MCW
Mister Car Wash, Inc.
stock NASDAQ

It hasn’t been disproven. At worst evidence is statistically inclusive.
Both of those quotes apply to MCW investing.
Choosing a subset of time to demonstrate outperformance is the definition of cherry-picking.
For example, from 2000-2020 Dimensional’s small cap value fund DFSVX outperformed the S&P500 by more than double or 275% (523% to 250%).
I admit it’s not guaranteed but neither is MCW investing.
I admit there is tracking error as compared to global MCW but so what if one is willing to stick it out.
I admit that investing in SCV could underperform for the remaining life of the market but given the time in the market before today SCV investing has outperformed the S&P500.
None of this is not fact.

Redundant implies they persist, not that they don’t.
That they are debated is the point of iterative research.
That they aren’t disproven implies that the original pricing model still works.
To date ( 30 Sept 2026 ), since its inception AVUV has underperformed the S&P500 by .02%. Not 2, two hundredths. During a time with large growth has been undeniably ripping. It certainly appears to be working in the time it’s been called as ‘dead’ and very much so in the context of a hundred years.
https://stockanalysis.com/etf/compare/voo-vs-avuv/?r=davidv4
Super fine if you aren’t interested but it works for me and probably more importantly I would be *less likely* to remain invested if I was exclusively investing at pure MCW.
I’m sticking with factor investing.

It hasn’t been disproven. At worst evidence is statistically inclusive.
Both of those quotes apply to MCW investing.
Choosing a subset of time to demonstrate outperformance is the definition of cherry-picking.
For example, from 2000-2020 Dimensional’s small cap value fund DFSVX outperformed the S&P500 by more than double or 275% (523% to 250%).
I admit it’s not guaranteed but neither is MCW investing.
I admit there is tracking error as compared to global MCW but so what if one is willing to stick it out.
I admit that investing in SCV could underperform for the remaining life of the market but given the time in the market before today SCV investing has outperformed the S&P500.
None of this is not fact.

Redundant implies they persist, not that they don’t.
That they are debated is the point of iterative research.
That they aren’t disproven implies that the original pricing model still works.
To date ( 30 Sept 2026 ), since its inception AVUV has underperformed the S&P500 by .02%. Not 2, two hundredths. During a time with large growth has been undeniably ripping. It certainly appears to be working in the time it’s been called as ‘dead’ and very much so in the context of a hundred years.
https://stockanalysis.com/etf/compare/voo-vs-avuv/?r=davidv4
Super fine if you aren’t interested but it works for me and probably more importantly I would be *less likely* to remain invested if I was exclusively investing at pure MCW.
I’m sticking with factor investing.

And it’s the same as MCW investing. The expected higher return is the direct result of a higher assumption of risk. That’s all.