Practice & capstones

This course advances by gates, not streaks. Each level ends in a capstone — something you do, with real instruments and your own numbers, checked against a rubric you apply to yourself honestly. This page collects every gate; a new capstone section is added here as each level ships.

A standing note that applies to every capstone below: the capstones have you underwrite and, where you choose to, deploy real money. The course teaches evaluation — every deployment decision, and every amount, is yours. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy any particular instrument.

Level 0 gate — the system, drawn

(Recap — this gate closes Level 0 and is assumed done before Level 1’s capstone.)

The gate: draw your own money system as stocks and flows — income → savings valve → asset stock → passive flow → reinvest loop — and state where every peso currently leaks (lifestyle inflation, fees, tax, inflation/peso depreciation).

You passed it when: the diagram exists on paper, each of the four leaks has a named, quantified line in your own system (“fees: ₱X/yr in fund charges”, “tax: 20% of all interest”), and your balance-sheet classification from lesson 0.1 shows a total passive ₱/month baseline — however close to zero. If any of that is missing, finish it before deploying a peso of the Level 1 capstone: the capstone assumes you know where your leaks are.

Level 1 capstone — the starter allocation, deployed

The gate (from the curriculum): underwrite any simple asset — net yield, real return, drawdown, liquidity, effort — and deploy a first allocation with the math written down.

The brief

Deploy the starter allocation with real money, at sizes you choose:

1. Emergency fund placed — split across PDIC-verified digital banks per lesson 1.3, with the starter buffer / deep fund separation and an automated fill running.
2. MP2 opened and funded — lesson 1.4’s deployment, with your compounded-vs-annual-payout choice written down, and the ladder’s year-2 diary entry set.
3. First global index purchase made — through the decision-tree branch you chose in lesson 1.6 (offshore broker with UCITS, retail app, or SEC-registered local feeder/UITF), with your written decision-tree outcome and its named, dated risks on file.
4. First PSE dividend share and/or first REIT bought — one board lot each per lesson 1.7, with the PSE EDGE dividend declarations pulled and the ex-dividend and payment dates recorded.

And the paperwork that makes it a capstone rather than a shopping trip:

5. A written one-line scorecard for every instrument chosen — all five axes: net yield · total expected return · drawdown · liquidity · effort — using dated figures.
6. The risk file — your −40% drawdown rehearsal, liquidity map, and one asymmetry-filtered pitch from lesson 1.8.

The rubric

Apply it to yourself, in writing, before moving to Level 2:

Verdict	Standard
Not yet	Any scorecard missing its net-of-tax math — a gross number where a net one belongs, an advertised rate uncorrected, a real return never computed. This is the single disqualifier, because it’s the failure the whole level exists to prevent. Redo lesson 1.1 on the offending instruments and rescore.
Passing	Every deployed instrument has all five scorecard axes computed with dated figures, the deployments in the brief exist, and the decision-tree outcome (1.6) is on file with named risks.
Strong	Passing, plus a rejected alternative for every pick, with the reason written down — “MP2 over Tonik TD because…”, “VWRA via Branch C over Branch A because…”, “AREIT over the higher-yielding REIT because…”. Choosing is easy; documenting what you turned down and why is what makes the next hundred decisions faster and the bad ones rarer.

Printable capstone pack

Level 0–1 workbook — every Do-it worksheet + this capstone brief and rubric + sign-off pageL0-L1-workbook.pdf886 KBSelf-made for this courseThe Benchmark Card — hurdles, net-of-tax table, MRR lens, Rule of 72 (1 page)L1-benchmark-card.pdf349 KBSelf-made for this courseThe PH Starter-Stack Card — MP2, PERA, RTBs, PDIC, W-8BEN (1 page)L1-ph-instruments-card.pdf343 KBSelf-made for this course

External checkpoints (optional, free): after passing, the course’s suggested outside signals are completing a BSP BELA e-learning module and attending one free PSE Academy webinar — the nearest things this domain has to a free formal checkpoint.

When you pass: update your progress page, redo the lesson 0.1 balance-sheet classification (your passive ₱/month baseline just moved off zero), and proceed to Level 2 — where the machinery you just built starts getting tuned: dividends without the traps, REITs analyzed properly, bonds, taxes, and behavior under fire.

