The questions a careful scholar asks first.

An educational institution that teaches people to operate in markets — to prepare, execute, review, and revise under pressure while preserving capital. The curriculum is designed backward from measurable competencies, graded on documented process rather than profit, and grounded in published research at every claim. It is a place of study, not a signal service, a strategy, or a fund.

The University teaches; the Lab provides an instrumented practice environment. They are deliberately separate. Simulated outcomes do not flow into an academic grade, and neither organization owns the independent credential.

SimFi University is an educator and publisher. It does not provide investment advice, execute trades, manage capital, promise returns, or endorse a trading strategy. All practice runs on simulated capital.

No one with a stake in the outcome. The Score is an independent standard on a neutral backend owned by neither the University that teaches nor the Lab that simulates — described the way a credit score is: a measure owned by no bank.

It is enforced in the architecture and governance: teaching data, simulated outcomes, and credential records are separated; the methodology is reviewable; and no party that profits from a result controls the measure.

It measures documented operator behavior across weighted families such as preparation, execution quality, review, consistency, adaptation, and stability. Profit and loss never enters a grade.

Yes. The standard is being built for publication and outside review. Its constructs, weightings, evidence base, reliability, and known limitations are intended to be inspectable rather than held as a trade secret.

One of three, scaled to your time. Author — anchor a course, module, or standard in your field. Advise — hold a named seat overseeing your domain. Engage — periodic sessions with operators or the build team. Any one is a complete contribution.

It depends on the path and is agreed before work begins. An advisory seat can be periodic review; a cohort engagement can be a single session; authorship is scoped as a defined module or standard with a clear delivery schedule.

Adults training to become disciplined market operators. They range from serious beginners to experienced participants who want a process-based standard rather than a promise of outcomes.

Everything is settled in writing before work begins, in a short Faculty Affiliation Memorandum: what you contribute, the affiliation you grant, the use rights the University holds, and the exit terms. Authorship is attributed to you.

Only as agreed and only for work you actually contributed or reviewed. We do not imply institutional endorsement, publish an affiliation without consent, or turn a citation into an endorsement.

That is addressed explicitly in the affiliation memorandum. The default aim is to support legitimate teaching and research use while protecting learner data, confidential implementation details, and the integrity of the standard.

Yes, where the research question, ethics, consent, privacy controls, and data quality support it. Publication access is based on anonymized records and an agreed research protocol, never open-ended access to learner data.

Yes. Contributions are recognized and compensated, with terms set individually and privately in the affiliation memorandum. We keep figures off a public page and are specific about compensation with you directly.

Compensation pays for defined work; it does not purchase a conclusion or endorsement. Scope, attribution, review rights, and exit terms are written down, and the independent standard remains open to examination.

A conversation, not an application. We talk about where your work might sit, answer the questions this page could not, and — only if it fits both sides — put terms in writing. There is no obligation in a first exchange.

Send it directly. If the answer is settled, we will answer plainly. If it is still being worked through, we will say that too rather than manufacture certainty.