← Grizzly Bulls Research

Research source kit

A fast source desk for journalists, researchers, educators, analysts, and data publishers who need to verify, cite, or reuse published Grizzly Bulls research.

Every record below points to a published Grizzly Bulls study. The source kit brings each research question, reviewed universe, key result, primary evidence, dates, public version, preferred citation, canonical URL, and available CSV/JSON downloads together in one place.

17 published studies5 research collectionsPublished September 12, 2026Last changed September 14, 2026

How to use this source desk

Cite the stable study

Use the preferred citation and canonical study URL. Preserve the data snapshot date when a measured statistic depends on a dated observation window.

Verify the finding

Open the full study for methodology, limitations, source notes, and unsupported-inference boundaries. The one-line result here is not a substitute for those qualifications.

Reuse public aggregate data

Use the study CSV/JSON to verify figures or build a new chart with attribution. Public reuse does not automatically extend to the third-party source records used to conduct the research.

Ask on a deadline

Methodology, corrections, data reuse, and reporting questions use the public research contact path. A citation or backlink is never required as a condition of factual reuse.

Ownership & Holdings

What reviewed filings can establish about public-equity ownership, how the evidence reaches the broader billionaire universe, and where ownership form or source coverage changes the answer.

Evidence coverage census · Data through September 6, 2026 · v1.0

Billionaire Public-Equity Ownership Census

Research question

How much of the billionaire universe can reviewed SEC ownership evidence actually support?

Key result

19.3% had reviewed SEC position evidence; source reach was the first blocker for 77.5%.

Reviewed universe
2,549 billionaire profiles
Primary evidence
SEC Forms 3/4/5 and Schedule 13 evidence
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “Billionaire Public-Equity Ownership Census: What SEC Filings Can Actually Prove About Billionaire Stock Ownership.” Grizzly Bulls, September 8, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot September 6, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/billionaire-public-equity-ownership-census
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →
Dated ownership snapshot · Data through September 4, 2026 · v1.0

Jensen Huang NVIDIA Ownership Snapshot

Research question

What did Jensen Huang's June 17 NVIDIA filing report, and what changes when that dated position is valued later?

Key result

812,004,746 NVIDIA shares were reported in the June 17 relationship; 91.4% were held indirectly.

Reviewed universe
1 person-company ownership relationship
Primary evidence
SEC Form 4 plus dated market-price evidence
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “Jensen Huang NVIDIA Ownership Snapshot: What the June 17 Form 4 Reported, and What $187 Billion at a September Price Does Not Mean.” Grizzly Bulls, September 9, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot September 4, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/jensen-huang-nvidia-ownership
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →
Cross-company ownership dataset · Data through September 6, 2026 · v1.0

Billionaire Public-Equity Positions Dataset

Research question

What reviewed billionaire public-equity relationships can be published without flattening unlike securities and filing scopes?

Key result

13 reviewed relationships preserve legal security classes, ownership form, exclusions, evidence scope, and observation dates.

Reviewed universe
13 relationships · 12 profiles · 12 companies
Primary evidence
SEC Forms 3/4, Schedule 13, and reviewed ownership evidence
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “Billionaire Public-Equity Positions Dataset: 13 Reviewed SEC Ownership Relationships Across 12 Billionaire Profiles and 12 Companies.” Grizzly Bulls, September 10, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot September 6, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/billionaire-public-equity-positions
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →

Voting Power & Governance

Companywide voting power, how that power changes through time, the legal mechanics behind enhanced-vote structures, and the difference between voting authority and share-count ownership.

Voting-power comparison · Data through July 14, 2026 · v1.0

Billionaire Voting Power: Meta, Alphabet and Berkshire Compared

Research question

How much total company voting power did three prominent billionaires hold at their reviewed SEC observation dates?

Key result

The highest reviewed observation was 60.8% of total company voting power; 1 observation exceeded 50%.

