The Screener keeps two scoring methods side by side. Both summarize stored history to help build a shortlist. Neither predicts next year's winner or recommends what to buy.
Classic score: broad comparison
Classic score is the lens for a broad universe or a view containing more than one category. It blends trailing return, subtracts an explicit expense-ratio and risk-free-rate drag, scales the result by total volatility, then applies drawdown, calendar-consistency and return-concentration penalties. Confidence shrinks a fund with a short record, measured against the whole history the app has stored for it, which the Days of history column shows. The exact weights and floors are in Settings and take effect immediately.
Classic score is the older whole-universe measure. It is useful for sorting a broad result set, but different asset classes still carry different return and risk structures; read the category and risk columns beside it.
Peer score: one category only
Peer score asks how an equity fund compared with others in the app's same category. It blends de-overlapped return segments, divides by downside deviation, and standardizes that risk-adjusted return using the category's median and median absolute deviation. Two gates then shrink that centered score toward neutral: confidence, from how much of the record exists (both the length of the stored history and how many of the return segments it reaches), and concentration, when one calendar year carried the fund's whole gain by more than the number of its up years would ordinarily produce. A fund with an ordinary spread of good years takes no concentration haircut, however long or short its record. The Shortlist flag marks the configured top N within each category.
There is no separate fee term: adjusted-close returns are already net of the fund's expenses, so subtracting the expense ratio again would double-count it. There are also no separate total-volatility, max-drawdown or calendar- consistency penalties. Non-equity and uncategorized rows stay blank because this lens was not designed for them.
Peer score is category-relative. A 0.4 in Emerging Markets is not comparable with a 0.4 in U.S. Large. The Screener only uses it as the ranking lens when the current scope contains one category. Use either score to shortlist, then review the fund, its fit and the underlying history.