A president selecting a Supreme Court nominee, like an investor, seeks to identify the candidate who will be the most "profitable" — the one who will exert the most profound and positive influence over the law. In nominating Judge Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump has avoided a trap that has sometimes led past presidents, mostly Republicans, to make bad investment decisions.

President Trump, as a lifelong entrepreneur, naturally brings an investor's mindset to the selection process. Taking this one step further, what can we learn by applying the tools of financial analysis?

One can think of a judge as a decision-generating machine. Judges hear arguments, decide cases, and publish opinions that interpret and apply the law. The value of a judicial "machine" is a function of its cost (confirmation), how long it lasts (tenure), and the value it generates over time (the stream of decisions).

Tenure is easy: younger nominees, unsurprisingly, live longer. Nominees in their 40s serve an average of 19 years, while nominees in their 60s average 12 years. That fact is responsible for the common wisdom that a president seeking to maximize influence should, all else equal, nominate the youngest candidate who can be confirmed.

Many presidents have stopped there. But the common wisdom doesn't stand up to the evidence.

Read more at Investor's Business Daily