Corruption Risk · 4-Vector Breakdown
Corruption isn't just trade-based. Here's the four ways political pressure can flow, scored independently from the public record.
Vector 1 · Personal Enrichment trade-based
Gilbert Cisneros is a high-frequency, diversified trader with 3,948 trades over five years, averaging a modest 41% win rate but showing extreme sector performance anomalies. His financial services sector trades (162 trades) yield a 92.6% win rate, 51.6 points above his overall rate, with an average return of 5.15%. Similarly, energy (106 trades, 86.8% win rate, +45.8 pts, 7.62% avg return) and mining (86 trades, 83.3% win rate, +42.3 pts, 7.96% avg return) show outsized success. These anomalies dominate a profile otherwise marked by broad diversification—top five tickers represent only 7.1% of trades—and a 13% options usage, per `get_politician_intelligence.profile.trading_styles` and `get_sponsor_profile.profile.trade_pattern`.
Trades 5y4,043
Volume$44.5M
Late filing—
Trader typeActive self-dealer
Vector 2 · Donor Funding money in
Raised $4.4M from individuals and $5.8M from PACs over five years, with top PAC industries being corporate_other (28% of PAC total), leadership PACs (27%), and labor (17%), per `get_donor_industry_breakdown.top_industries`. Lobbying spending targeting his committee sectors totaled $4.5M, with defense being the dominant issue area, per `get_lobbying_around_pol.total_lobbying_spend_on_pols_sectors_usd` and `top_lobbying_clients_targeting_pols_committees`.
PAC raised$5.8M
Individual—
Vector 3 · Committee Pressure lobbying around
Defense industry capture via Armed Services Committee jurisdiction, with $4.5M in lobbying spend targeting his committees and an 81.3% win rate on defense sector trades, per `get_lobbying_around_pol.total_lobbying_spend_on_pols_sectors_usd` and `get_politician_intelligence.sector_expertise`.
defense
$4.5M lobbying spend on his committee sectors (`get_lobbying_around_pol.total_lobbying_spend_on_pols_sectors_usd`) and 81.3% win rate on defense trades (`get_politician_intelligence.sector_expertise`).
↳ committee jurisdiction overlap with trading
financial services
92.6% win rate on 162 trades, 51.6 points above overall (`PRE-COMPUTED SECTOR ANOMALIES`).
↳ sector trading anomaly
Top influence channels
PAC funding
corporate_other PACs
$5.8M
Lobbying in committee jurisdiction
AMERICAN LEGION
$4.5M
12 MONTHS PAST · 3 MONTHS FUTURE
Activity timeline · 29 votes (12mo) · 28 on passage · 100% with party on passage votes
Votes/wk (top band)
with party
against party
present / unknown
Vote markers (passage only)
yea (with party)
nay (with party)
against party
Trades
buy
sell
Bills sponsored
★ introduced
Predictions / pipeline
model fire
committee bill
🔮 GOVGREED FORECAST · 30-DAY WINDOW
Predicted next trades · 25 active
Recent Activity
📋 COMMITTEE BILL PIPELINE
Bills moving through their committees · 23 active
Each row links a bill in their committee jurisdiction to the public companies its passage would affect — the upstream signal for a future trade.
Recognizing Community Organizations for Veteran Engagement and Recovery Act
Nationwide Consumer and Fuel Retailer Choice Act of 2025
AI PLAN Act
Combating Organized Retail Crime Act of 2025
Justice for ALS Veterans Act of 2025
Protect America’s Innovation and Economic Security from CCP Act of 2025
United States Commission on International Religious Freedom Reauthorization Act of 2025
Promoting Resilient Supply Chains Act of 2025
National Biotechnology Initiative Act of 2025
Ensuring Veterans’ Final Resting Place Act of 2025
Purple Heart Veterans Education Act of 2025
Student Veteran Benefit Restoration Act of 2025
Voting Pattern
Voted 70 times in the current Congress with 100% attendance, showing a nearly even split between yea (34) and nay (36) votes, per `get_voting_record.yea_count` and `get_voting_record.nay_count`. Recent high-profile votes include yea on HR.1689 (On Passage) and nay on HR.261 (On Passage), indicating no clear partisan bloc alignment.
Loading intelligence layer…