Printable materials — Levels 2 through 5

The rest of the course’s cheat sheets and workbooks, in one place (the Level 0–1 pack is above). Each is also linked from its source lesson.

Level 2–3 workbook — every Do-it worksheet + the Level 2 and Level 3 capstone briefs and rubrics + sign-off pageL2-L3-workbook.pdf1.2 MBSelf-made for this courseThe Tax Card — per-instrument PH tax table, filing-form map, 8%-vs-graduated crossover (1 page)L2-tax-card.pdf372 KBSelf-made for this courseThe Underwriting Card — Gallinelli formulas, PH loan-channel comparison, five escapes (1 page)L3-underwriting-card.pdf303 KBSelf-made for this courseLevel 4–5 workbook — every Do-it worksheet + the Level 4 and Level 5 capstone briefs and rubrics + the full wealth-thesis template + final course sign-offL4-L5-workbook.pdf926 KBSelf-made for this courseThe Deal Card — SDE/EBITDA addbacks, PH 5-layer DD stack, private-lending rules, estate quick facts (1 page)L4-deal-card.pdf321 KBSelf-made for this courseThe Patterns Card — ten breakthrough patterns, Tiger 21 allocation, phase gates, EM-arbitrage scan (1 page)L5-patterns-card.pdf286 KBSelf-made for this course

Level 2 capstone — the income portfolio, live

The gate (from the curriculum): run a benchmarked income portfolio and handle its taxes correctly.

The brief

Everything Level 2 built, assembled and running — three artifacts plus the live portfolio they describe:

1. The portfolio itself, deployed at your chosen sizes — global index core on its schedule (1.5–1.6), the PH dividend basket screened through the 2.1 discriminator, the REIT pick from your 2.2 three-way scorecard, the peso ladder designed in 2.3, and the speculative sleeve inside its 2.5 cap. Every yield-bearing product you declined along the way counts as work done, not work skipped.
2. The one-page IPS (2.6) — purpose, target weights per sleeve plus the USD/PHP split, contribution rule, rebalancing bands, the never list, and the 2.8 trigger rules appended, dated.
3. The dashboard (2.6) — current vs target weight per sleeve, trailing-12-month income per income sleeve net of tax, and net portfolio yield tracked against the two hurdles: MP2’s tax-free rate and the global index’s expected total return.
4. The completed tax map (2.7) — every holding → its tax (rate, final or schedular) → its form (or “final — none”) → its date, agency row and any foreign-income row included, no blank cells. Plus your 8%-vs-graduated crossover computation and this year’s filing calendar, in your actual calendar.

The rubric

Apply it to yourself, in writing, before moving to Level 3:

Verdict	Standard
Not yet	Any inconsistency between the three artifacts and the live portfolio — a holding missing from the tax map, a dashboard yield quoted gross where net belongs, actual weights outside the IPS bands with no rule-triggered action noted, or an IPS that names sleeves the portfolio doesn’t have (or vice versa). The gate is coherence: the documents must describe the portfolio you actually run.
Passing	Portfolio, IPS, and tax map exist and are consistent with each other and with reality — every live holding appears in all three, every yield is net-of-tax, every weight is inside its band (or its drift is flagged with the rule-prescribed action), and the filing calendar covers every form the tax map names.
Strong	Passing, plus the written pre-mortem from 2.8: one page, eighteen-months-from-now voice, on how this exact portfolio hurts you in a 2008 — peso drawdowns per sleeve at current sizes, the agency-revenue cut included, ending with the repairs list and at least one repair already made. A portfolio that has rehearsed its own worst year is the difference between owning the machine and being owned by it.

External checkpoint (optional, free): the PSE Academy intermediate webinars — REIT and fixed-income sessions especially — pair well with a finished capstone; attend one with your scorecard open.

When you pass: update your progress page, redo the lesson 0.1 balance-sheet classification once more (the passive ₱/month line should now be a real number with a tax column), and proceed to Level 3 — where the two-year bankability project begins and the machine you built starts qualifying you for leverage: credit files, loans head-to-head, underwriting, and real buildings.

Level 3 capstone — one real deal, fully underwritten

The gate (from the curriculum): fully underwrite one real PH property deal end-to-end — financing, DSCR, cash-on-cash, taxes — and defend the go/no-go.

