DUK
Duke Energy Corporation
stock NYSE

Yes I feel your sentiment OP.
I have money invested in tech but it’s limited and I mainly focus on sure bets that will give me good returns.
That said, I don’t stay away entirely from tech if I see good opportunity. When I saw $MSFT go down I felt comfortable trying to catch the rebound. It fell further and I doubled down. Then it went up over $500 so I sold.
I’m trying to find good value again to buy and hold or sell if it launches due to current AI craziness.
The play I’m looking to make is to buy shares of a utility company. Something like $DUK has been on the decline for 6 months, and is nearing a 3 month low, and I’m thinking of starting a position.
Reasoning, it’s a stable payer no matter what, but if AI takes off and energy demand continues to increase like the news is saying it will, then a utility company like $DUK will benefit too. Kind of a tides rise all ships play.

OP -- I started investing in individual stocks in 2015 in a taxable brokerage account. My goal was to do better than my checking/savings account interest and preserve my capital -- I'm really not sure why I didn't know about HYSA (this might be red flag number one....).
I was doing this with some encouragement from my father, who would talk as if he had figured it out after some scary moments. He'd followed "Dogs of the Dow" for a few years with some success. I suspect he talked much more about the successes than the misses.
I went into it using screens similar to yours -- I wanted dividends (to beat the interest rate at the bank) and then used P/E, ROI, debt/equity, years of increasing dividends, payout ratio, P/B, EPS growth, etc. to find strong companies that were likely to grow or at least hold steady. I also focused on large cap and often S&P listed stocks. My screens were not always the same, values and metrics varied some. Bottom line is there wasn't an exact thesis, but I'd say the thinking/concept was similar to yours.
This included the period when the talk was for BRIC as the source/location of most growth. I messed around and found a Russian Oil stock, a Brazilian cell phone thing, and a shipping thing. None of those were winners for me; even if only minor losses, the opportunity cost was real. I also had home grown losers, particularly when I started trying to use some DOW 5 (version/extension of Dogs of the Dow) concepts. DOW, VZ, T, GE, and WBA did not do well for me. I have some real winners from the basic premise: CAT, CINF, CMI, VLO, JNJ, PG, and BA (sold at the first hint of Max issues).
I met my goal of doing better than my savings account. I don't know that I beat the market; I'm not going to work hard enough to figure it out. Around 2019, I started increasing my focus on index funds (VOO, DIA, and MOAT). My risk tolerance is declining as I'm about to turn 55. I've added more index funds (SPYM for its lower share cost, VYM, VTI, SCHD, and XLP). The turn to index was a desire to get away from individual stocks. I also continue to choose to invest in some dividend focused stocks and funds. I do this despite the tax drag issues; I do this for risk avoidance and belief, which are largely emotional reasons. Had I simply bought a combination of SGOV and VOO I would have met my goal, depending on the split I might be ahead of where I am now. I'm comfortable with it and my journey.
I still have and buy some individual stocks -- NVDA, AMZN, AMSL, GOOGL and XOM. However, the bulk of my purchasing now is VOO, SPYM, VTI, and SGOV. My individual stock positions in the other stuff I bought earlier like ED, DUK, MET, MMM, HD, and IBM are now decisions driven by taxes -- do I want to pay the tax and give up the dividend to end the opportunity cost? Buffett did very well for himself and his shareholders; he also said that retail investors should buy broad, low fee index funds.
So what do you what to discuss? I've learned that low fee index funds require low effort, are lower stress, and have a strong history of being successful. I know that each individual investor has different goals, metrics for success, and risk perception and tolerance. As illogical to me as it is, Price/Book doesn't seem to be important in the way I thought it would help me -- buying things that are close to 1/1 or 1/2 should ensure that the stock can't get worse (how can the price fall below the intrinsic value?). The criticism you're seeing is because "beating the market" only matters if it is repeatable. Doing it once doesn't show that you've captured "the thing" that makes it worse. In your 4 years, with one year beating the market, are you overall matching (or nearly) the market? What do you think is different between your 3 under versus 1 over years? Do you think your choices have been influenced by FOMO? For example, does the selection of a highly volatile shipping/tanker reflect beliefs about global trade influences/impacts of current/recent US foreign policy/actions or is it strictly based on your apriori analysis of fundamentals/metrics?

