2023→FY2026, total revenue $26.97B → $60.92B → $130.50B → $215.94B Financials.

What's missing: quarterly data center segment revenue for Q1–Q4 FY2026 would require the segment disclosures from the 10-Q filings, which are indexed but not surfaced in the context above.
A refusal, captured 12 Sep 2026 — the desk names the filing that would answer it
Four agents

Ask a question, or send a pod to argue about it.

Each agent is a different depth of work on the same verified substrate — a minute, or the better part of a coffee break.

Agent 01 · seconds

Research

Ask about a company, trade or theme in plain English. Pick which of the seven sources it draws from with the @ menu, or run a named skill instead of a free-form answer.

Cited answer · clickable source tags
Agent 02 · several minutes

Analyst Debate

A multi-agent research pod — specialists, a bear and a synthesizer — argues out a company and lands on a conviction call, grounded in filings. Specialists research concurrently; the bear stress-tests what they found before the call is written.

  1. 1Data
  2. 2Plan
  3. 3Research
  4. 4Debate
  5. 5Memo
Jump to a finished stage while later ones still run
Agent 03 · about a minute

Deep Analysis

Everything on file about one company — valuation, financial health, growth, what analysts expect, who owns it — as 27 computed panels, then a 17-section note written in the structure of a research memo.

27/27 panels · verdicts from all five lenses
Agent 04 · a cold read takes minutes

Social Sentiment

What the crowd is actually saying, source by source — Reddit, X and a community feed. The composite weights each source by how reliable it has been and how much volume backs it, so three posts don't count like three hundred.

Every source, weight and post count shown — never one opaque score
Deep Analysis

Five schools of investing, disagreeing in public.

Every company is scored against each lens before a model sees it. When the lenses disagree, the workup says so and gives you the spread rather than averaging the argument away.

  • Verdict, gate count and conviction per lens — Buffett & Munger, Graham, Lynch, the short seller's checklist, trend-following
  • Panels grouped the way a note is: market & valuation, fundamentals, growth & mix, consensus, ownership, peers, filings, news
  • Opening a Screen row runs the whole workup and memo automatically
research-desk / tools / deep-analysis?ticker=NVDA
NVDA NVIDIA Corporation · Semiconductors 218.29 -0.03%
mkt cap 5.29T · 52w 164.27–236.54
PROVENANCE
filed 2026-08-26 · period end 2026-07-26 · USD · 0001045810|2027|Q2|2026-07-26
Verdicts 4 bullish · 1 bearish · spread 1.82 — the lenses disagree sharply
Quality compounder Buffett & Munger 5/5 +0.87
Deep value Graham 3/6 −0.92
Quality growth Lynch 4/5 +0.62
Distress signals the short seller's checklist 0/5 +0.90
Price trend trend-following macro 5/5 +0.87
Valuation
P/E 27.46 · EV/EBITDA 22.70
Health
Altman Z 39.60 · Piotroski 6
Consensus
Buy · target 341.43
Deep Analysis · 27/27 panels · example workup captured 12 Sep 2026
Screen

The whole coverage list, scored, for nothing.

Every name you follow is scored against every lens, so you can see at a glance which are worth opening. No AI is involved here — each cell counts how many of that style's tests the company passes, calculated from filed figures. Re-running costs nothing.

  • Sort by a lens, or filter to names passing a minimum number of gates
  • A partial mark means some figures were unavailable — not the same as failing
  • Click any row through to the full workup, memo and all
research-desk / screen Coverage ↻ Re-run
Sort by Quality compounder ⌄ showing names passing at least any ⌄ gates
Swipe for the other lenses
Coverage list scored against five investor lenses
Name Quality
compounder
Deep
value
Quality
growth
Distress
signals ↓
Price
trend
NVDANVIDIA Corporation 5/53/64/50/55/5
MUMicron Technology, Inc. 5/54/64/50/55/5
PATHUiPath Inc. 4/53/64/50/53/5
AMDAdvanced Micro Devices, Inc. 4/54/63/50/55/5
ADBEAdobe Inc. 4/54/64/51/52/5
COSTCostco Wholesale Corporation 4/53/63/50/51/5
ORCLOracle Corporation 3/51/63/53/52/5
4/5 passes most tests 4/5 on a ↓ lens, where high is bad · marks a partial score — some figures were unavailable Click ↗ to open the full workup
7 of 7 names shown · run at 2026-09-12 13:16 UTC · no model in the loop, so re-running costs nothing
Investor lenses

Your house criteria, encoded — and editable.

