halal-investingaaoifivalue-investingbuild-in-public
invest-like now runs every stock through an AAOIFI-compliant halal screen alongside its 7-framework value-investing scoring. 1,500+ stocks pass, each surfaced with the underlying debt ratio, non-permissible income share, and full Buffett-fit grade.
What is the best PE ratio for value investing? There is no universal answer, here's the worked-example proof
Every beginner asks what PE ratio counts as cheap. The honest answer is that there is no universal number. A PE of 15 in software is a screaming bargain. A PE of 15 in a utility is fairly priced. A PE of 15 in a coal miner is expensive. We walk through three sectors with worked examples.
Value investing in tech, is it an oxymoron? 5 tech names that pass the framework consensus today
For decades Buffett refused to buy tech. Then he bought Apple in 2016 and made over 100 billion in gains. Munger bought BABA. The lesson: tech is not the opposite of value investing if you know what to look for. Five tech names that pass the invest-like 7-framework screen today.
Tesla (TSLA) through 7 value-investing frameworks: where Buffett, Graham, Lynch and Greenblatt agree (and disagree)
We ran Tesla through every value-investing framework on invest-like.com. Buffett scores 41/100, Graham 69, Fisher 34, Lynch 22, Greenblatt 3, Munger 33, T. Smith 39. Six of seven frameworks reject TSLA outright. The story under those scores is more interesting than the headline rejection.
Most halal stock lists are a directory: a static list of tickers that someone, somewhere, declared compliant. They go stale, they rarely explain the screen, and they almost never tell you which of the "halal" stocks are actually worth owning.
That has been my single biggest user request since invest-like launched: "Run the seven value-investing frameworks against the halal universe." So we did, and the result shipped this week. Here is what it covers, how the screen works, and what is and is not in it.
Open any stock page and you will now see a small Halal-eligible or Halal-ineligible badge next to the ticker, plus the underlying reason. The badge is also a site-wide filter: turn on Halal Mode in settings and every list - verdicts, Buffett-Brain grades, framework results, watchlist, conviction portfolio - re-filters to the halal universe in real time.
The full halal-eligible list is currently 1,547 stocks out of the 12,000+ tracked universe. Of those, 218 also pass at least 5 of the 7 value-investing frameworks (the high-conviction halal cohort). Of those 218, 23 pass 7-of-7 and sit in the top conviction tier.
All three lists are public. No paywall on the screening.
We chose AAOIFI (Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions) Standard 21 as the canonical source, because it is the most-cited and most-rigorous screen in the institutional halal-investing world. Most popular consumer halal apps use lighter screens (often just the Dow Jones Islamic Index criteria, which AAOIFI-trained scholars consider too permissive). The trade-off: our list is shorter than most "halal stock apps" because the bar is higher.
The four AAOIFI tests we run on every stock at every quarterly refresh:
Primary business test. The core business cannot be in prohibited categories. We exclude:
Interest-bearing debt ratio. Total interest-bearing debt / 36-month average market cap must be ≤ 30%. This is the AAOIFI threshold (some screens use 33%; AAOIFI is stricter at 30%).
Non-permissible income ratio. Income from non-permissible sources / total income must be ≤ 5%. Examples of non-permissible income that still slip into otherwise-halal businesses: interest income on cash holdings, partnership revenue from a non-halal sub-brand, etc.
Liquid assets ratio. Cash + interest-bearing securities + receivables / market cap must be ≤ 30%. Designed to exclude businesses whose value comes mostly from cash piles (which earn riba), not productive assets.
A stock must pass all four tests to be marked Halal-eligible. Partial passes (e.g. debt ratio at 31%) get a Borderline badge with the specific failing metric called out, so you know which stocks to watch as their fundamentals shift.
The 23 stocks that currently pass both Halal-eligible AND 7-of-7 framework consensus (the top conviction tier) span:
Specific names get visible (with current grade, current price, current entry timestamp) at /track-record/ under the Halal Conviction Portfolio section if you toggle Halal Mode on in settings.
This is not a fatwa. We are not Islamic scholars. We are implementing the published AAOIFI standard mechanically against current fundamentals, then surfacing the pass/fail with the underlying numbers. Any user with a specific scholar or mosque ruling that differs from AAOIFI Standard 21 should treat our screen as a starting point, not the final word.
This is not "ethically perfect investing". The AAOIFI screen does not test for ESG, climate alignment, supply-chain labour practices, or weapons. We also offer separate Ethical Filters (no Israeli, Russian, or Ukrainian operations; defence-exclusion) that can be layered on top of the halal screen - see settings for the full list.
This is not a recommendation. The badge says eligible, not good to own. Pair the halal eligibility with the 7-framework verdict on the same stock page to see whether the business is actually high-quality.
The honest workflow:
The whole point of publishing the screen mechanically is that you should never have to take our word for it. Pull the underlying ratio, check it against AAOIFI's published thresholds, and decide.
This is an educational analysis tool. The halal screen runs against published AAOIFI thresholds applied to current fundamentals. It is not religious advice, not a fatwa, not a substitute for consulting a qualified Islamic scholar on a personal investing question. Past performance of any cohort is not a forecast.
The implementation is the work of Zaid Ghazal (the founder), reviewed against AAOIFI Standard 21 (published Arabic text plus the official English translation), with input from three halal-investing-focused beta users. If you spot a methodology issue, please email me directly.