The seven named Strong Buys and the Inter Parfums spotlight are Positive. The remaining disclosed holdings are Neutral — their weights and profit/loss are published but they are not individually rated in this issue (the post says only that there are 7 Strong Buys and 8 Buys among 18 names). The four SaaSpocalypse casualties are Neutral: they are cited as evidence of the derating, and only S&P Global and Moody's are covered elsewhere in the archive. Research legend: QT Qualtrim · SA Seeking Alpha · STK Stock Analysis; foreign rows point QT/SA at the US ADR/OTC symbol. Written post with no timestamps — the At link opens the article.
| Ticker | Name | Research | View | What he said | At |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IPAR | Inter Parfums, Inc. | QT · SA · STK · FA | Positive | The issue's spotlight — "an interesting company with a 'Buy rating' we haven't talked about in a while." A licensed-fragrance business that "manufactures, markets, and distributes a wide range of fragrances under licensing agreements," hit by "macro issues, consumer spending, competition, and tariffs. These have resulted in a very low valuation." The growth is contracted rather than forecast: Off-White (first sales 2027), Annick Goutal and Longchamp (both late 2026), together "expected to generate over $100 million per year in 3-5 years." Four reasons given: rising fragrance demand, new brands starting to sell, temporary headwinds resolving, and "the stock looks quite cheap." Fragrance is "one of the most profitable and fastest growing segments in the beauty industry." Carries a ~4.5% weight and a roughly $8,500 unrealised loss. | read ↗ |
| BRO | Brown & Brown | QT · SA · STK · FA | Positive | One of the seven Strong Buys. A ~4.85% weight and one of the book's larger unrealised losses (roughly −$17,500), which is precisely the setup the 5 February sheet described: intrinsic value up 13.6% in 2025 against a 21.9% price fall, making the stock "35% (!) cheaper." | read ↗ |
| KPG.AX | Kelly Partners Group Holdings | STK | Positive | A Strong Buy, and one of the three positions carrying the book. "For us, Medpace ($MEDP), Games Workshop ($GAW), and Kelly Partners Group ($KPG) are doing really well right now" — roughly +$40,500 unrealised on a ~7.0% weight, the third-largest gain in the portfolio, despite the ~50% six-month drawdown argued three days earlier as the #2 buy. | read ↗ |
| KNSL | Kinsale Capital Group | QT · SA · STK · FA | Positive | A Strong Buy. A ~6.2% weight and only a small unrealised loss (roughly −$3,500) — the mildest drawdown among the losing positions, on the name argued three days earlier as 30% cheaper than a year ago on a 15% EPS gain. | read ↗ |
| TOI.V | Topicus.com Inc. | QT · SA · STK | Positive | A Strong Buy, and one of the SaaSpocalypse's casualties inside the book. Roughly −$20,000 unrealised on a ~4.4% weight, having been topped up two weeks earlier on 1 February at a CAD 105 limit. | read ↗ |
| CSU.TO | Constellation Software | QT · SA · STK · FA | Positive | A Strong Buy. Roughly −$16,000 unrealised on a ~3.75% weight — one of the two smallest positions in the book, which is the fact the 22 February issue then acts on: "Constellation Software has a low weight of 3.8% within Our Portfolio. It deserves a higher weight, especially at these valuation levels." | read ↗ |
| ZTS | Zoetis Inc. | QT · SA · STK · FA | Positive | A Strong Buy, seventeen days after purchase. Bought on 29 January with the OTC Markets proceeds ($54,000, 440 shares, limit $123) and already in the top rating tier. It does not appear in the published weight chart, which shows only seventeen of the stated eighteen holdings. | read ↗ |
| NVO | Novo Nordisk A/S | QT · SA · STK · FA | Positive | A Strong Buy — upgraded from Buy since the 5 February sheet. A ~5.15% weight and roughly −$20,000 unrealised, on the widest multiple discount in the watchlist (12.5x forward against a 27.8x five-year average). | read ↗ |
| MEDP | Medpace Holdings | QT · SA · STK · FA | Neutral | The largest position (~8.2%) and the largest gain (~+$46,000). Named as one of the three names carrying the book — "A few companies will drive the majority of your returns" — but rated Hold on the 5 February sheet as the one holding trading above its own five-year multiple. Not individually rated here. | read ↗ |
| GAW.L | Games Workshop Group PLC | QT · SA · STK | Neutral | The second-largest gain (~+$42,000) on a ~6.8% weight, and the second of the three "doing really well right now." Also the one holding the February sheet marks 61.4% overvalued — the likely candidate for "every company except for 1 is undervalued in Our Portfolio today." | read ↗ |
| LVMUY | LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton | QT · SA | Neutral | The second-largest position at ~7.8%, carrying a modest unrealised loss (roughly −$6,500). Disclosed by weight only; rated Hold on the 5 February sheet and not discussed in this issue. | read ↗ |
| EVO.ST | Evolution AB | QT · SA · STK | Neutral | The book's largest loss by a wide margin — roughly −$44,000 on a ~7.2% weight, more than twice the next-worst position. Rated Buy on the 5 February sheet at the lowest forward PE of any name (10.3x against a 15.0x average) but not among the seven Strong Buys, and not discussed here. | read ↗ |
| AMP | Ameriprise Financial | QT · SA · STK · FA | Neutral | A ~6.4% weight and roughly +$11,500 unrealised — the fourth-best position and the only gainer outside the three named winners of any size. Disclosed by weight; rated Buy on the 5 February sheet, not individually discussed here. | read ↗ |
| DNP.WA | Dino Polska S.A. | SA · STK | Neutral | A ~6.0% weight and roughly +$6,000 unrealised. Disclosed by weight only; the Earnings Growth Model spotlight on the 5 February sheet, but not covered in this issue. | read ↗ |
| V | Visa Inc. | QT · SA · STK · FA | Neutral | A ~5.6% weight and roughly +$3,500 unrealised, two weeks after the 1 February $20,000 add at a $325 limit. Disclosed by weight; not individually rated here. | read ↗ |