Each lens is a set of pass/fail tests calculated from filed figures before any AI is involved. Move a threshold, swap which figure a test reads, hide a lens you don't use, or write one of your own. Changes apply to Deep Analysis and the Screen immediately.

Quality compounderin the tradition of Buffett & Munger5 gates
Deep valuein the tradition of Graham6 gates
Quality growthin the tradition of Lynch5 gates
Distress signalsthe short seller's checklist — inverted, high is bad5 signals
Price trendin the tradition of trend-following macro5 gates
+ New lenswrite your own tests against any filed figureunlimited

Editing a built-in stores an override, so Reset returns it to the definition in code rather than to your last save. Hiding a lens removes it from the band and the screen without deleting it.

Around the coverage list

The week ahead, without a second tab.

key events · 3 events across 7 names Beta
September 2026
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun 78910111213 14151617181920 21222324COST252627 282930MU1234
NVDA · next report 2026-11-18, beyond this window
AMD · next report 2026-11-03 · pays a dividend; next ex-date not yet declared
ADBE · next report 2026-12-09 · pays a dividend; next ex-date not yet declared
Earnings, ex-dividend and split dates — filed by the company or its registrar, never estimated by a model. Days outside the fetched window are dimmed, because that is not the same as having nothing on them.
latest news · filter by ticker
Entergy's next growth engine is already connected
Seeking Alpha · 12 Sept, 07:42
The Fed faces a huge credibility test
Seeking Alpha · 12 Sept, 07:05
Trump says Iran probably responsible for attack on Saudi pipeline
Reuters · 12 Sept, 06:18
Canadian boycott of US products pushes grocers to adapt
Reuters · 12 Sept, 06:03
Latest News · company news with litigation PR filtered out · captured 12 Sep 2026

Coverage that can't quietly go wrong

Every symbol is confirmed against live market data before it joins your list, so a typo never becomes a silent gap in a screen. Up to 200 names.

Named analyses, not prompt craft

Type /earnings-review ORCL Q3 FY2026 for the desk's full review note on one reported quarter: actuals versus consensus, what changed, the drivers, and what management said. Figures are assembled in code first; the model only writes them up.

Shared across the desk

Seats two and three see the same coverage list, the same lenses and the same research record. Adding an analyst is a setting, not a second sales conversation.

Closed beta

Published prices. Invited seats.

Every institutional platform in this category is demo-request only, and won't tell you what it costs until you've sat through the call. We'll tell you now — we're just not open to everyone yet.

The founding cohort

Applications open

What you get

  • Free through the beta. No card, no invoice, until the desk reaches general availability.
  • The founding rate afterwards — locked, whatever the list price does later.
  • A direct line to the people building it. A shared channel with the founders, not a support queue.
  • Real influence on build order. Which coverage lands next, which lenses ship, which beta surfaces reach GA first.

What we ask

  • Use it on names you actually cover, not a test ticker
  • Tell us when a figure or an argument is wrong — that is the entire point of the cohort
  • A short call every few weeks while we're still shaping it
At general availability What a seat will cost once the beta closes. Founding members keep whichever rate they joined on.
Analyst
$149 / month
  • 15 names in coverage
  • 5 analyst debates a month
  • Research, Deep Analysis, Screen, Social Sentiment
  • All seven licensed sources
Apply
Desk · most common
$399 / seat / month
  • 60 names in coverage
  • 30 analyst debates a month
  • Shared coverage list and lenses
  • Custom lenses and named skills
  • Key Events and monitoring in beta
Apply for early access
Fund
$1,250 / month +
  • Three seats or more
  • Unlimited names and debates
  • Shared research record across the desk
  • Bring-your-own data connections
Apply as a team

Stop re-checking every figure by hand.

We're taking a small group of working analysts into the beta. Bring one ticker you know cold and see whether the desk tells you anything you'd have missed — or admits what it can't see.

  1. 01You tell us what you cover and what you'd point it at first.
  2. 02The founder replies within two working days, either way.
  3. 03A 20-minute call, then your coverage list loaded and a seat open.
Please tell us your name.
A valid work email, so we can reply.
Which firm are you with?
Please pick a role.
One or two sentences is plenty. This is what we'll open the call with. Tell us roughly what you'd use it for.

Free through the beta. We use these details to assess the application and reply — nothing else.

Not connected yet: set FORM_ENDPOINT or CONTACT_EMAIL in the script at the end of this file.

Application received.

We read every one and reply within two working days, either way. If it's a fit, the next step is a short call and your coverage list loaded before it.