Reviewed universe
3 person-company voting observations
Primary evidence
Issuer proxy and SEC ownership disclosures
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “Billionaire Voting Power: Meta, Alphabet and Berkshire Compared: A 2026 SEC Comparison of Mark Zuckerberg, Sergey Brin and Warren Buffett.” Grizzly Bulls, September 10, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot July 14, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/billionaire-voting-power
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →
Founder-control cohort · Data through July 31, 2026 · v1.0

Founder Voting Control at 10 Public Companies

Research question

How much total company voting power did founders hold across 10 selected public companies, and which mechanisms created it?

Key result

4 of 10 reviewed founders exceeded 50% of total voting power; the highest observation was 82.4%.

Reviewed universe
10 selected public companies
Primary evidence
Issuer proxy, voting, and governance disclosures
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “Founder Voting Control at 10 Public Companies: How SEC Disclosures Show 27.4% to 82.4% Founder Voting Power, and Why the Mechanism Matters.” Grizzly Bulls, September 10, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot July 31, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/founder-voting-control
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →
Longitudinal disclosure comparison · Data through July 31, 2026 · v1.0

How Founder Voting Control Changed at 10 Public Companies

Research question

How did founder voting power change between two comparable issuer disclosures for the same 10-company cohort?

Key result

5 increased, 4 decreased, and 1 was unchanged; the study does not assign transaction causes.

Reviewed universe
10 founder-company pairs with two reviewed endpoints
Primary evidence
Paired issuer voting-power disclosures
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “How Founder Voting Control Changed at 10 Public Companies: Five Founders Gained Voting Power, Four Lost It, and One Was Unchanged Across Reviewed SEC Disclosures.” Grizzly Bulls, September 10, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot July 31, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/founder-voting-control-change
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →
Governance mechanics study · Data through August 26, 2026 · v1.0

When Founder Supervoting Rights End at 10 Public Companies

Research question

When do enhanced founder voting rights convert or end across the selected 10-company cohort?

Key result

2 of 10 reviewed companies have a hard time-based companywide sunset; other mechanisms depend on events, thresholds, transfers, or holder votes.

Reviewed universe
10 founder-control structures
Primary evidence
SEC-hosted charters and issuer governance disclosures
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “When Founder Supervoting Rights End at 10 Public Companies: Only Two Reviewed Companies Have a Hard Time-Based Companywide Sunset; the Rest Depend on Founder Events, Thresholds, Transfers or Holder Votes.” Grizzly Bulls, September 11, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot August 26, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/founder-supervoting-sunsets
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →
Matched-denominator study · Data through August 26, 2026 · v1.0

Founder Voting Power vs Share Ownership at 9 Public Companies

Research question

How does founder total voting power compare with issuer-disclosed share-count ownership when the same disclosure supports both?

Key result

9 of 9 matched founders had voting power above disclosed share-count ownership; Alphabet remains explicitly unmatched.

Reviewed universe
9 matched companies · 1 source-coverage exclusion
Primary evidence
Issuer proxy and principal-holder ownership disclosures
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “Founder Voting Power vs Share Ownership at 9 Public Companies: All Nine Matched Founders Had More Voting Power Than Their Disclosed Share-Count Ownership.” Grizzly Bulls, September 11, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot August 26, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/founder-voting-vs-ownership
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →

SEC Evidence & Methodology

Research about what SEC source families can support, what they cannot support, and why filing presence alone does not make a broader ownership or transaction claim ready to publish.

Evidence methodology study · Data through September 6, 2026 · v1.0

SEC Filing Evidence for Billionaire Stock Ownership

Research question

What can the SEC source families behind the reviewed billionaire ownership dataset actually establish?

Key result

6 source patterns appear across 13 relationships; 4 relationships use multiple source families.

Reviewed universe
13 reviewed ownership relationships
Primary evidence
Forms 3/4, Schedule 13, proxy / Item 403, and filing-history metadata
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “SEC Filing Evidence for Billionaire Stock Ownership: 13 Reviewed Ownership Relationships Required Six Different Evidence Patterns; No Single Filing Type Meant the Same Thing.” Grizzly Bulls, September 11, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot September 6, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/sec-ownership-evidence
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →
SEC transaction-evidence methodology study · Data through August 31, 2026 · v1.0

SEC Sale Footnotes Across 48,912 Form 4/5 Candidates

Research question

How often did Form 4/5 sale candidates require footnote review, and which recurring semantics dominated candidates blocked only by that gate?

