Purpose
The process is designed to slow down interpretation, preserve the evidence behind a conclusion, and make uncertainty visible. It supports consistent review rather than a single formula for every market condition.
Evidence hierarchy
- Primary documents, official releases, filings, and direct statements.
- Provider data with identifiable source, definition, and timing.
- Reliable secondary reporting and independent analysis.
- Market commentary, sentiment, and unverified claims, which require additional caution.
Source verification
Review the exact source, timestamp, definitions, revisions, and context. Distinguish what happened from why observers believe it happened. Where a source cannot be verified, label the limitation rather than present the claim as settled fact.
Data handling and revisions
Check symbol mapping, units, calculation method, time zone, adjustment method, missing observations, revisions, and whether the measure is real-time, delayed, or indicative. A later revision should be considered when it changes the interpretation.
Relevant comparison
Compare the current move with recent history, sector peers, market breadth, volatility, liquidity, policy conditions, and the broader market regime. A comparison is useful only when the baseline is relevant and definitions are consistent.
Assumptions, scenarios, and change conditions
State material assumptions and separate a base case from alternative scenarios. Each scenario should identify observable evidence that supports it, evidence that would weaken it, and a condition that would require the view to be reviewed.
Risk-first framework
Record concentration, liquidity, policy, earnings, valuation, implementation, and data risks before reaching a conclusion. Preserve contrary evidence rather than forcing all information into one narrative.
Quantitative and qualitative information
Quantitative measures can clarify magnitude, breadth, dispersion, and historical comparison. Qualitative evidence can clarify incentives, policy context, business conditions, and source credibility. Neither category is complete by itself.
Research record
A useful review record identifies the source, date, confirmed facts, interpretation, assumptions, contrary evidence, open questions, and the condition that would change the view. This allows later comparison without rewriting the original reasoning.
Limitations
Data can be delayed or revised, comparisons can be misleading, assumptions can fail, and market structure can change. The methodology does not eliminate uncertainty or assure an outcome.