{{company_name}}
Company Name
Example: Example: Horizon Consumer Technologies
Enter the company being evaluated.
Ready to Use
Complete Prompt
This prompt has variables that can be replaced with your own information. Copy and use it with your preferred LLM, or try it out in the LearnerBox Prompt Playground.
Act as a senior investment research analyst specializing in corporate governance and capital allocation.
Evaluate the company’s governance quality and capital-allocation record using the information provided below.
Company:
{{company_name}}
Ownership and board information:
{{ownership_board}}
Management incentives and remuneration:
{{incentives}}
Capital-allocation history:
{{capital_allocation_history}}
Financial performance and returns:
{{financial_returns}}
Disclosures, controversies, and related parties:
{{disclosures_controversies}}
Analysis requirements:
1. Assess ownership structure, including:
- controlling shareholders;
- founder influence;
- state ownership;
- institutional ownership;
- cross-holdings;
- voting rights;
- dual-class shares; and
- minority-shareholder protections.
2. Assess board composition, including:
- independence;
- skills;
- tenure;
- diversity;
- attendance;
- committee structure;
- overboarding;
- conflicts; and
- succession.
3. Assess management incentives, including:
- performance measures;
- time horizon;
- equity ownership;
- dilution;
- clawbacks;
- discretion;
- related-party benefits; and
- alignment with long-term value creation.
4. Evaluate disclosure quality, transparency, consistency, and treatment of unfavorable information.
5. Review related-party transactions, auditor relationships, internal controls, regulatory issues, and governance controversies.
6. Analyze capital allocation across:
- organic investment;
- capital expenditure;
- R&D;
- acquisitions;
- disposals;
- dividends;
- buybacks;
- debt reduction;
- equity issuance; and
- cash accumulation.
7. Compare capital deployment with:
- return on invested capital;
- cost of capital;
- free cash flow;
- leverage;
- valuation;
- strategic logic; and
- timing.
8. Identify evidence of:
- disciplined reinvestment;
- empire building;
- value-destructive M&A;
- poorly timed buybacks;
- excessive dilution;
- underinvestment;
- overcapitalization; or
- short-term earnings management.
9. Develop a governance and capital-allocation scorecard.
10. Distinguish documented facts from interpretation.
11. Do not infer misconduct, conflicts, or intent without evidence.
12. Do not invent ownership, compensation, board, transaction, return, or controversy data.
Present the result as:
{{output_format}}
Include:
- ownership and control assessment;
- board-quality review;
- incentive-alignment review;
- disclosure and related-party assessment;
- capital-allocation history;
- return-on-capital evaluation;
- acquisition and buyback review;
- governance scorecard;
- stewardship strengths;
- governance and allocation vulnerabilities;
- unanswered questions; and
- investment implications.Customization Variables
Replace each variable shown in double curly brackets with accurate information from your own professional context.
{{ownership_board}}
Ownership and Board Information
Example: Provide shareholders, voting rights, board biographies, independence, committees, tenure, and attendance.
Use official filings and current board disclosures.
{{incentives}}
Management Incentives and Remuneration
Example: Provide pay structure, KPIs, equity awards, vesting, ownership, dilution, and clawback terms.
Focus on the relationship between incentives and long-term value creation.
{{capital_allocation_history}}
Capital-Allocation History
Example: List capex, R&D, M&A, disposals, dividends, buybacks, debt changes, and equity issuance over time.
Provide several years of capital-deployment decisions.
{{financial_returns}}
Financial Performance and Returns
Example: Provide ROIC, ROE, free cash flow, leverage, growth, margins, valuation, and cost of capital.
Returns help evaluate whether capital allocation created value.
{{disclosures_controversies}}
Disclosures, Controversies, and Related Parties
Example: Provide related-party transactions, auditor information, regulatory issues, restatements, and controversies.
Use verified sources and neutral language.
{{output_format}}
Output Format
Choose the format appropriate for research or governance review.
Expected Output
A structured governance and capital-allocation review containing ownership, board, incentives, disclosure, related parties, capital deployment, returns, scorecards, vulnerabilities, questions, and investment implications.
💡 Important:
The quality of the result depends on the
completeness, accuracy, and relevance of the
information supplied to the AI.
Prompt Characteristics
These characteristics describe the type of thinking, customization, and output structure involved in using this prompt effectively.
Prompt Anatomy
This breakdown explains how the prompt’s major components work together to guide the AI toward a useful, reliable, and well-structured response.
Role
Positions the AI as an investment-research governance and stewardship specialist.
Context
Combines ownership, board, incentives, capital allocation, returns, disclosures, and controversies.
Task
Requires evaluation of governance quality and long-term stewardship of capital.
Constraints
Prevents invented data, unsupported allegations, and assumptions about intent.
Output Structure
Requires ownership, board, incentives, capital allocation, scorecards, vulnerabilities, and implications.
Input Variables
Company, ownership and board, incentives, allocation history, returns, disclosures, and output format.
Customization Tips
- Use official filings for ownership, board, remuneration, and related-party data.
- Review capital allocation over a full cycle rather than a single year.
- Compare returns on deployed capital with the cost of capital.
- Evaluate buybacks relative to valuation and dilution.
- Avoid treating governance concerns as misconduct without evidence.
Responsible Professional Use
Review Before Applying the Output
AI-generated responses can contain errors, omissions, unsupported assumptions, outdated information, or recommendations that do not reflect your jurisdiction or professional context.
Verify calculations, evidence, regulations, standards, policies, and professional recommendations before relying on the result. The qualified professional remains responsible for the final decision.