Key result

45,879 of 48,912 sale candidates (93.8%) carried a footnote-review blocker; 6,808 of 7,573 footnote-only cases used weighted-average or price-range language.

Reviewed universe
48,912 non-derivative sale candidates across 513 billionaire profiles
Primary evidence
SEC Forms 4 and 5 non-derivative sale transactions and footnotes
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “SEC Sale Footnotes Across 48,912 Form 4/5 Candidates: 45,879 Sale Candidates Hit a Footnote Review Gate, and Price-Aggregation Language Dominated the Footnote-Only Cases.” Grizzly Bulls, September 12, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot August 31, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/sec-sale-footnote-review
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →
SEC ownership-extraction methodology study · Data through September 10, 2026 · v1.0

SEC Ownership Evidence Funnel Across 20,834 Form 3/4/5 Candidates

Research question

What survives when exact SEC identity review and conservative Forms 3/4/5 extraction are applied to a selected group of billionaire profiles?

Key result

1,503 of 20,834 candidates (7.2%) were simple direct non-zero positions; footnote review accounted for 50.6% of candidates.

Reviewed universe
20,834 position candidates across 198 Forms-eligible profiles
Primary evidence
SEC Forms 3, 4 and 5 ownership filings and conservative position extraction
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “SEC Ownership Evidence Funnel Across 20,834 Form 3/4/5 Candidates: Only 1,503 of 20,834 Extracted Position Candidates Were Simple Direct Non-Zero Positions.” Grizzly Bulls, September 12, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot September 10, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/sec-ownership-evidence-funnel
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →

Valuation & Market Data

Research about point-in-time valuation inputs, market-data timing, financial-statement normalization, and the source and capital-structure boundaries required before a valuation output is complete.

Point-in-time valuation-methodology study · Data through September 2, 2026 · v1.0

Historical Market Cap: SEC Share-Count Disclosure Lag Across 21 Companies

Research question

How long after a share count's stated as-of date did the SEC filing make that count public across 21 reviewed companies?

Key result

The median disclosure lag was 6 calendar days; 5 of 21 observations (23.8%) were at least 10 days, with a 17-day maximum.

Reviewed universe
21 reviewed U.S. public-company share-count observations
Primary evidence
SEC Forms 10-Q and 10-K
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “Historical Market Cap: SEC Share-Count Disclosure Lag Across 21 Companies: A Median 6-Day Gap Separated the Share Date From the Filing Date, a Point-in-Time Trap for Backtests.” Grizzly Bulls, September 11, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot September 2, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/historical-market-cap-share-count-lag
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →
Longitudinal point-in-time methodology study · Data through May 20, 2026 · v1.0

SEC Share-Count Disclosure Cadence Across 16 Filings

Research question

Do share-count disclosure lags persist within the same issuer across repeated SEC filings?

Key result

Four of five reviewed issuers stayed within a one-day lag band; 13 of 16 observations (81.3%) were disclosed in 5–7 days, while Netflix ranged from 17 to 23 days.

Reviewed universe
16 reviewed observations across 5 issuers
Primary evidence
Repeated SEC Forms 10-Q and 10-K
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “SEC Share-Count Disclosure Cadence Across 16 Filings: Four of Five Reviewed Issuers Stayed Within a 1-Day Lag Band, While Netflix Repeatedly Took 17–23 Days.” Grizzly Bulls, September 11, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot May 20, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/share-count-disclosure-cadence
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →
Capital-structure methodology study · Data through September 2, 2026 · v1.0

Enterprise Value Financing Scope Across 9 Reviewed Companies

Research question

How often is complete reviewed net-debt evidence still insufficient for the bounded enterprise-value calculation?

Key result

3 of 9 reviewed companies had EV withheld despite complete net-debt review: 2 for noncontrolling interests and 1 for preferred equity; 6 were compatible.

