← Back to Skills Marketplace
gold3bear

Investment Risk Scanner (Buffett + Porter Framework)

by Bear Xiong · GitHub ↗ · v2.1.0 · MIT-0
cross-platform ✓ Security Clean
74
Downloads
1
Stars
0
Active Installs
3
Versions
Install in OpenClaw
/install investment-risk-scanner
Description
Investment risk scanner using Buffett + Porter's Five Forces framework. Triggers when users ask "analyze XXX's risk", "is this project legit", "can I buy thi...
README (SKILL.md)

🎯 Investment Risk Scanner — Buffett + Porter Framework

Core Question

"What happens if the subsidies stop?" + "Where does the OCF actually come from?"

  • Users still stay without incentive? → Probably OK ✅
  • OCF comes from real business, not supplier/customer financing? → Clean ✅
  • Users leave immediately? → Ponzi-lite 🚨

⚠️ CRITICAL: OCF Source Quality Analysis

New mandatory check — Never look at OCF in isolation!

OCF Quality Matrix

OCF Source Quality Example
Real product/service sales ✅ Clean Apple iPhone sales
From supplier financing (欠供应商钱) ⚠️ Dirty 迪链模式 ⚠️
From customer advance payments ⚠️ Dirty 预售模式
From regulatory subsidies ⚠️ Conditional EV补贴
From working capital manipulation 🚨 Dangerous 延付供应商+提前收客户

The 迪链 Lesson (BYD case):

BYD OCF = ¥593亿 → Looks great!
BUT: ¥4000亿+ 迪链规模 = OCF partially from supplier financing
Real business OCF ≈ ¥593亿 - 供应商资金占用 ≈ ?

Part 1: Five-Layer Buffett Framework

Layer 1: Business Model

Check Pass ✅ Danger 🚨
Subsidy test Users stay without incentive 🚨 No (Qutoutiao/StepN)
Moat describable? Clear description 🚨 Vague
Competitor replication time >3 years 🚨 Cloneable anytime
DCF/Owner Earnings Positive or estimable ⚠️ Unclear

Layer 2: Unit Economics

Check Formula Danger Signal
User value Ad revenue > incentive cost? Qutoutiao style 🚨
Token value Real cash flow support? StepN style 🚨
Lending model Rate > cost + defaults? P2P style 🚨
Gross margin >15% (industrial) Below = weak ⚠️
Revenue vs FCF quality Is growth funded by real economics? ⚠️

Layer 3: Management

Check Pass ✅ Danger 🚨
Skin in Game Major personal stake 🚨 Barely holds shares
Track record Delivers on promises 🚨 Misses commitments
Narrative Talks about moat 🚨 Only talks about growth
Incentives Aligned with shareholders 🚨 Misaligned
Supplier relations Treats suppliers fairly 🚨 Exploits suppliers

Quantitative: Founder/stakeholder ownership >20% = strong signal ✅

Layer 4: Valuation & Margin of Safety

Check Pass ✅ Danger 🚨
DCF estimable? Reasonable assumptions 🚨 Pure speculation
Margin of safety? >30% 🚨 Zero margin
Sustainable growth? \x3C3% �️ 5%+ unrealistic
Growth quality? Organic 🚨 Fundraising-dependent

Quantitative Thresholds:

Metric Safe ✅ Warning ⚠️ Danger 🚨
Forward P/E \x3C20x 20-40x >40x
PEG Ratio \x3C1.0 1.0-2.0 >2.0
P/S \x3C2x 2-5x >5x
P/B \x3C3x 3-8x >8x
FCF Positive Breakeven Persistent negative
ROE >15% 8-15% \x3C8%
Net Margin >10% 3-10% \x3C3%
Debt/Equity \x3C30% 30-60% >60%

Layer 5: Structural Risk

Check Red Flag 🚩
Liquidity Runway \x3C12 months
Regulation Depends on regulatory arbitrage
Technology Single-tech dependency
Competition Rapidly disrupting industry
Geopolitics Major market concentration
Supply Chain Finance Relies on supplier financing (迪链-type) 🚨

Part 2: Porter's Five Forces (Complementary Framework)

Why add Porter's Five Forces?

