Research Standards
This document sets out the standards under which Business Deep Dives (“BDD”) research is produced. It covers coverage selection, analytical independence, sourcing, verification, financial models, the use of technology and artificial intelligence, authorship, conflicts, personal account dealing, corrections, and publication practices. It is published so that subscribers—including institutional subscribers whose compliance functions review external research providers—can assess BDD’s process directly rather than infer it.
These standards apply to the entirety of BDD’s output unless a publication expressly states otherwise.
Last updated: August 11, 2026
Version 1.0
Effective: August 2026
Our editorial commitment
BDD seeks to produce research that is:
Grounded in identifiable evidence
Independently reasoned
Clear about uncertainty and limitations
Transparent about material conflicts
Careful in distinguishing fact from interpretation
Subject to human editorial responsibility
BDD prioritizes accuracy over speed, primary evidence over repetition, and substantive analysis over the volume of content published.
BDD does not publish to a fixed or committed calendar. A publication is released when BDD considers the analysis sufficiently complete and the work ready for its intended format. Quality takes priority over cadence and volume.
BDD determines:
What subjects to research
Which questions are material
Which sources are credible and relevant
What analytical framework to apply
Which assumptions and conclusions are supported by the evidence
What information should be included or omitted
Whether a publication is ready for release
All published work receives human review and final approval. The use of research software, financial databases, artificial-intelligence systems, or other technological tools does not transfer editorial responsibility to those tools or their providers. BDD remains responsible for the analysis, conclusions, presentation, and final publication.
No research process can eliminate every error or uncertainty. These standards describe the process BDD seeks to apply; they are not a representation that every publication will be complete, current, or free from error.
Publication formats and proportionate review
BDD applies these standards proportionately across different publication formats. The depth of review may vary according to the scope, complexity, and intended purpose of the work. A shorter format does not relieve BDD of responsibility for material factual claims, but readers should consider the scope and purpose of the relevant publication.
Evolution Series and flagship Deep Dives
These reports are intended to provide extensive, long-form analysis. They generally involve broader source review, historical context, financial and strategic analysis, and more extensive editorial preparation.
Implication Reports
Implication Reports are intended to interpret meaningful developments and their potential consequences. They may be produced more quickly than flagship reports but should still distinguish established facts from early information, assumptions, scenarios, and BDD’s interpretation.
Notes and shorter commentary
Notes may contain preliminary observations, shorter arguments, charts, questions, or commentary. They may receive a lighter review process and should not automatically be treated as comprehensive research reports.
BDD may provide report-specific disclosure where a publication’s production process differs materially from the ordinary process described on this page.
BDD may expand into further formats in the future at its own discretion.
Coverage selection and analytical independence
Coverage decisions are ultimately made by BDD on analytical and editorial grounds.
Subscribers and institutional clients may suggest or commission topics, including bespoke research. BDD may accept such requests provided that:
Payment is for the research service, not for a predetermined opinion, valuation, rating, or conclusion
BDD retains control over the methodology, assumptions, analysis, wording, and final conclusions
The commissioning party does not receive a right to dictate the methodology, analysis, wording, or conclusions
Whether the work is private, distributed to a limited audience, or published is governed by the applicable engagement terms
A material commission or relationship is disclosed where relevant to a reader’s assessment of a published report, subject to lawful confidentiality obligations
BDD does not accept payment, equity, securities, options, expenses, or other consideration from a covered issuer, its management, controlling shareholders, or advisers in exchange for initiating, continuing, discontinuing, or shaping coverage of that issuer. BDD does not publish issuer-paid, issuer-sponsored, or pay-for-coverage research under its name.
BDD may accept general advertising, sponsorship, or other commercial revenue that is separate from its research conclusions. No advertiser, sponsor, subscriber, investor, or other commercial counterparty receives coverage rights or editorial control. BDD does not accept payment from an issuer to sponsor research about itself. Any material commercial relationship with a subject of coverage will be disclosed where relevant.
BDD may be funded through subscription and customer revenue, founder or shareholder capital, external investment, or other lawful sources. No source of funding receives the right to determine BDD’s coverage, methodology, conclusions, wording, or publication decisions. Any ownership, financing, affiliation, or other relationship that could reasonably be material to a reader’s assessment of a publication will be disclosed where relevant.
BDD will not knowingly accept compensation in exchange for an undisclosed favorable or adverse opinion.
BDD does not provide covered companies with editorial approval or routine prepublication review. It may, in limited circumstances, share specific factual questions, quotations, data points, or limited excerpts solely to check accuracy. This does not grant the subject the right to approve, suppress, delay, or dictate BDD’s analysis or conclusions.
