Draft Stonk Journey Map Synthesis - Review
This page renders the complete proposed Journey Map synthesis for review before the canonical artifact is written. It combines the approved JTBD Switching Timeline and Experience Map intermediates into one lifecycle overview.
Pre-product hypothesisNo canonical write yetParent loop gate: synthesis
Review Boundary
Updated from prior page: the earlier framework-selection review page was archived to docs/history/archive/2026-06-18/140637/alignment/journey-map-draft-stonk.html. This page is now the synthesis approval review.
This synthesis covers the approved primary ICP: U.S. finance-curious social retail players who want a low-risk, social fantasy-stock game instead of real-money trading, prize contests, brokerage behavior, or investment advice.
- Based on approved framework intermediates:
research/journey-map-jtbd-timeline.mdandresearch/journey-map-experience-map.md. - Also grounded in
research/icp.md,research/competitive-analysis.md,README.md,concept.md, andCLAUDE.md. - Does not write
research/journey-map.mduntil final compiled YAML approves artifact creation. - Does not prescribe UI, architecture, implementation, deployment, testing workflows, legal advice, or GitHub Actions workflows.
Proposed Canonical Artifact
Summary
Draft Stonk's customer journey starts when a market story, stock argument, fantasy-sports analogy, or group challenge creates a desire to test a stock instinct socially. The target user is not primarily trying to become a serious trader. They want a quick, fair, visible way to say "I picked better than you" without real money, prizes, brokerage behavior, or investment advice.
The journey wins if the user moves from unstructured market chatter into a compact fantasy-stock game: understand "fantasy football, but for stocks," make a first pick, complete a short snake draft, see equal-dollar standings, and feel a reason to replay, share, or invite someone. The journey loses if the product feels like a trading simulator, advice product, gambling-adjacent contest, fake-data toy, or another app with no social payoff.
The strongest lifecycle risks are trust and payoff. Trust risk appears when users need proof that the game is entertainment only and that local, mock, delayed, or otherwise labeled data is not misleading. Payoff risk appears when the first standings result does not create a share, invite, replay, or rivalry moment strong enough to beat group chats, screenshots, spreadsheets, watchlists, or doing nothing.
Confidence is medium. The ICP, competitive analysis, JTBD timeline, experience map, README, and concept seed align, but Draft Stonk remains pre-product. There is no active research/customer-feedback.md, user interview set, app analytics, support log, or production behavior.
User Journeys
Finance-Curious Social Retail Player
Core use case: turn a stock opinion or market argument into a fast, fair, low-risk competition.
Entry points: market headlines, earnings, meme-stock activity, creator takes, Reddit, TikTok, Discord, fantasy-sports groups, friend chats, campus communities, or a friend's stock claim.
Task steps: notice the market spark; understand the fantasy-stock frame; compare alternatives; decide whether the game is safe and fast enough; make a first pick; complete a compact draft; inspect equal-dollar standings; decide whether to replay, share, or invite.
Decision points: concept legibility, trust boundary, ticker support, scoring fairness, data labels, and social payoff.
Happy path: the user understands the metaphor, makes a pick quickly, trusts the no-money/no-advice posture, sees fair equal-dollar standings, and names someone to challenge or a market event that would bring them back.
Failure modes: defaulting to chat, product feeling brokerage-like, ticker/scoring confusion, fake-feeling data, or weak standings payoff.
Friend-Group Or Club Organizer
Core use case: create a lightweight social challenge without manually setting rules, tracking duplicate picks, calculating returns, or managing compliance-sensitive framing.
Entry points: group chat argument, fantasy draft season, finance-club meeting, semester kickoff, market-news week, or recurring community activity.
Task steps: notice group energy; check whether the game is credible and low-risk; decide whether setup is light enough; invite or gather participants; use standings as the group payoff; decide whether to repeat.
Decision points: mixed-sophistication explanation, no-advice/no-prize framing, setup burden, and group discussion value.
Happy path: the organizer frames a safe fantasy game, participants understand the rules quickly, standings create discussion, and the group wants another round.
Failure modes: setup feels heavier than payoff; the activity looks like advice, gambling, or formal trading; the product is too solo; the group loses interest.