Buffett's blind spot: He focuses on "Is this a good business?" but misses "How does industry structure determine profitability?"

The 迪链 lesson: BYD looked great by Buffett metrics (OCF ¥593B, PE 19.7x) but Porter's Five Forces would immediately ask:

"Why can BYD extract ¥4000B+ from suppliers?" → Supplier power is weak → Unstable moat

The Five Forces

                    New Entrants
                        ↓
            ┌───────────────────────────┐
            │    Industry Competition   │
            │   (Price War = High)     │
            └───────────────────────────┘
            ↑                           ↑
  Suppliers ←                           → Buyers
(Weak = Good)                       (Competitive = Bad)

Force 1: Bargaining Power of Suppliers

Supplier Power Implication Example
Weak (fragmented) Company can extract value BYD vs small suppliers ✅
Strong (concentrated) Suppliers capture value Rare earth miners 🚨
Danger Pattern Company survives by squeezing suppliers 迪链模式 ⚠️

Critical Check: If a company's "moat" is based on supplier exploitation, how sustainable is it?

Force 2: Bargaining Power of Buyers

Buyer Power Implication Example
Weak (fragmented) Company sets prices Apple App Store ✅
Strong (concentrated) Buyers extract value Car dealers vs OEMs ⚠️
In EV market Price war = buyer power HIGH Bad for all EV makers ⚠️

Force 3: Competitive Rivalry

Competition Level Signal Example
Low Moat is real Apple's ecosystem ✅
High (price war) Commodity trap China EV market 🚨
Price War = Maturity Stage Buffett: "bad industry" EV 2024-2026 ⚠️

Force 4: Threat of New Entrants

Barrier to Entry Pass Fail
Capital requirements High barrier ✅ Low barrier 🚨
Network effects Strong barrier ✅ No barrier 🚨
Regulatory barriers Protects incumbent ✅ Open competition 🚨

Force 5: Threat of Substitutes

Substitute Risk Example
Low iPhone → App Store ecosystem ✅
High Fuel car → EV ⚠️
Very High Physical retail → E-commerce 🚨

Part 3: Supply Chain Finance Risk (迪链-Type)

🚨 New Mandatory Check

Ask this for every company:

Check Question Danger Signal
Supply chain financing Does company use supplier financing tools? 迪链/商票模式 ⚠️
Scale How large is supply chain finance? >20% of OCF 🚨
Supplier dependency Are suppliers highly dependent on this company? Yes = systemic risk ⚠️
What-if scenario What if sales drop 30%? Can suppliers survive? Supplier collapse = company risk ⚠️

The 迪链 Pattern (Case Study)

Company Profile:
- OCF: ¥593B positive ✅
- Apparent debt: ¥277B (5% of liabilities) ✅
- Reality: ¥4000B+ 迪链 (supply chain financing) ⚠️
- Real net debt: ¥3230B (vs reported ¥277B) 🚨

Key Insight:
OCF ¥593B ≠ "Great business"
OCF ¥593B = "Real business ¥593B" + "Supplier financing ¥???B"

Danger: If monthly sales drop below threshold (BYD: ~150k/month),
suppliers face cash crunch → systemic redemption crisis

Red Flags for Supply Chain Finance

Flag What It Means
Company brags about "zero-interest supplier financing" They're extracting from suppliers ⚠️
Supplier Average Payment Period > 180 days Likely using supply chain finance ⚠️
Reported debt low but company dominates suppliers Hidden leverage ⚠️
Industry has "dominant player" + weak suppliers Systemic risk if dominant player stumbles ⚠️

Part 4: Hidden Liabilities Checklist

🚨 New Section — Always Check These

Hidden Liability How to Detect Risk Level
Supply chain financing (迪链) Notes payable + accounts payable days 🚨 High
Operating lease obligations Off-balance sheet leases ⚠️ Medium
Product warranties/recalls Accumulated warranty reserves ⚠️ Medium
Environmental remediation EPA-type obligations ⚠️ Medium
Pension underfunding Pension assets vs liabilities ⚠️ Medium
Related party guarantees Guarantees on affiliate debt 🚨 High
Sales-type leasing (dealer inventory) Auto manufacturers special 🚨 High

Formula for Real Net Debt:

Real Net Debt = Reported Net Debt
              + Supply Chain Finance (迪链-type)
              + Operating Lease PV
              + Pension Underfunding
              + Related Party Guarantees
              - Excess Cash above operational needs

Part 5: Industry Lifecycle Check

Which Stage Is This Industry In?

