1 min read
Sources:
Kevin's account, Kevin's account (Sept 29, 2026)
[]
Short answer
This site is the company’s partial answer: a public, sourced, correctable record of his claims, with misses listed and the open questions marked. It is not an independent review, and it is written by the company. Whether he would open a privacy-redacted record of his investment results to an outside reviewer, and whether he would sit for a long interview with an informed critic who sets the questions, are commitments only he can make,. 1
What is on the record
Kevin’s account
I believe in transparency even when mistakes are made. The full archive is available, including my historical correct and incorrect calls, which I consider incredibly valuable to learn from. 1
The archive and this site are the company’s version of transparency: everything he has said, kept, and everything the record says, sourced. Neither is independent.
From the September 29, 2026 Q&A
Kevin’s account
Question 104, a substantive interview with an informed critic who controls the questions and follow-ups: yes. 2
Question 103, an independent review of a redacted record of his investment results, was not answered and remains open.
Yes to the hostile interview. He has said so. The archive, kept whole including the misses, is his standing version of an open record. 1
Simply put
✅ Interview
➡️ Yes, with a critic who controls the questions.
✅ Review
➡️ His answer is the archive: every call, right or wrong, still up, and this site with the sources next to each.
Sources
Kevin's account, No, I didn't unlist my library: “I believe in transparency even when mistakes are made” Read the excerpt
Kevin's account (Sept 29, 2026), Question 104 Read the excerpt
