Community Intelligence Fund Holdings
The fund published its holdings on the public site at a cadence that made the rest of the industry look slow. This page explains what the disclosure looked like, why it was structured that way, and how a careful reader should think about a list of names.
What this page is
A description of how holdings were disclosed when the fund was operating. The disclosure was the point. The list itself was the byproduct. An investor who understood the structure of the disclosure understood more about the fund than they could learn from any sales material.
Why holdings were disclosed
Disclosure converted a story into evidence. A reader could see whether the fund actually held what the marketing said it held. They could also see whether new positions matched the stated philosophy. Disclosure made the manager accountable in a way no quarterly letter could.
Historical disclosure philosophy
Holdings were posted to the public site on a much faster cadence than the regulatory minimum required. Trade rationales were published in plain language. When the manager added a name the community had not surfaced, the page said so. When the manager overrode a popular community pick, the page said why. Nothing about the disclosure was decorative.
Example holdings format
The holdings page had a small set of columns and resisted the urge to add more.
| Ticker | Name | Weight | Position note |
|---|---|---|---|
| redacted | Industrial holding | 4.1% | Cyclical, balance sheet review pending. |
| redacted | Software holding | 3.6% | Initiated this quarter from community pool. |
| redacted | Consumer holding | 2.9% | Trim on valuation; thesis intact. |
| redacted | Healthcare holding | 2.7% | Manager add; not a community surfaced idea. |
The columns above are illustrative. Tickers and weights are intentionally omitted because the audited file is not currently available to publish.
How investors should interpret holdings
A holdings page is a snapshot. It does not show trade history, conviction, or how the manager arrived at the position. The right way to read a holdings list is to compare it against the stated philosophy. If the philosophy says quality at a fair price and half the names are speculative growth at any price, something is wrong. Disclosure makes that mismatch easy to spot.
Important disclaimer
The original Community Intelligence Fund is no longer in operation. Nothing on this page is a recommendation or a current portfolio. The current StockJungle research platform is independent. Today's portfolio disclosure for the named Portfolio Managers is on the portfolio disclosure page.