Stage Characteristics Investment Implication
Introduction High growth, unproven model High risk, high reward
Growth Revenue growing 20%+, competition emerging Buy if moat forming
Mature Growth \x3C10%, price war begins ⚠️ Buffett: "bad industry"
Decline Revenue shrinking, overcapacity 🚨 Avoid

The Price War Signal:

Mature/Decline Indicators:
- Industry-wide price cuts
- "Winner takes all" narrative
- Capacity expansion despite declining margins
- Weak players not exiting
→ Buffett 1977: "In bad industries, even brilliant management fails"

Updated Case Library

Project Type Conclusion
Qutoutiao Ponzi-lite 🚨 Avoid — no moat, DCF always negative
StepN Ponzi-lite 🚨 Avoid — token has no cash flow, Ponzi structure
WeWork Turnaround trap 🚨 Avoid — no moat, management failure
Quibi Concept failure 🚨 Avoid — no user stickiness, unit economics collapsed
AMC Meme-stock Ponzi 🚨 Avoid — dilution machine, bankruptcy risk
RIVN EV price war victim 🚨 Avoid — burning cash, no clear path to profit
COIN Crypto policy bet 🚨 High Risk — regulatory uncertainty is existential
TSLA Dream stock 🚨 High Risk — PE 341, Elon Musk concentration risk
PLTR Government dependency ⚠️ Watch — AIP promising but PE 500+ is rich
NVDA AI infrastructure moat ⚠️ Watch — real moat but fully priced in
BYD EV with hidden supply chain risk 🚨 Watch — PE 19.7x cheap BUT ¥4000B+ 迪链 ⚠️⚠️
Geely Cheap EV, strong founder ⚠️ Watch — PE 11x extremely cheap, FCF positive

BYD Analysis (Updated with 迪链 Finding)

Updated structural risk: 🔴 Extremely High (was "High")

Risk Level Note
迪链 Supply Chain Finance 🚨 ¥4000B+ hidden Real net debt ¥3230B vs reported ¥277B
Price War 🚨 Extreme China EV = mature stage, price war
Geopolitical 🚨 High US 100% tariff, EU tariffs
OCF Quality ⚠️ Mixed Real ¥593B + supplier financing
Moat Sustainability ⚠️ Uncertain Moat based partly on supplier extraction

New Conclusion: ⚠️ Watch — But with much higher risk than surface metrics show


Output Format Template (Updated)

## 🎯 [Name] Risk Assessment

### 📋 Inspection Results
| Dimension | Result | Note |
|-----------|--------|------|
| Business Model | ✅/⚠️/🚨 | [One sentence] |
| Unit Economics | ✅/⚠️/🚨 | [One sentence] |
| Management | ✅/⚠️/🚨 | [One sentence] |
| Valuation | ✅/⚠️/🚨 | [One sentence] |
| Structural Risk | Low/Med/High/🔴 Extreme | [Key risks] |

### 🔍 OCF Quality Analysis [NEW]
| OCF Component | Amount | Quality |
|---------------|--------|---------|
| Real business OCF | ¥XXX | ✅ Clean |
| Supplier financing | ¥XXX | ⚠️ Dirty |
| Customer advances | ¥XXX | ⚠️ Conditional |
| **Total Reported OCF** | ¥XXX | [Mix assessment] |

### ⚠️ Porter's Five Forces Summary
| Force | Level | Implication |
|-------|-------|-------------|
| Supplier Power | Strong/Weak | [Note] |
| Buyer Power | Strong/Weak | [Note] |
| Competitive Rivalry | High/Med/Low | [Note] |
| New Entrant Threat | High/Med/Low | [Note] |
| Substitute Threat | High/Med/Low | [Note] |

### ⚠️ Key Risks
1. [Most serious risk — include hidden liabilities if found]
2. [Secondary risk]
3. [Other observations]