Reviewed universe
9 reviewed companies with complete current net-debt evidence
Primary evidence
Issuer Forms 10-Q and 10-K financing and balance-sheet disclosures
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “Enterprise Value Financing Scope Across 9 Reviewed Companies: 3 of 9 Had Enterprise Value Withheld Even After Complete Net-Debt Review.” Grizzly Bulls, September 11, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot September 2, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/enterprise-value-financing-scope
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →
Financial-statement source coverage study · Data through September 3, 2026 · v1.0

SEC Companyfacts Annual Financial Coverage Across 61 Companies

Research question

How much of a 61-company market universe could strict SEC Companyfacts annual normalization cover without generic IFRS mapping, implicit FX conversion, or inferred issuer identity?

Key result

59 of 61 companies (96.7%) normalized under the reviewed 13-metric annual-financials schema; the two remaining cases stopped at a CAD currency-unit boundary and an unresolved issuer-identity boundary.

Reviewed universe
61 configured market companies in the September 3, 2026 measurement
Primary evidence
SEC Companyfacts annual US-GAAP facts and reviewed issuer identity
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “SEC Companyfacts Annual Financial Coverage Across 61 Companies: 59 of 61 Normalized Under Strict Reviewed Rules; the Remaining Gaps Were Currency and Identity.” Grizzly Bulls, September 12, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot September 3, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/sec-companyfacts-normalization-coverage
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →

Systematic Markets

Measured market and macro studies that test how signals, probabilities, concentration, and portfolio mechanics behave outside a clean textbook story.

Forecast reconstruction · Data through September 12, 2026 · v1.0

Yield Curve Recession Signal: Reconstructing the May 2023 Warning

Research question

What did the 10-year minus 3-month Treasury spread imply in May 2023 under the maintained New York Fed model, and what was the realized NBER classification twelve months later?

Key result

The May 2023 spread averaged -1.73 percentage points and reconstructs to 71.4% recession probability for May 2024; NBER did not classify that target month as recession as of the study cutoff.

Reviewed universe
22 May 2023 daily T10Y3M observations plus one 12-month target month
Primary evidence
FRED T10Y3M, New York Fed yield-curve model, and NBER business-cycle chronology
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “Yield Curve Recession Signal: Reconstructing the May 2023 Warning: A -1.73 Percentage-Point Monthly Average Implied 71.4% Recession Probability Twelve Months Ahead; May 2024 Was Not an NBER Recession.” Grizzly Bulls, September 13, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot September 12, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/yield-curve-recession-signal
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →
Index concentration snapshot · Data through September 9, 2026 · v1.0

S&P 500 AI Concentration: How Much of the Index Is AI-Linked?

Research question

How concentrated was the S&P 500 in September 2026, and how much of its weight sat in a conservative company cohort directly tied to AI infrastructure and cloud-platform investment?

Key result

The top 10 security lines were 38.09% of index weight; the conservative AI-linked cohort was 29.46%, or 77.3% of top-10 weight.

Reviewed universe
10 top security lines · 9 companies · 7-company conservative AI-linked cohort
Primary evidence
S&P Dow Jones Indices, State Street index holdings, SEC filings, and issuer financial disclosures
Public data
CSV · JSON
Lee Bailey. “S&P 500 AI Concentration: How Much of the Index Is AI-Linked?: The Top 10 Security Lines Were 38.09% of the Index; a Conservative Seven-Company AI-Linked Cohort Was 29.46%.” Grizzly Bulls, September 14, 2026. Version 1.0. Data snapshot September 9, 2026. https://grizzlybulls.com/research/sp500-ai-concentration
Open methodology, limitations, and full evidence →

Source and reuse boundary

  • Public Grizzly Bulls research pages and factual findings may be cited without permission.
  • When reusing a measured statistic, preserve the study data snapshot date and any material limitation that changes interpretation.
  • Public aggregate CSV and JSON downloads may be used for verification, analysis, and new charts with attribution to Grizzly Bulls and the canonical study.
  • The source kit helps readers discover and reuse published studies. The full study remains the reference for source scope, dates, methodology, limitations, and third-party reuse restrictions.

This source kit is an index for discovery and reuse. The full study remains the reference for each finding's dates, methodology, limitations, and source context.