Does this work outside the US?

The arithmetic travels; the data quality decides. The screen needs trustworthy EPS history and quarterly or at least semi-annual reporting. In markets with annual reporting the growth number updates once a year, which doubles the time every error survives. The mid-cap coverage gap the method exploits exists in most developed markets.

Can I run it on a screener without reading anything?

You can, and the result is a list where the best-looking entries are the most dangerous ones — peak cyclicals and one-off-quarter beneficiaries screen identically to genuine fast growers. The numbers are the filter; the two hours per position is where the false positives are removed. The screen without the reading is the ratio without the method.

Lynch GARP (Growth at a Reasonable Price)Value & business quality6 min read

Where GARP hunts: mid-caps, the categories it actually catches, and the quarterly rhythm

The screen has a home ground: mid-sized companies in an established growth phase, under-covered enough to be mispriced. Two of Lynch's six categories pass it; the other four fail it by construction, and one of those failures is a trap.

Key takeaway

The sweet spot is mid-caps: large enough to have real filings, small enough that coverage is thin and mispricing survives
Of Lynch's six categories, the screen catches fast growers and the quicker stalwarts — and structurally cannot see turnarounds or asset plays
The rhythm is quarterly, set by the reporting calendar; between filings there is genuinely nothing to do

Why the hunting ground is mid-caps

The method needs two things to coexist: reported growth above 20%, and a multiple below 20. In mega-caps that combination is rare and brief — thirty analysts reprice a large grower within a quarter of the growth showing up. In micro-caps the numbers exist but the filings are thin and the growth rates are noise. The mid-cap band is where real audited growth and thin coverage overlap, which is where a PEG under 1 can persist long enough to be bought.

This is also why the seed's markets list reads 'consumer and industrial names'. Those sectors produce the method's natural prey: understandable businesses that grow by opening more locations or taking share, where the growth driver is visible to a customer before it is visible in a model.

Which of Lynch's six categories the screen can actually see

Lynch sorted every stock he looked at into six categories — slow growers, stalwarts, fast growers, cyclicals, turnarounds and asset plays — and prescribed a different playbook for each. The PEG screen is the fast-grower playbook. Run mechanically, it catches fast growers and the quicker stalwarts, and structurally cannot see the rest.

Category	Passes the screen?	Why
Fast growers	Yes — the intended catch	Growth above 20% with a multiple the market has not caught up to
Stalwarts	Occasionally	Growth usually 10-15%; only the fastest ever clear the bar
Slow growers	No	Fail the growth test by definition
Cyclicals	Yes, at the worst moment	Peak earnings make both P/E and growth look wonderful at the top
Turnarounds	No	Negative or erratic earnings fail the positive-P/E test
Asset plays	No	The value is on the balance sheet, invisible to an earnings ratio

The six categories against the three conditions.

The table's fourth row is the important one: cyclicals do not fail the screen — they pass it, at exactly the wrong time. That failure has its own section on the next page, because it is the method's most expensive trap and it arrives wearing the screen's own approval.

The quarterly rhythm: two hours per position, then nothing

Each earnings report: re-run the three numbers — growth rate, P/E, debt — and re-read the story. Did the thing that caused the growth happen again this quarter?
Check the sell trigger: has the multiple crossed 30? A position can hit the exit through price rising or earnings falling, and the second one matters more.
Re-screen for candidates once a quarter, after the bulk of the season's filings land. New names enter the watchlist, not the portfolio — the story work comes first.
Between filings: nothing. The inputs only change four times a year. Watching the price daily adds information about the market's mood and none about the thesis.

The one-to-three-year holding period is not a preference, it is the mechanism. The return arrives when the market re-rates the multiple toward the growth rate, and re-ratings follow earnings reports — of which there are only four a year. A thesis that needs six reports to be proven takes eighteen months to pay, and no amount of screen-watching accelerates it.

Common questions

Does this work outside the US?: The arithmetic travels; the data quality decides. The screen needs trustworthy EPS history and quarterly or at least semi-annual reporting. In markets with annual reporting the growth number updates once a year, which doubles the time every error survives. The mid-cap coverage gap the method exploits exists in most developed markets.
Can I run it on a screener without reading anything?: You can, and the result is a list where the best-looking entries are the most dangerous ones — peak cyclicals and one-off-quarter beneficiaries screen identically to genuine fast growers. The numbers are the filter; the two hours per position is where the false positives are removed. The screen without the reading is the ratio without the method.

These are documented methods described for study. Nothing here is investment advice, a recommendation, or a claim about future returns — every system on this page has losing periods, and the pages say where.

Reading about a system is not having one.

Plutux is where you write your own rules down, test them against real data, and keep the record your memory would otherwise rewrite. Join the waitlist for early access.