### ✅ Potential Upsides
1. [If any]
2. [If any]

### 📊 Quantitative Scorecard
| Metric | Value | Signal |
|--------|-------|--------|
| Forward P/E | xxx | ✅/⚠️/🚨 |
| PEG | xxx | ✅/⚠️/🚨 |
| ROE | xxx | ✅/⚠️/🚨 |
| FCF | xxx | ✅/⚠️/🚨 |
| Real Net Debt | xxx (vs reported yyy) | ⚠️ Hidden risk |
| Debt/Equity | xxx | ✅/⚠️/🚨 |

### 📌 Framework Quotes
> "[Relevant Buffett quote]"
> "[Relevant Porter insight]"

---
**Overall**: □ Investable  □ Watch  □ Avoid

Cross-Stock Comparison Template (Updated)

| Metric | [Stock A] | [Stock B] | Winner |
|--------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| Market Cap | $X | $Y | [A/B] |
| Forward P/E | Xx | Yx | ✅ Cheaper |
| **Real Net Debt** | ¥X (rep ¥Y) | ¥X (rep ¥Y) | ⚠️ Hidden risk |
| **OCF Quality** | Clean/Mixed/Dirty | Clean/Mixed/Dirty | ✅ Cleaner |
| ROE | X% | Y% | ✅ Higher |
| Net Margin | X% | Y% | ✅ Higher |
| FCF | $X | $Y | ✅ Better |
| Debt/Equity | X% | Y% | ✅ Lower risk |
| Supplier Power Dependency | High/Med/Low | High/Med/Low | ⚠️ Risk |
| Founder Ownership | X% | Y% | ✅ Stronger |
| Moat Depth | Strong/Med/Weak | ... | ... |
| Price War Resilience | Strong/Med/Weak | ... | ... |
| Industry Lifecycle | Intro/Growth/Mature/Decline | ... | ... |

Overall: □ [A]  □ [B]  □ Tie

Quantitative Decision Matrix

When scoring, use 1-5 stars:

Score Meaning Action
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (5) Exceptional — rare opportunity Strong buy
⭐⭐⭐⭐ (4) Good — meets all criteria Buy on dips
⭐⭐⭐ (3) Average — mixed signals Watch only
⭐⭐ (2) Below average — multiple concerns Avoid or sell
⭐ (1) Poor — fails most tests Avoid

Final Score = Average of 5 layers Penalty: If hidden liabilities >50% of reported → automatic downgrade 1 star


Key Lessons from Recent Cases

The 迪链 Lesson (BYD)

What we missed: OCF ¥593B looked great, but didn't ask "HOW?"
Buffett asks: "Is this a good business?"
Porter asks: "Why can this company extract ¥4000B from suppliers?"
Answer: Because suppliers are weak → Not a sustainable moat
New rule: Always ask "Where does the OCF actually come from?"

The Correct Process

1. Buffett Layer 1-5: Check business quality
2. OCF Quality Check: Is OCF from real business or financing?
3. Porter Five Forces: Why does industry structure allow this?
4. Hidden Liabilities: What's NOT on the balance sheet?
5. Industry Lifecycle: Is this a price war (mature) industry?