Customer Lifecycle
Confidence By Stage
| Stage | Confidence Score |
|---|---|
| Trigger | 4 |
| Discovery | 3 |
| Evaluation | 5 |
| Onboarding | 4 |
| Aha Moment | 4 |
| Conversion | 3 |
| Transaction | 5 |
| Retention | 3 |
| Expansion | 3 |
| Advocacy | 3 |
| Churn | 5 |
| Recovery | 3 |
| Stage | User State | Product Must Prove | Evidence | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trigger | A market story, stock claim, fantasy-sports analogy, or group argument creates a "let's settle it" moment. | The category can attach to an existing social spark instead of requiring a cold education motion. | ICP trigger events; JTBD first thought; Experience Map market spark. | Medium-high |
| Discovery | User encounters Draft Stonk through friends, group chats, Reddit, TikTok, Discord, finance communities, fantasy-sports references, or campus groups. | The one-line metaphor makes the product legible immediately. | ICP discovery behavior; README and concept promise. | Medium |
| Evaluation | User compares doing nothing, screenshots, watchlists, spreadsheets, broker-like simulators, education games, and fantasy sports. | Draft Stonk must feel faster, more social, and less finance-tool-like than alternatives. | Competitive analysis substitution pressure; JTBD passive/active looking; Experience Map alternative evaluation. | High |
| Onboarding | User needs to understand the game, choose or recognize a stock, and trust that the experience is not trading, advice, or gambling. | First-pick setup must lower both cognitive friction and trust anxiety. | README first loop; concept constraints; JTBD active looking and deciding; Experience Map first pick decision. | Medium-high |
| Aha Moment | User sees a pick turned into equal-dollar standings. | The score must make "who was right" fair, visible, and understandable. | ICP value drivers; README and concept first loop; JTBD consuming; Experience Map draft and score. | Medium-high |
| Conversion | In pre-product terms, conversion is commitment to finish the first loop or start a challenge. | The user must feel enough safety, speed, and game payoff to continue beyond curiosity. | JTBD deciding; Experience Map trust cliff; competitive analysis trust posture. | Medium |
| Transaction | No money, prize, brokerage, or paid entry transaction belongs in the approved first loop. | The product must avoid transaction mechanics that imply gambling, trading, advice, or account funding. | README non-goals; concept non-goals; competitive analysis prize and compliance contrast. | High |
| Retention | User returns for another market event, group challenge, fantasy-style rivalry, or club activity. | Standings must create a repeat reason beyond one-time novelty. | ICP post-adoption dynamics; JTBD satisfaction; Experience Map return or departure. | Medium |
| Expansion | Friend groups, clubs, and communities become larger cohorts only after the solo loop is legible. | Group setup must amplify social payoff without changing the product into a heavy league or education platform too early. | ICP college club wedge; JTBD group organizer burden; Experience Map channel transitions. | Medium |
| Advocacy | User shares results, invites friends, or uses the game to settle future stock claims. | Output must be socially readable and safe to share. | ICP validation signal; JTBD satisfaction criteria; Experience Map social payoff. | Medium |
| Churn | User leaves if chat, screenshots, watchlists, spreadsheets, or doing nothing feel easier. | The game must beat inertia with instant legibility and payoff. | Competitive analysis substitutes; JTBD habit force; Experience Map indifference zones. | High |
| Recovery | A new market story, earnings event, fantasy draft season, or group challenge may reactivate the user. | Reactivation should attach to timely market sparks and previously proven social payoff. | ICP trigger frequency; JTBD stage durations; Experience Map return or departure. | Medium |
Critical Moments
- Concept recognition: the user either understands "fantasy football, but for stocks" quickly or leaves the category fuzzy.
- Trust resolution: the user decides whether Draft Stonk is truly no-money, no-prize, no-advice, non-brokerage entertainment.
- First pick: the user either makes a pick quickly despite mixed ticker knowledge or stalls.
- Scoreboard proof: equal-dollar standings either feel fair and meaningful or feel fake, confusing, or arbitrary.
- Social payoff: the result either creates a replay, share, invite, or challenge target, or the user returns to familiar channels.
Stage Detail Index
- Trigger, switching pressure, decision sequence, and force imbalance details:
research/journey-map-jtbd-timeline.md - Emotional arc, channel transitions, pain moments, delight moments, and indifference zones:
research/journey-map-experience-map.md - ICP, trigger events, pains, alternatives, value drivers, and segment roles:
research/icp.md - Competitive substitutes, trust/compliance posture, simulator contrasts, and source gaps:
research/competitive-analysis.md - Product promise, first loop, constraints, and non-goals:
README.md,concept.md
Next Steps In Proposed Artifact
Pending final artifact approval and canonical write. The parent orchestrator should select the downstream route only after research/journey-map.md is approved and written.