Yes I feel your sentiment OP.
I have money invested in tech but it’s limited and I mainly focus on sure bets that will give me good returns.
That said, I don’t stay away entirely from tech if I see good opportunity. When I saw $MSFT go down I felt comfortable trying to catch the rebound. It fell further and I doubled down. Then it went up over $500 so I sold.
I’m trying to find good value again to buy and hold or sell if it launches due to current AI craziness.
The play I’m looking to make is to buy shares of a utility company. Something like $DUK has been on the decline for 6 months, and is nearing a 3 month low, and I’m thinking of starting a position.
Reasoning, it’s a stable payer no matter what, but if AI takes off and energy demand continues to increase like the news is saying it will, then a utility company like $DUK will benefit too. Kind of a tides rise all ships play.

OP -- I started investing in individual stocks in 2015 in a taxable brokerage account. My goal was to do better than my checking/savings account interest and preserve my capital -- I'm really not sure why I didn't know about HYSA (this might be red flag number one....).
I was doing this with some encouragement from my father, who would talk as if he had figured it out after some scary moments. He'd followed "Dogs of the Dow" for a few years with some success. I suspect he talked much more about the successes than the misses.
I went into it using screens similar to yours -- I wanted dividends (to beat the interest rate at the bank) and then used P/E, ROI, debt/equity, years of increasing dividends, payout ratio, P/B, EPS growth, etc. to find strong companies that were likely to grow or at least hold steady. I also focused on large cap and often S&P listed stocks. My screens were not always the same, values and metrics varied some. Bottom line is there wasn't an exact thesis, but I'd say the thinking/concept was similar to yours.
This included the period when the talk was for BRIC as the source/location of most growth. I messed around and found a Russian Oil stock, a Brazilian cell phone thing, and a shipping thing. None of those were winners for me; even if only minor losses, the opportunity cost was real. I also had home grown losers, particularly when I started trying to use some DOW 5 (version/extension of Dogs of the Dow) concepts. DOW, VZ, T, GE, and WBA did not do well for me. I have some real winners from the basic premise: CAT, CINF, CMI, VLO, JNJ, PG, and BA (sold at the first hint of Max issues).
I met my goal of doing better than my savings account. I don't know that I beat the market; I'm not going to work hard enough to figure it out. Around 2019, I started increasing my focus on index funds (VOO, DIA, and MOAT). My risk tolerance is declining as I'm about to turn 55. I've added more index funds (SPYM for its lower share cost, VYM, VTI, SCHD, and XLP). The turn to index was a desire to get away from individual stocks. I also continue to choose to invest in some dividend focused stocks and funds. I do this despite the tax drag issues; I do this for risk avoidance and belief, which are largely emotional reasons. Had I simply bought a combination of SGOV and VOO I would have met my goal, depending on the split I might be ahead of where I am now. I'm comfortable with it and my journey.
I still have and buy some individual stocks -- NVDA, AMZN, AMSL, GOOGL and XOM. However, the bulk of my purchasing now is VOO, SPYM, VTI, and SGOV. My individual stock positions in the other stuff I bought earlier like ED, DUK, MET, MMM, HD, and IBM are now decisions driven by taxes -- do I want to pay the tax and give up the dividend to end the opportunity cost? Buffett did very well for himself and his shareholders; he also said that retail investors should buy broad, low fee index funds.
So what do you what to discuss? I've learned that low fee index funds require low effort, are lower stress, and have a strong history of being successful. I know that each individual investor has different goals, metrics for success, and risk perception and tolerance. As illogical to me as it is, Price/Book doesn't seem to be important in the way I thought it would help me -- buying things that are close to 1/1 or 1/2 should ensure that the stock can't get worse (how can the price fall below the intrinsic value?). The criticism you're seeing is because "beating the market" only matters if it is repeatable. Doing it once doesn't show that you've captured "the thing" that makes it worse. In your 4 years, with one year beating the market, are you overall matching (or nearly) the market? What do you think is different between your 3 under versus 1 over years? Do you think your choices have been influenced by FOMO? For example, does the selection of a highly volatile shipping/tanker reflect beliefs about global trade influences/impacts of current/recent US foreign policy/actions or is it strictly based on your apriori analysis of fundamentals/metrics?