Related Resources

  • Buffett Moat Framework: [[护城河 (Moat) - 投资概念]]
  • Buffett Valuation: [[内在价值 (Intrinsic Value)]]
  • Safety Margin: [[安全边际 (Margin of Safety)]]
  • Complete checklist: Feishu Wiki (投资风险快筛表)
Usage Guidance
This skill appears coherent and low‑risk: it provides frameworks and numeric thresholds for investment risk analysis and does not request credentials or install code. Before using it in production, verify where the agent will obtain live financial data (which data sources/APIs it will call), confirm you do not supply any brokerage or cloud credentials, and treat the tool as decision‑support (not professional financial advice). If you want the skill to fetch live market data, ask the author to list the data sources/APIs it uses so you can validate their trustworthiness.
Capability Tags
cryptocan-make-purchases
Capability Assessment
Purpose & Capability
Name/description (Buffett + Porter risk analysis) matches the SKILL.md content: checklists, thresholds, and case examples are all appropriate for an investment risk scanner. There are no unexpected credential or binary requirements.
Instruction Scope
SKILL.md contains a detailed, self‑contained methodology (five Buffett layers + Porter's Five Forces) and does not instruct the agent to read arbitrary local files, access unrelated environment variables, or send data to external endpoints. The guidance is prescriptive rather than open‑ended.
Install Mechanism
Instruction‑only skill with no install spec and no code files — nothing is written to disk and no external packages or downloads are required.
Credentials
The skill declares no environment variables, credentials, or config paths. The checks and thresholds in SKILL.md do not imply any hidden need for additional secrets or system access.
Persistence & Privilege
always is false and the skill is user‑invocable. It does not request permanent platform presence or modify other skills/configuration.
How to Use
  1. Make sure OpenClaw is installed (local or Docker)
  2. Run the install command in chat: /install investment-risk-scanner
  3. After installation, invoke the skill by name or use /investment-risk-scanner
  4. Provide required inputs per the skill's parameter spec and get structured output
Version History
v2.1.0
**Major update: Porter's Five Forces, OCF quality analysis, and supply chain finance risk added** - Added Porter's Five Forces as a complementary framework to Buffett’s 5-layer approach for more robust industry risk analysis. - Introduced mandatory Operating Cash Flow (OCF) source quality checks, highlighting risks from supply chain financing and working capital manipulation. - New supply chain finance (迪链-type) risk section: outlines red flags, hidden liabilities, and supplier dependency risks in assessment. - Updated scoring criteria and tables to reflect these additional layers and the latest real-world case studies. - Skill description clarified to explicitly mention new frameworks and risk analysis requirements.
v2.0.0
**Version 2.0.0 — Major update: Now fully supports international (English) investment risk analysis with expanded framework.** - Language switched from Chinese to English throughout SKILL.md. - Expanded the Buffett 5-layer risk framework for broader applicability, including new metrics and quantitative benchmarks (e.g., P/E, PEG, ROE, FCF). - Added several new built-in case studies (e.g. TSLA, NVDA, PLTR, COIN, AMC, RIVN, BYD, Geely). - Introduced new output templates for risk assessment, cross-stock comparison, and quantitative scoring. - Coverage now includes specific sector checks (e.g., EV/gross margin, tech/free cash flow quality). - Documentation reorganized for clarity and global audience readability.
v1.0.0
investment-risk-scanner 1.0.0 初始发布 - 提供基于巴菲特投资框架的五层风险检验体系(商业模式、单位经济、管理层、估值、安全边际、结构性风险) - 内置趣头条、StepN、WeWork 等经典案例作为风险参考 - 支持根据用户投资相关提问自动触发分析模板 - 提供综合评分卡与标准化输出结构便于快速判断 - 引用飞书知识库及巴菲特经典原话辅助投资判断
Metadata
Slug investment-risk-scanner
Version 2.1.0
License MIT-0
All-time Installs 0
Active Installs 0
Total Versions 3
Frequently Asked Questions

What is Investment Risk Scanner (Buffett + Porter Framework)?

Investment risk scanner using Buffett + Porter's Five Forces framework. Triggers when users ask "analyze XXX's risk", "is this project legit", "can I buy thi... It is an AI Agent Skill for Claude Code / OpenClaw, with 74 downloads so far.

How do I install Investment Risk Scanner (Buffett + Porter Framework)?

Run "/install investment-risk-scanner" in the OpenClaw or Claude Code chat to install it in one step — no extra setup required.

Is Investment Risk Scanner (Buffett + Porter Framework) free?

Yes, Investment Risk Scanner (Buffett + Porter Framework) is completely free, licensed under MIT-0. You can download, install and use it at no cost.

Which platforms does Investment Risk Scanner (Buffett + Porter Framework) support?

Investment Risk Scanner (Buffett + Porter Framework) is cross-platform and runs anywhere OpenClaw / Claude Code is available (cross-platform).

Who created Investment Risk Scanner (Buffett + Porter Framework)?

It is built and maintained by Bear Xiong (@gold3bear); the current version is v2.1.0.

💬 Comments