The brief

Pick one REAL listed property — a foreclosure/acquired asset (3.6) or an RFO unit (3.5) — currently listed, with a real asking price you can cite by URL or listing reference. Produce the full underwriting package:

1. Acquisition + friction costs — asking price vs zonal value (3.8), the negotiated/discount-tier price you’d actually offer, plus all entry costs: DST, transfer tax, registration, diligence costs (CTC, survey if land), arrears exposure (dues/RPT), and — if occupied — the honest ejectment/cash-for-keys budget with a timeline.
2. Three financing quotes (3.3) — Pag-IBIG, one bank, and in-house or cash as the third column; live rates pulled this month, MRI included, amortization tables attached. Name the fixing-period bet in each.
3. The NOI build-up with cited line items (3.4) — real rent comps (three minimum, linked), actual association dues from the building, actual RPT from the tax declaration or a defensible estimate, vacancy at the district’s honest rate, management priced even if self-managing (3.9). The 50%-rule screen shown alongside the line-item version.
4. The metrics block — cap rate, yield-on-cost at your offer price, GRM, cash-on-cash and DSCR per financing column, payback, and a 10-year IRR with the exit priced net of ~8–9% friction (3.8).
5. The repricing stress test (3.1) — every financing column recomputed at +3% after its fixing period, plus −10% rent and +2 months vacancy rows. DSCR verdicts marked against the ≥1.25 rule.
6. Tax treatment (3.10) — which regime this deal’s income files under next January (the combined-income crossover computation attached), the VAT-line check, the withholding note if the tenant would be corporate, and the year-1 depreciation schedule.
7. The exit plan — who buys this from you, at what realistic price, after how many months on market, and what friction leaves. “I’ll just sell” is not an exit plan; a named buyer profile with district resale evidence is.
8. The go/no-go memo — two pages maximum. State the escape (3.5’s five) this deal uses, by name and number. Then argue both sides and sign a verdict.

If the verdict is go, whether and when to actually bid remains — as everywhere in this course — entirely your decision, made with your own money and named risks. The deliverable is the package, not the purchase.

The rubric

Apply it to yourself, in writing, before moving to Level 4:

Verdict	Standard
Not yet	Any unsourced number — a rent with no comp, dues “estimated” when the admin was one message away, a financing rate from a 2022 video, a stress test skipped because the base case looked fine, or an exit priced gross of friction. The gate is sourcing discipline: this level’s entire premise is that the seller’s numbers are marketing and yours must be evidence.
Passing	Every number in all eight sections sourced and dated, the metrics block computed from your own template (not a calculator you can’t inspect), the stress test run on every financing column, and the go/no-go memo signed with the deal’s escape named — including the honest “no escape applies — no-go” verdict if that’s what the math said.
Strong	Passing, plus the no-go case argued as hard as the go case — steelman both: the strongest reason this deal fails (occupancy honesty? repricing cliff? exit liquidity?) written with the same rigor as the strongest reason it works, before the verdict. An underwriter who can argue only one side hasn’t underwritten; he’s shopped with a spreadsheet.

External checkpoints (optional, free): walk one Pag-IBIG auction/negotiated-sale cycle as an observer (listings → terms → results) without bidding; and pull Colliers’ latest quarterly residential summary to date-stamp your market assumptions.

When you pass: update your progress page, re-run the lesson 0.1 balance-sheet classification (whether or not you deploy, your analysis capacity just moved — and if you did deploy, so did the passive ₱/month line), and proceed to Level 4 — operators and the edge: semi-passive businesses at honest economics, buying cash flow at 2–3× SDE, lending against collateral, and the full-system portfolio.

Level 4 capstone — the teardown: one real business, taken apart

The gate (from the curriculum): evaluate a cash-flowing business or lending deal with asymmetric risk framing and design your full-system portfolio.

