> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://matterhorn-doc.mometic.com/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://matterhorn-doc.mometic.com/understand-the-scores/understanding-scores.md).

# Scores and ranks

Learn the difference between Matterhorn component scores, the adjusted ranking, investor lenses, emergence, and the optional ML enhanced score.

Matterhorn uses several views of the same company because business quality, opportunity, and remaining runway are different questions. Read the label before comparing two numbers.

![How source evidence feeds standard Matterhorn scores and the separate ML beta view](https://981865776-files.gitbook.io/~/files/v0/b/gitbook-x-prod.appspot.com/o/spaces%2FNOJXLd7UJBniObM136Nu%2Fuploads%2Fgit-blob-dd0e3503d585625646e34225fa24799c2c08622c%2Fscore-layers.svg?alt=media)

## The standard five-component score

The standard **Opportunity Score Breakdown** combines these components on a 0–100 scale:

| Component      | Nominal weight | What it asks                                                                    |
| -------------- | -------------: | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Compounding    |            30% | Are growth, profitability, capital returns, and per-share economics attractive? |
| Forward Demand |            20% | Is there supported evidence of future business activity?                        |
| Durability     |            20% | What evidence supports persistence of favorable economics?                      |
| Valuation      |            15% | What price and expectations accompany the business?                             |
| Portfolio Fit  |            15% | How does the mapped economic exposure fit the platform's theme framework?       |

The checklist adapts to the company's industry. A software vendor and a utility do not answer identical questions. Where a whole component lacks evaluated evidence, the standard display identifies that absence and its weight can be redistributed across measured components. Evidence support and rankability still matter.

![Standard company score breakdown and five-component radar](https://981865776-files.gitbook.io/~/files/v0/b/gitbook-x-prod.appspot.com/o/spaces%2FNOJXLd7UJBniObM136Nu%2Fuploads%2Fgit-blob-79a62bf2c447990d80887ce666fcb9d4ed60e9d3%2Fcompany-standard.png?alt=media)

## Why rank can differ from the raw composite

The standard ranking begins from the evidence-supported composite and adjusts for the company's standing within its checklist cohort, remaining compounding runway, comparable sector growth, and cash-generation quality. Small cohorts receive less reliance on their own percentile. The current implementation also uses coverage and confidence to break ties.

This means a raw score of 70 is not automatically ahead of every raw score of 65. The **rank** answers the platform's ordering question; the component breakdown explains the financial case. Avoid treating a percentile as a probability.

## Scoring Detail

![NVIDIA Scoring Detail showing five evidence-based investor lenses and their measured star rating](https://981865776-files.gitbook.io/~/files/v0/b/gitbook-x-prod.appspot.com/o/spaces%2FNOJXLd7UJBniObM136Nu%2Fuploads%2Fgit-blob-af8cf3fe36ec5269fac72b3904615c62da8bd1ea%2Fscoring-detail.png?alt=media)

The five investor lenses reorganize evaluated checklist rows:

| Lens                | Read it as                                                                  |
| ------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Forward Book        | Demand already indicated or committed, and its development                  |
| Toll Economics      | Repeat business, retention, switching friction, and pricing characteristics |
| Fundamentals        | The growth, margins, and capital economics underneath the story             |
| Market Confirmation | How market and valuation measures relate to the case                        |
| Cash Generation     | Cash flow and capital-allocation evidence                                   |

These lenses explain existing checklist results. They do not add five more votes to the score. The accompanying star rating summarizes measured lenses; it is not an analyst price target or a recommendation rating. Different lenses can overlap in the evidence they use.

In **Analytics**, selecting a sector updates both the average star rating and the number of rated companies to that sector. **All sectors** shows the broader population. Check the count before treating a high average in a small group as a strong comparison.

![Banks sector average of 3.63 stars across 302 rated companies, with evidence coverage by lens](https://981865776-files.gitbook.io/~/files/v0/b/gitbook-x-prod.appspot.com/o/spaces%2FNOJXLd7UJBniObM136Nu%2Fuploads%2Fgit-blob-df3bc0065b3181cc1ab9ab522788012d07a58600%2Fsector-stars.png?alt=media)

## Other scores you will encounter

**Standard Emergence** combines a measured compounding rate, durability conditions, and headroom. **ML emergence** is a learned ranking signal. **ML enhanced** is the separate 70/30 beta blend. Their names overlap because they address related questions, but their formulas and scales differ.

> **Pro Tip — Investigate disagreements.** A high growth reading with poor cash generation is a specific concern. Two broadly similar headline scores may conceal very different investment cases.

Next: [ML enhanced](/understand-the-scores/ml-enhanced.md), [compounding and emergence](/understand-the-scores/compounding-and-emergence.md), [column dictionary](/reference/columns.md).