ValueStockScreen
Value stock screener — screens for fundamentally strong companies at reasonable valuations with transparent metrics.
How we got these numbers
Every figure is computed from the inputs below — the same top-down + stated-fraction methodology the product applies, with the arithmetic left visible.
| Step | Formula | Result | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| TAM (anchor) | Bottom-up arithmetic (2025) | $5B | Bottom-up: US retail investor platform spend (rounded) — Bottom-up: ~60M US households with brokerage accounts × ~$80/year average spend on premium screeners/data ≈ $4.8B; rounded to $5B. |
| SAM (serviceable) | $5B × 5% | $250M | Retail investors who actively screen for value factors rather than momentum or index funds. |
| SOM (obtainable) | $250M × 1% | $2.5M | Niche value-screening tool; organic search + content on fundamental analysis, ~3-year horizon. |
| Customer framing | $2.5M ÷ ($9/mo × 12) | ≈ 23,000 customers | What the obtainable estimate means at the reference price of $9/month. |
Share-of-market framing
What small, plausible shares of the serviceable market translate to in annual revenue.
| Share of SAM | Annual revenue | Vs. obtainable estimate |
|---|---|---|
| 0.1% | $250K | below the $2.5M SOM estimate |
| 0.5% | $1.3M | below the $2.5M SOM estimate |
| 1% | $2.5M | above the $2.5M SOM estimate |
Willingness to pay
Curve generated by the product's WTP simulator around the stated price inputs. Model output for orientation — not survey data. Modeled optimal band: $6–$12/mo around the $9/mo reference price.
| Monthly price | Modeled market share | Revenue score |
|---|---|---|
| $0 | 28% | Med |
| $4 | 34% | Med |
| $7 | 40% | Med |
| $11 | 40% | High |
| $15 | 34% | Med |
| $18 | 28% | Med |
| $22 | 21% | Med |
| $25 | 16% | Med |
| $29 | 9% | Low |
Opportunity signals
- Value investing has a durable following even in growth/momentum markets; transparent factor screens fill a gap.
- Most free screeners hide methodology or sell data; an honest, open-source-style screener builds trust.
- Retail investors increasingly distrust black-box recommendations after recent market cycles.
Risks & pain points
Fundamental data feeds are not free; maintaining fresh fundamentals at low price point is challenging.
Finviz and TradingView already offer powerful free screens; differentiation must be clear.
Competitive density — Medium density
Confidence rubric — 50/100 (Moderate)
- Base 30: public anchor, no primary research
- +0: single anchor source, not independently corroborated
- +10: anchor figure is recent (2025)
- +10: bottom-up anchor with visible arithmetic
- Capped at 80: educational estimate, not primary research
Want this analysis for your market?
This page was produced by EstimateMarketShare's own methodology. Run the live AI analyzer on any market — segments, willingness-to-pay, and pain points included. 3 free credits.
More from the portfolio
This analysis of valuestockscreen.com is an educational estimate generated by the PMM-1.0 methodology from the stated inputs above. Anchors are rounded public figures; fractions are explicit judgments with written rationales; the WTP curve is model output, not survey data. Nothing here is audited market research or financial advice. valuestockscreen.com is part of the same founder's portfolio as this product.