The brief

Run a full Acquisitions-Anonymous-style teardown of one real PH business-for-sale listing — BusinessTrade.ph, a broker sheet, or a marketplace listing with a stated price and claimed earnings, cited by URL or reference. Analysis only; no peso moves. Produce:

1. The read (4.2) — the listing summarized the AA way: what it is, asking price, claimed earnings, implied multiple, revenue model, and your first-pass revenue-quality observations, before any charity is extended.
2. The valuation with scrubbed addbacks (4.2) — the seller’s SDE rebuilt three ways (pessimistic / claimed / defensible), every suspected addback and negative addback listed with the evidence you’d demand, and your price at your defensible SDE × your justified multiple — with the multiple argued, not assumed.
3. The DD checklist, executed to the limit of public information (4.3) — the entity found in SEC/DTI records (or the finding that it can’t be), the full 10-row document demand list tailored to this business, the revenue triangulation designed (its physical trace, third-party settlements, observation plan), and the asset-vs-share memo with the liability walls named.
4. The financing structure (4.2) — down payment, seller-note terms, working capital peg, holdback/escrow sizing, and any earnout — each term tied to a specific risk it addresses.
5. The operator plan (4.4) — the DACI grid with peso thresholds, the five-metric scorecard including the physical trace, the GM spec with comp design, and the both-ways yield math: owner-operated vs GM-installed, with your owner-hours priced at your agency rate.
6. The asymmetry statement (1.8, all grown up) — downside (what you lose if it goes wrong, after the collateral of structure: peg, holdback, note offsets), upside (defensible SDE growth under your operator plan), and your honest probabilities. The Dhandho sentence, signed: “Heads I win ₱; tails I lose at most ₱.”
7. The buy/pass verdict — two pages maximum, both sides argued, against the alternative uses of the same capital on your 4.7 dashboard (the index, the next property, a note). “Pass” is a passing grade; most listings are passes, and the funnel is the skill.

The rubric

Apply it to yourself, in writing, before moving to Level 5:

Verdict	Standard
Not yet	Any claimed number accepted without a named verification route — an SDE taken at the broker’s word, an addback unchallenged, a multiple asserted without argument, a DD row marked “would check later,” or a yield computed without the GM and your hours priced. The gate is adversarial sourcing: the seller’s listing is marketing, and this level’s entire premise is that you rebuild every number from evidence.
Passing	All seven sections complete: SDE rebuilt three ways with the evidence list, the public-record checks actually run (screenshots/references), structure terms each tied to a named risk, the operator plan with real thresholds, the asymmetry statement with peso figures and probabilities, and the verdict signed with both sides argued.
Strong	Passing, plus you found the liability the seller wasn’t advertising — the unremitted contributions a share sale would smuggle in, the lease that dies at transfer, the revenue that exists only undeclared, the customer list that is really one customer, the owner who IS the product. Named specifically, with the diligence row that would confirm it and the structure term that would wall it off. A teardown that only verifies the seller’s story is an audit; finding the thing he hoped you’d miss is underwriting.
Also required	The allocator’s half (4.7): your live dashboard with every current sleeve’s four answers, kill criteria filed per asset, and the four cadence blocks in your real calendar. The capstone deal must appear on it as a candidate row — sized, hurdled, and capped — because Level 4’s gate is not “can you buy a business” but “can you run the system that decides whether to.”

External checkpoints (optional, free): listen to two fresh Acquisitions Anonymous episodes after finishing your teardown and score your write-up against the hosts’ instincts — what did they probe that you skipped? And browse ten BusinessTrade.ph listings in thirty minutes as a funnel rep: rank by implied multiple, flag the two worth a second look, pass on the rest in writing.

When you pass: update your progress page, redraw the 0.1 balance sheet with the owner-dependency column added (the level’s real deliverable is that number trending up), and proceed to Level 5 — Global Wealth Architecture: how the genuinely wealthy allocate, the ten breakthrough patterns, the S&P leverage point, going global legally, and your composite 12–15-year path.

Level 5 capstone — the wealth thesis

The gate (from the curriculum): read any market and identify which wealth patterns apply, where the arbitrage is, and what your next structural move is.

The brief

One written document — the wealth thesis — in four parts. This is the course’s terminal artifact: everything from lesson 0.1’s asset definition to 5.8’s phase gates converges in it, and unlike every earlier capstone it has no external listing to underwrite. The subject is your own position in the world.