Evidence Matrix And Coverage
| Claim | Supporting Frameworks | Evidence | Inference | Confidence | Decision Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The journey starts from social market chatter, not a serious trading workflow. | JTBD Timeline, Experience Map | ICP trigger events; JTBD first thought; Experience Map market spark. | Product entry should attach to social sparks and claims. | Medium-high | Keep the canonical journey game-first and pre-product. |
| The fantasy-sports metaphor is the main discovery and comprehension bridge. | JTBD Timeline, Experience Map | README and concept promise; JTBD pull force; Experience Map social framing. | The user needs fast category recognition before deeper explanation. | High | Approve the journey summary around concept recognition. |
| Alternatives create high inertia because they are free, familiar, or established. | JTBD Timeline, Experience Map | Competitive analysis substitutes; JTBD habit force; Experience Map alternative evaluation. | Draft Stonk must beat the no-tool path, not just other apps. | High | Keep churn and evaluation risks prominent. |
| Trust copy is journey-critical, not decorative. | JTBD Timeline, Experience Map | No-money/no-prize/no-advice constraints; competitive analysis trust finding; JTBD anxiety; Experience Map trust cliff. | Trust framing is a conversion blocker. | High | Approve trust resolution as a critical moment. |
| Equal-dollar standings are the core aha moment and fairness proof. | JTBD Timeline, Experience Map | README and concept first loop; ICP value drivers; JTBD consuming; Experience Map draft and score. | The first score has to prove fair comparison. | Medium-high | Approve aha moment framing, while keeping comprehension untested. |
| Social payoff determines retention more than individual portfolio practice. | JTBD Timeline, Experience Map | ICP post-adoption dynamics; JTBD satisfaction; Experience Map social payoff. | Replay/share/invite is the likely return split. | Medium | Flag retention as a major hypothesis, not a proven behavior. |
Required Gate: Research Completeness
Is the evidence sufficient to approve this synthesis as the canonical journey overview, with the stated pre-product caveats?
Assumptions And Confidence
| Assumption | Confidence | Why | What Would Change It |
|---|---|---|---|
| The approved primary ICP remains the correct journey subject. | Medium-high | research/icp.md is canonical and both framework outputs used that scope. | User redirects to clubs, fantasy-sports groups, creators, or educators. |
| The product should remain first-loop focused. | High | README and concept define one activation loop and defer full league scope. | Strategy changes to prioritize a group, club, or institutional path. |
| Trust and data clarity are journey-critical. | Medium-high | Multiple sources identify no-money/no-advice posture and market-data labeling as anxiety reducers. | User tests show another blocker dominates. |
| Social payoff is the main retention split. | Medium | ICP, JTBD, and Experience Map converge on replay/share/invite. | Tests show solo learning or individual progress is stronger. |
| Customer language must remain inferred. | High | No customer-feedback artifact, interviews, analytics, or product behavior exists. | Direct customer evidence is added. |
Required Gate: Assumptions And Confidence
Should the canonical artifact preserve these assumptions and confidence labels?
Source Coverage Gaps And Journey Gaps
- No active
research/customer-feedback.md. - No interviews, usability tests, surveys, analytics, support logs, production screens, or app event data.
- No direct usability evidence shows whether users prefer fastest-to-first-pick or cleanest concept explanation.
- No direct test confirms whether users understand equal-dollar standings without explanation.
- No direct test confirms whether local, mock, or delayed data labels preserve trust.
- No direct evidence proves which social payoff creates the strongest replay or invite behavior.
- No legal or compliance review exists; this synthesis preserves the approved no-money/no-prize/no-advice posture but does not provide legal advice.
- No fresh web research was run in this synthesis; it relies on already approved framework and competitive-analysis artifacts.
Proposed File Changes
| Path | Action After Approval | Reason |
|---|---|---|
research/journey-map.md | Write approved canonical artifact. | Completes parent journey-map synthesis. |
research/_working/preliminary-journey-map-research.md | Archive then remove active working packet. | Stage 2 packet is temporary until approved. |
research/_working/journey-map-run.yaml | Archive then remove active run manifest. | Selected framework loop is complete after canonical synthesis. |
alignment/journey-map-draft-stonk.html | Convert from review to confirmed. | Preserve approval record after canonical write. |
research/.progress.yaml | Update pipeline_stage to journey-map if manifest exists. | Record pipeline progress. |
Required Gate: Proposed File Changes
Should the next agent pass write the canonical journey map and archive the temporary synthesis artifacts?
Required Gate: Artifact Destination
Is research/journey-map.md the approved canonical destination for this synthesis?
Post-Approval Route
While this page is in review, the only next action is to compile YAML from this page and paste it into a fresh session invoking $journey-map --synthesize. Downstream routing is intentionally withheld until the canonical journey map is approved and written.
Compile Responses
Answered required gates: 0 / 4. Complete approval requires all gates answered with no unresolved negative feedback.