After years in the market, here's the uncomfortable truth about "deep research" and discipline

I've been in the market long enough to realize one thing: more research does NOT automatically mean better decisions.

Early on, I did what everyone praises:

• Read every SEC filing

• Dig through earnings calls line by line

• Compare competitors, TAM, margins, moats... you name it

At some point, research stopped being a tool and turned into a hiding place.

Hiding from making a decision. Hiding from being wrong.

Here's what experience taught me the hard way:

1. If your thesis can't fit on half a page, you don't have a thesis.

It's just information hoarding.

2. Most data is noise once you've identified the 2-3 variables that actually move the business.

Revenue driver, cost structure, capital allocation.

The rest is intellectual entertainment.

3. Buffett-style investing isn't about reading everything.

It's about knowing what to ignore.

My process now is brutally simple:

• Start with a single falsifiable thesis

• Define what would make me wrong before I read more

• Time-box research aggressively

• Stop the moment new info stops changing the decision

If after that I'm still unsure, I pass.

Missing a trade is cheap.

Being stuck in analysis paralysis is expensive.

Curious how others handle this:

• Do you use strict checklists?

• Hard time limits?

• Or do you accept that research never really "ends"?

Interested to hear from people who've been through a few cycles - not just theory.