| HGT.L | HgCapital Trust | STK | Neutral | A ~4.2% weight and roughly −$4,500 unrealised. A Strong Buy on the 5 February sheet (valued on a £5.5 NAV against a £5.0 price) but not among the seven named here — the one rating that appears to have moved down between the two issues. | read ↗ |
| BN | Brookfield Corporation | QT · SA · STK · FA | Neutral | A ~3.9% weight — one of the three smallest positions — and roughly +$1,800 unrealised. Disclosed by weight only; a week later it receives the largest single add of the month ($25,000, 22 February). | read ↗ |
| JDG.L | Judges Scientific plc | STK | Neutral | A ~3.75% weight and roughly −$17,500 unrealised — a large loss on one of the smallest positions. Disclosed by weight only; the name later flagged as the portfolio's single sell candidate on 28 April. | read ↗ |
| SPGI | S&P Global | QT · SA · STK · FA | Neutral | Named as a SaaSpocalypse casualty: −25% in a month. "The companies above are great companies. It has been a while we've seen them fall so much so quickly." No stance or valuation is offered here — the full toll-bridge write-up and the Best Buy #3 rating arrive two weeks later in March. | read ↗ |
| MCO | Moody's Corporation | QT · SA · STK · FA | Neutral | Named as a SaaSpocalypse casualty: −21% in a month. Cited as evidence that "credit agencies" were repriced alongside software and data providers — the same legal-duopoly business the archive elsewhere calls "nearly impossible to disrupt." No stance offered in this issue. | read ↗ |
| FDS | FactSet Research Systems | QT · SA · STK · FA | Neutral | The worst of the four named casualties: −31% in a month, and the deepest single-month fall recorded anywhere in this archive. A financial-data terminal business — the "data providers" category Slegers names as one of the three sectors "Mr. Market is moody about." No thesis, valuation or stance is offered; it appears nowhere else in the archive. | read ↗ |
| PAYC | Paycom Software | QT · SA · STK · FA | Neutral | Named as a SaaSpocalypse casualty: −19% in a month, and the most directly exposed to the stated trigger — Claude Cowork automating "legal, sales, and marketing" work. Ten days earlier it topped the forward-PE undervaluation screen at 16.8x against a 43.8x five-year average (61.6% under). No stance is taken on it in either issue. | read ↗ |
Stance = how each name is framed in this post. Weights and profit/loss figures are read from the two published bar charts (transcribed in transcript.txt) and are approximate. Two internal inconsistencies are worth flagging: the post claims 18 holdings but the weight chart shows 17 (Zoetis is absent), and HgCapital Trust is a Strong Buy on the 5 February sheet but not among the seven named here. Anthropic (Claude Cowork) is private and appears only as the cause of the derating.
A jargon-free summary of the thesis behind the names argued at length in this issue. (Renders on each name's consolidated page.)
Inter Parfums does not own famous fashion brands — it rents them. It signs exclusive worldwide agreements to make and sell the perfume for names like Montblanc, Jimmy Choo and Coach, and pays the brand a royalty. That means very little of its own capital is tied up in factories or brand-building, and its real asset is a distribution network reaching more than 120 countries, which is why luxury houses come to it rather than doing the work themselves.
The shares are cheap because several unrelated pressures landed at once — a weak consumer, competition, tariffs, general macro nerves — and Slegers reads all of them as temporary. What makes this more than hope is that the next leg of growth is already signed: three new licences, Longchamp and Annick Goutal starting to sell in late 2026 and Off-White in 2027, together expected to add over $100 million of annual revenue within three to five years. Fragrance is also one of the most profitable and fastest-growing corners of the beauty industry. Put together — rising demand, contracted new brands, fading headwinds and a low multiple — he calls it "a great setup to do very well." The position is about 4.5% of the book and currently down roughly $8,500.
FactSet sells the financial-data terminals and analytics that investment firms use to research companies — a subscription business with the kind of high margins and recurring revenue Slegers usually likes. It appears here for one reason: it fell 31% in a single month, the worst decline named anywhere in this archive.
The cause given is the "SaaSpocalypse" — Anthropic's release of Claude Cowork, a tool that automates legal, sales and marketing work, which led investors to conclude that AI agents will replace software licences generally. Slegers offers no view on FactSet itself; it is cited as evidence of how violently the market repriced data and software businesses in early 2026, and it does not appear again in the archive.
Paycom sells payroll and HR software to American businesses. It is named here as one of four casualties of the same one-month derating — down 19% — and it is the one most directly in the line of fire, since the trigger was a tool that automates exactly the kind of routine office work HR software supports.
Worth putting the two February issues side by side. Ten days earlier, Paycom topped the forward-PE screen as the single most undervalued name in the whole watchlist relative to its own history — 16.8 times forward earnings against a five-year average of 43.8. Slegers never takes a position on it either way. It sits in the archive as the clearest illustration of the month's pattern: a business the model says is extraordinarily cheap, priced that way by a fear the newsletter argues is mistaken elsewhere, and left alone.
Summary derived from the archived Compounding Quality post (text and transcribed chart images in transcript.txt) for personal study. Not investment advice. © Compounding Quality / Pieter Slegers for source material.