agentleFS
HHFinAiHHFinAi/claude-equity-research-skills/corporate-network-analysis/SKILL.md

corporate-network-analysis

Skill10 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub

Systematic framework for analyzing corporate networks to generate investment alpha. Use when analyzing supplier-customer relationships, director interlocks, executive networks, insider holdings patterns, or identifying M&A signals through board connections. Triggers on supply chain analysis, customer momentum, board interlock, director network, connected party analysis, relationship mapping, or network-based investment research.

1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈5

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Supply Chain Momentum: When a customer gets a big order, upstream suppliers benefit with a lag (40% of shock diffuses over subsequent …

    line 12
  2. Distinctive:

    Use free data sources in this priority order:

    line 29
  3. Distinctive:

    Before acting on network signals, verify:

    line 75
  4. Distinctive:

    All public SEC filings (10-K, DEF 14A, Form 4, 13D, 13F)

    line 87
  5. Distinctive:

    When completing analysis, produce:

    line 99

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Corporate Network Analysis

Exploit slow information diffusion through supply chain relationships and director interlocks to identify predictable stock returns. Academic research shows customer momentum yields ~150bps monthly alpha; board centrality generates ~4.68% annual risk-adjusted returns.

Core Investment Theses

  1. Supply Chain Momentum: When a customer gets a big order, upstream suppliers benefit with a lag (40% of shock diffuses over subsequent months)
  2. Director Interlock Signals: Shared board members facilitate information flow, M&A activity, and strategic alignment
  3. Cross-Holding Synergies: Executives/directors with positions in multiple companies may orchestrate beneficial strategic moves

Workflow

Phase 1: Identify Target Company Networks

1. Map supplier-customer relationships (>5% revenue materiality)
2. Identify board members and their other directorships
3. Track executive cross-company positions
4. Document insider holdings across connected firms

Phase 2: Data Collection

Use free data sources in this priority order:

Relationship TypePrimary SourceHow to Access
Suppliers/CustomersSEC 10-K Item 1/7EDGAR full-text search
Board MembersDEF 14A ProxyEDGAR company filings
Insider TransactionsForm 3/4/5EDGAR insider filings
Beneficial OwnershipSchedule 13D/13GEDGAR ownership filings
Institutional HoldingsForm 13FEDGAR quarterly filings

See references/sec-data-guide.md for detailed extraction procedures.

Phase 3: Network Construction

Build network graphs connecting companies through:

  • Customer-supplier links (weighted by revenue %)
  • Shared directors (first-degree: direct; second-degree: shared third board)
  • Executive overlaps
  • Cross-insider holdings

Calculate centrality metrics:

  • Degree: Number of direct connections
  • Betweenness: Importance in information flow paths
  • Closeness: Speed of information propagation

See references/network-metrics.md for calculation methods.

Phase 4: Signal Generation

Customer Momentum Signal:

1. Calculate weighted 12-month returns of major customers
2. Rank universe by customer momentum
3. Long top quintile, short bottom quintile
4. Optimal: 4th-layer relationships (less crowded)

Board Connection Signals:

  • New shared director between firms → potential M&A signal
  • Director clustered buying across positions → information signal
  • High centrality + adverse event → watch for network contagion

See references/signal-generation.md for detailed procedures.

Phase 5: Due Diligence Checklist

Before acting on network signals, verify:

  • Relationship confirmed via multiple sources
  • Revenue materiality >5%
  • Network position shows high centrality
  • Relationship stable (duration >2 years)
  • Information asymmetry present (limited analyst coverage)
  • Sufficient liquidity for execution
  • No MNPI exposure risk

Phase 6: Compliance Review

Permissible:

  • All public SEC filings (10-K, DEF 14A, Form 4, 13D, 13F)
  • Public earnings calls and press releases
  • Mosaic theory: combining immaterial public info

Prohibited:

  • Material non-public information from any source
  • Shadow trading: using MNPI about Company A to trade Company B

See references/compliance-guide.md for legal boundaries.

Output Templates

When completing analysis, produce:

  1. Network Map: Visual or tabular representation of company relationships
  2. Signal Summary: Ranked opportunities with confidence scores
  3. Due Diligence Notes: Verification status for each relationship
  4. Risk Factors: Data quality issues, concentration risks, compliance flags

Key Academic References

  • Cohen & Frazzini (2008): Customer-supplier momentum, 1.37-1.55% monthly alpha
  • Ali & Hirshleifer (2020): Shared analyst coverage unifies spillover effects
  • Larcker, So & Wang (2013): Board centrality predicts returns
  • Cai & Sevilir (2012): Board connections in M&A transactions

See references/academic-papers.md for full bibliography.

Data Quality Considerations

  • SEC disclosures only capture >10% revenue customers
  • Companies may strategically withhold customer names
  • Board data has survivorship bias (failed firms disappear)
  • Post-publication alpha decay affects well-known signals
  • Multi-source verification essential for high-confidence signals

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.