Why Returnolio, and not another investing platform

Most retail-investing platforms are attention businesses dressed as investment tools. They optimise for clicks, push notifications and trade frequency. None of those compounds capital. We sell a subscription, so our incentive is whether the research keeps earning its place in your week, not how many minutes we can hold your eyes on a screen.

That is easy to say. The test of it is what a business publishes when the numbers are unflattering.

The founding decision was not to build another site that only shows the good months. That is why the losing years are printed next to the winning ones, why a person reads every monthly list before it goes out and says in writing why each name is there, and why the portfolio is published as a record of what was actually held rather than a queue of what to buy next.

What we deliberately don't do

• The score is not for sale. No issuer pays us to be covered, ranked or featured, and no company can buy its way into the Top 10. There are no banner slots and no sponsored tickers. Each Top 10 edition does carry two partner cards under the heading "The tools we use ourselves", a broker and a charting tool we actually use, and those are affiliate links with the disclosure printed underneath them. They sit at the edition level and have no connection to which ten names the edition holds: the picks are chosen first, and no partner has any say in them.
• No intra-day push spam. Email digests, calm by default.
• No third-party trackers. EU data residency on Hetzner Germany, encrypted backups.

What we do that others don't

• Auditable models. Every fair-value number links to its assumptions. If we can't show our work, we don't show the number.
• Sector-aware methods. A REIT and a SaaS company don't get the same formula. See Fair-value methods.
• Manual editorial pass on the Top 10. A name only makes the list if we can defend it. See Monthly Top 10.

How we price it

Low, on purpose. Think of it as one lunch a month. If you run a portfolio of ten, fifty or a hundred thousand, that fee is small enough that it is not really a trade-off, and that is what makes it worth doing on both sides. We would rather be affordable to a lot of people than expensive to a few, and the Free tier gives you the whole methodology.

The test we hold ourselves to is the obvious one: over a year, the work should be worth more to you than the plan costs you. That is a standard we aim at, not a promise. Nobody can guarantee what a portfolio will do, and anyone selling you that guarantee is selling you something else. But if the formula doesn't pay for itself, we've built the wrong product, and no amount of copy on this page fixes that.