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
The portfolio is defined by a high-frequency, sector-concentrated strategy with a significant anomaly in technology. The technology sector, comprising 259 trades (75% of total activity), shows a win rate of 62.1%, which diverges +13.1 points from the overall 49% win rate (`get_politician_intelligence.sector_expertise[0]`). This high-volume focus on mega-cap tech (NVDA, AAPL, GOOG, AMZN, MSFT) is executed with a 0% late filing rate (`get_sponsor_profile.late_filing_rate_pct`) but yields a negative average excess return of -0.4% and an F quality tier (`get_politician_intelligence.profile.quality_tier`).
Trades 5y345
Volume$37.0M
Late filing—
Trader typeActive self-dealer
Vector 2 · Donor Funding money in
PAC funding is fragmented, with the top industry ('corporate_other') at $382,000, followed by labor at $200,000 and finance at $99,500 (`get_donor_industry_breakdown.top_industries`). Individual contributions are diffuse, with the top donor industry 'other' representing 244 donors (`get_sponsor_profile.top_donor_industries[0].donor_count`). The $2.75M in lobbying spend targeting his Financial Services Committee jurisdiction (`get_sponsor_profile.total_lobbying_spend_5yr_usd`) far outweighs donor money, signaling influence is channeled through legislative access, not campaign finance.
PAC raised—
Individual—
Vector 3 · Committee Pressure lobbying around
Technology sector capture via legislative jurisdiction on Financial Services Committee, evidenced by $2.75M in lobbying spend targeting the committee and 259 trades in the sector.
technology
259 trades in technology sector while sitting on Financial Services Committee overseeing fintech and AI regulation.
↳ jurisdictional trade concentration
finance
$2.75M in lobbying spend targets his committee, with a 100% match rate on tickers he trades.
↳ lobbying alignment
Top influence channels
lobbying target
Various Financial Services Clients
$2.7M
committee jurisdiction
House Financial Services Committee
—
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
A+
NFLX
↑ bullish
69.5 conf
Signal Intelligence
UNUSUAL_SIZEBILL_CORRELATIONLOBBYING_INFLUENCEVOLUME_SPIKE
A+
NFLX
↑ bullish
69.5 conf
Signal Intelligence
UNUSUAL_SIZEBILL_CORRELATIONLOBBYING_INFLUENCEVOLUME_SPIKE
A
GOOG
↑ bullish
53.9 conf
Signal Intelligence
UNUSUAL_SIZEBILL_CORRELATIONMASSIVE_VOLUMEVOLUME_SPIKE
A
GOOG
↑ bullish
53.9 conf
Signal Intelligence
UNUSUAL_SIZEBILL_CORRELATIONMASSIVE_VOLUMEVOLUME_SPIKE
Recent Activity
📋 COMMITTEE BILL PIPELINE
Bills moving through their committees · 9 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.
AI PLAN Act
Protect America’s Innovation and Economic Security from CCP Act of 2025
National Biotechnology Initiative Act of 2025
Dental Care for Veterans Act
DIGITAL Applications Act
ACRES Act
LASSO Act
Facilitating DIGITAL Applications Act
Voting Pattern
Voting record shows near-even split with 33 nay and 31 yea votes on 75 total votes (`get_voting_record`), though sample is limited to first-term activity. Recent high-profile votes include supporting HR.1689 and opposing HR.261 on passage (`get_voting_record.recent_high_profile_votes`).
Loading intelligence layer…