1. The market scan (5.7) — one imported-pattern opportunity for the Philippines, argued with maturity evidence: the pattern’s overseas proof at scale, the PH gap quantified from primary sources (IMF Article IV, e-Conomy SEA, sector data — cited and dated), the enabling-infrastructure status, who is already trying and whether they’re winning on execution or earliness, and your angle (operate / fund / buy listed exposure / client-side / deliberately skip). Your 5.7 watchlist’s top row, grown into a thesis.
2. The full-system allocation, now → destination (5.1, 5.3, 5.4) — your current balance sheet in destination categories (agency valued conservatively in the PE line), your barbell ratio with every “middle” asset named and hurdled, and the destination shape at liquidity-event-plus-one-year — with one sentence per major difference from the Tiger 21 row explaining why yours differs on purpose.
3. The next structural move (5.5, 5.6) — banking, entity, or market: one concrete move (expected answer at most bands: the declared SG banking rail — argue it or beat it), with its full cost-benefit: money, time, compliance obligations created, risks retired, and the phase gate that triggers it. Premature structure is a failing answer by definition; “no move until gate X” is a passing one if argued.
4. The failure-mode pre-mortem (5.8) — the four deaths personalized with pesos, dates, and pre-signed defenses: the never-diversify gate written as a number, the leverage constitution cited, the fraud-drift redundancy shown in the phase plan, the lifestyle/fee leak audit with this year’s figures.

Plus the closing artifact the whole document exists to serve: the endgame paragraph — the computed “enough,” this decade’s memory-dividend allocations at peso scale, the inheritance-timing stance — so the thesis states not just how the machine compounds, but what it is for.

The rubric

Apply it to yourself, in writing:

Verdict	Standard
Not yet	Any part argued from this course’s snapshots instead of your own pulled sources — a watchlist row cited without a current primary-source date, an allocation restated without the agency honestly valued, a structural move recommended with no threshold math, or a pre-mortem in vibes instead of pesos. The gate is original evidence: Level 5’s entire skill is reading the world yourself, and a thesis that quotes the course has skipped the level.
Passing	All four parts complete with dated primary sources, the allocation consistent with your live 4.7 dashboard, the structural move costed both ways (do it / don’t), and the pre-mortem signed with defenses that reference specific course mechanisms (DSCR floors, gates, burn numbers).
Strong	A stranger could execute from it. Hand the document to a competent operator who has never met you: they could run the scan’s next verification step, place the trades and open the accounts of the destination shape, execute (or correctly defer) the structural move, and know the endgame’s success condition — all without asking a single clarifying question. Ambiguity anywhere is the tell that a decision is still hiding from you.

External checkpoint (optional, free): next year’s IMF Article IV and e-Conomy SEA releases are the thesis’s built-in expiry test — re-run part 1 against them and score how your maturity calls aged. The document that survives its first annual review is the real credential this course confers.

When you pass: the course is complete. The 0.1 balance-sheet exercise you have redrawn at every gate is now a wealth thesis a stranger could run. What remains is execution, on the cadence you calendared — which was the point of every level: not information, a system, running, with you as its allocator.

The course, maintained — a closing note

This course is a living system, not a finished book, and it decays at known rates unless maintained:

• Volatile figures (rates, yields, multiples, minimums — everything rendered with an as-of chip) live in one file: src/data/figures.json. Refresh cadence: quarterly for PH deposit/loan/dividend rates and the Tiger 21 allocation; annually for the report-derived figures. A figure whose as-of chip is older than a year is telling you it no longer counts as evidence.
• The annual report re-harvest, calendared by release month: UBS Global Family Office Report (May), UBS Global Wealth Report + Capgemini WWR + e-Conomy SEA (June onward), IMF Article IV (per schedule), UBS Billionaire Ambitions Report (December), Tiger 21 quarterlies throughout. These feed 5.1, 5.7, and the capstone’s evidence standard.
• Regulatory watch items re-verified at every touch: the offshore-broker access status (1.6’s live lesson), the PH CRS first-exchange date (5.6), PERA/tax specifics (2.7), and Pag-IBIG rate windows (3.3).
• Embedded videos die occasionally; each lesson’s transcript archive in the course repo preserves the teaching content, and the segment maps make replacements a bounded task rather than a rewrite.

The maintenance is small — a few hours per quarter — and it is also the curriculum’s last lesson in disguise: the re-harvest calendar above is the same scanning cadence 5.7 installed for your own watchlist. Maintaining the course and running your system are the same habit.

This course teaches evaluation, not recommendations. Figures carry as-of dates and drift; verify current rates before acting. Nothing here is personalized financial, legal, or tax advice — for binding decisions (large loans, estate structuring, tax elections), engage a licensed PH professional.