What You Will Learn
Traditional stock screeners force you to think in database filters: set a minimum market cap, pick an industry code, choose a P/E range, adjust a debt-to-equity slider. It works, but it requires you to already know exactly what you are looking for — and it misses nuance. "Companies benefiting from AI adoption with strong free cash flow" is not a filter you can set on a traditional screener.
With Journely, stock screening becomes a conversation. Describe what you want in plain language and the AI translates your intent into a multi-factor screen across fundamentals, technicals, and thematic criteria. It searches across US, Japanese, and Vietnamese markets simultaneously.
- Natural language screening — describe what you want instead of configuring filters
- Multi-factor analysis — combine fundamental, technical, and thematic criteria in a single query
- Cross-market search — screen stocks across US, Japan, and Vietnam simultaneously
- Iterative refinement — narrow results through follow-up conversation
Step-by-Step: Screening for Stocks
Describe What You Are Looking For
Start by telling Journely what kind of stocks you want. You can be as specific or as broad as you like. Mention themes, financial characteristics, sectors, market conditions, or any combination. The AI will interpret your intent and build the appropriate screen.
I am screening for: Market cap $2B-$20B (mid-cap), revenue growth above 15% YoY, positive net income (profitable), forward P/E below 30x (reasonable valuation), sectors limited to Technology and Healthcare, US-listed companies.
Searching across 1,847 mid-cap names. This will take a moment as I pull financial data and apply the filters.
Tip: You Do Not Need to Be Precise
Phrases like "reasonably valued" and "strong growth" are intentionally vague — and that is fine. Journely interprets these as reasonable ranges (e.g., forward P/E below 30x for "reasonable," revenue growth above 15% for "strong"). If the interpretation does not match what you had in mind, just tell the AI to adjust.
Review the Results
Journely returns a ranked list of stocks matching your criteria along with the key metrics that drove the selection. Each result includes enough context to quickly assess whether it is worth a deeper look. The AI ranks results by a composite score that weighs growth, quality, and valuation.
Here are the top results ranked by composite score:
1. AXON (Axon Enterprise) — $19.8B market cap. Revenue growth 32% YoY, operating margin 18%, forward P/E 62x. Law enforcement tech platform (body cams, Taser, cloud software). Note: P/E is above your threshold but growth rate is exceptional.
2. DOCS (Doximity) — $9.2B market cap. Revenue growth 22% YoY, operating margin 38%, forward P/E 28x. Digital platform for physicians. 80%+ of US doctors are members. Very high margins for a mid-cap.
3. PCOR (Procore Technologies) — $11.4B market cap. Revenue growth 24% YoY, recently turned profitable, forward P/E 45x. Construction management SaaS. Large addressable market with low penetration.
4. GMED (Globus Medical) — $8.6B market cap. Revenue growth 19% YoY, operating margin 22%, forward P/E 23x. Robotic-assisted spine surgery. Post-merger with NuVasive creating a scaled orthopedic platform.
5. PODD (Insulet) — $16.2B market cap. Revenue growth 26% YoY, operating margin 15%, forward P/E 48x. Omnipod insulin delivery system. Benefiting from global Type 1 diabetes market expansion.
Showing top 5 of 14. Want me to continue, or shall we narrow down?
Narrow Down Your Results
Fourteen results is a good starting list, but you probably want to focus on a handful. Ask Journely to apply additional filters, change the ranking criteria, or exclude certain characteristics. This is where conversational screening shines — each follow-up refines the screen without starting over.
After applying stricter filters (forward P/E under 35x, positive FCF, revenue growth above 20%), four companies remain:
DOCS (Doximity) — Forward P/E 28x, FCF yield 3.8%, revenue growth 22%. Extremely capital-efficient with 80%+ gross margins. The physician network effect is a strong moat.
PCOR (Procore) — Forward P/E 34x, FCF margin just turned positive at 8%, revenue growth 24%. Scratches under the P/E limit. Construction SaaS with 90%+ retention rates.
GMED (Globus Medical) — Forward P/E 23x, FCF yield 4.1%, revenue growth 19%. Slightly below the 20% growth threshold on a TTM basis, but analysts project 23% growth next quarter post-merger synergies. Including it for consideration.
HALO (Halozyme) — Forward P/E 18x, FCF yield 6.2%, revenue growth 28%. Biotech with a unique drug delivery platform (ENHANZE). Royalty revenue model creates recurring cash flows with minimal capex.
Conversational Refinement vs. Traditional Screeners
With a traditional screener, you would need to go back, change the filter values, and re-run from scratch. With Journely, each follow-up builds on the previous results. You can add criteria, remove them, or change direction entirely — the AI maintains context throughout the conversation.
Deep Dive on Your Top Picks
Once you have narrowed to a short list, ask Journely to do a deeper analysis on your favorites. You can request a full fundamental breakdown, technical analysis, competitive comparison, or all of the above. This transitions seamlessly from screening to research.
Growth: HALO edges out with 28% revenue growth vs DOCS at 22%. However, DOCS has more consistent growth (5 consecutive quarters of acceleration) while HALO's growth is lumpy due to royalty timing.
Profitability: DOCS wins decisively. Operating margin 38% vs HALO 32%. FCF conversion is 95% for DOCS vs 78% for HALO. DOCS is one of the most capital-efficient software companies in public markets.
Moat: DOCS has a strong network effect — 80% of US physicians and 90% of medical school graduates use the platform. HALO has IP-based moat through the ENHANZE technology with 15+ pharma partnerships. Both are defensible but through different mechanisms.
Risks: DOCS faces platform concentration risk (mainly US physicians) and potential disruption from general-purpose AI tools. HALO faces patent expiration risk and single-technology dependency, plus royalty revenue depends on partner drug approvals.
Valuation: DOCS at 28x forward P/E looks reasonable for 22% growth and best-in-class margins. HALO at 18x forward P/E is cheaper, reflecting the biotech risk discount. On a PEG basis, HALO (0.64) is more attractive than DOCS (1.27).
Key Takeaways
- Describe intent, not filters — tell Journely what kind of company you want rather than specifying exact filter ranges. The AI translates your language into appropriate criteria
- Iterate through conversation — your first screen is a starting point. Refine by adding constraints, changing priorities, or exploring tangents without starting over
- Combine dimensions traditional screeners cannot — "Companies benefiting from AI with improving margins" mixes thematic and fundamental criteria that no checkbox filter can capture
- Transition from screening to research seamlessly — once you have a short list, go deep on your favorites in the same conversation. No need to switch tools
- Screen across markets — Journely covers US, Japan, and Vietnam. Ask for Japanese mid-cap exporters or Vietnamese consumer stocks and the same process works