126,202 assets indexed across stocks, crypto and funds, of which 73,051 carry a verdict. The remaining 53,151 are indexed but not yet screened, and each one says so in its own row. Every control says which asset types it can evaluate, and every verdict says how completely it was screened.
Sign in to save this screen and re-run it later. Sharing needs no account — use Copy link.
These are not offered, because the data behind them does not exist for the whole universe — and a control that silently matches nothing is worse than no control. Everything else the market category names — price, RSI, ATR, relative volume, trend, a 20-session VWAP and a daily SMC grade — is filterable above, on the Stocks tab.
market — intraday session VWAP, full multi-timeframe SMC. the bulk snapshot holds a 20-session VWAP and the DAILY SMC timeframe; the intraday session VWAP is one chart request per symbol and the five-timeframe SMC read is two more, so neither is held for the universe.
intelligence — news sentiment, analyst consensus, insider activity, options flow, COT, HTR score. each is one live call per symbol against a 22/min process-wide bucket shared with page renders — 118 minutes per field for 2,589 symbols — and COT is not a per-equity measurement at all.
Screening completeness is not a footnote. Where financial ratios pass but business activity has not been verified, the verdict reads NOT DETERMINED — never COMPLIANT. Financial ratios pass, but business activity has not been verified. HTR therefore does not assign a final compliance classification.
For equities the methodology count is a financial-ratio result — debt, receivables and interest income. They do not screen what the business does, so a company can pass every one of them and still be non-compliant on its activity. Rows where that happens are marked †.
The disagreement runs the other way too. Where the verdict is COMPLIANT but every methodology our own ratio engine could establish for that issuer failed, the row is marked ‡. The verdict comes from a provider that also screens business activity; our ratios test the balance sheet. Neither is wrong, and they disagree — which is worth knowing before relying on the verdict rather than after.
And a third case, which neither mark above could reach. Where the status reads QUESTIONABLE — the compliance provider looked and declined to come down either way — while every methodology our own engine could establish agreed, the row is marked §. A hedge is not a finding, and our own unanimous reading of the balance sheet is worth opening before taking the hedge at face value.
| Asset | Type | Shariah status | Methodologies | Completeness | Key metric | Screened | Add to watchlist | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ZZZ ZZZ | ETF / Fund | NOT DETERMINED No holdings filing found | — | Insufficient data | — | — | ||
| ZZZD.TO BMO Tactical Dividend ETF Fund | ETF / Fund | NOT DETERMINED | — | Insufficient data | — | — |
up to 4 — anything beyond the first four is ignored
Showing 126,201–126,202 of 126,202, grouped by asset type, then by methodology scheme, then by how many methodologies pass.
See also: How the screen works · How we screen crypto · Full compliance list · Screening is a published methodology applied consistently, not a fatwa.