Research methodology
BDD research is long-form and business-first. The primary unit of analysis is the operating business: its economics, competitive position, capital requirements, management, and the durability of its returns. Valuation is generally treated as a conclusion drawn from that analysis rather than as the starting point.
A long-form report will ordinarily seek to explain:
How the business earns its returns
The structural sources of those returns and the evidence bearing on their durability
The competitive, financial, operational, and regulatory factors that may affect the business
Management’s capital-allocation record
The principal ways in which the thesis could be wrong
A valuation or expectation framework that follows from the preceding analysis and identifies its material assumptions
BDD may use a combination of primary and secondary sources. The weight given to a source depends on its proximity to the underlying facts, incentives, methodology, reliability, relevance, timeliness, and corroboration. The source hierarchy described below is a preference rather than an inflexible rule.
Primary sources
Primary sources may include:
Regulatory filings and statutory accounts
Annual and interim reports
Earnings releases and earnings-call transcripts
Investor presentations, company announcements, and direct company communications
Government, judicial, regulatory, and statistical publications
Legislation, regulations, and official policy documents
Patent, technical, and scientific materials
Original datasets
Direct interviews and correspondence
Other records produced by the relevant company, institution, regulator, or individual
Where reasonably practicable, BDD gives greater evidentiary weight to original and primary materials. Relevant documents are reviewed to a depth proportionate to the publication and the claim being assessed. A flagship report may require reading an entire filing, transcript, or source set; a shorter publication may rely on a targeted review of the sections necessary to evaluate the relevant issue.
Secondary sources
Secondary sources may include:
Reputable financial and business publications
Industry and trade publications
Academic research
Broker, investment-bank, and independent research
Specialist newsletters and analytical publications
Expert commentary
Financial databases and licensed datasets
Other relevant third-party materials
Secondary sources may provide context, identify questions, contribute proprietary data or original reporting, or contain information and insights unavailable in primary materials. BDD may rely directly on a reputable secondary source where it is the most appropriate or reasonably available source, provided the claim is clearly attributed and the source is assessed in context.
Where a material secondary-source claim can reasonably be traced to an original source, BDD seeks to review the original source before relying on the claim. Where this is not possible, BDD seeks to corroborate the claim or explain the limitation where material.
The citation of a source does not mean that BDD endorses every statement, assumption, or conclusion made by that source.
Source identification and citation
BDD seeks to identify the origin of material information clearly enough for readers to understand the basis of the analysis.
Sources may be cited through:
Direct links
Footnotes or endnotes
Source descriptions beneath charts and tables
References within the body of a report
A source list accompanying the publication
Some information may originate from proprietary databases, paid publications, expert networks, private correspondence, or licensed materials that BDD cannot reproduce or make publicly accessible. Where BDD cannot provide the underlying material, it seeks to identify the source and relevant context to the extent reasonably permitted.
Where a figure originates outside a company’s own disclosure, BDD seeks to attribute it in the text, a chart or table source, or an accompanying source note. Where the author has direct operating or professional exposure to an industry under coverage, that exposure is disclosed where it materially informs a judgment.
Charts and tables should identify, where relevant:
The applicable period
Currency and units
The underlying source
Whether the information is reported, estimated, consensus-based, or calculated by BDD
Material methodological qualifications
Verification of facts and figures
Before publication, BDD seeks, where reasonably practicable, to verify material factual claims against the underlying source material.
The review process may include checking:
Company and individual names
Dates and reporting periods
Financial figures and operating statistics
Currency, units, and scale
Quotations and attribution
Reported versus adjusted financial measures
Historical versus forecast information
Per-share figures, share counts, and corporate actions
Chart labels, periods, and source descriptions
BDD’s own calculations
Where different sources use different definitions or methodologies, BDD seeks to explain or reconcile those differences when they could materially affect the analysis.
BDD seeks to distinguish among:
Verified or reported facts
Statements made by companies, management teams, or third parties
BDD estimates and calculations
Scenarios and forecasts
Analytical inferences
BDD opinions and conclusions
A statement made by a company is not automatically an independently verified fact. Where the distinction is material, BDD may use language such as “the company stated,” “management estimates,” or “according to the company.”
BDD may use estimates where reported information is unavailable or incomplete. Estimates should be identified as such and should not be presented as reported facts.
Financial models and valuation
Not every BDD publication requires a financial model. Where a model is used, BDD may build, adapt, or review it using company filings, regulatory disclosures, market data, consensus estimates, licensed datasets, screening outputs, pre-built templates, spreadsheet software, code, and artificial-intelligence tools.
Templates, screening outputs, consensus data, and third-party datasets may be used as starting points, references, or comparison tools. They are not treated as substitutes for judgment or review. Material inputs, formulas, assumptions, and outputs used in a published conclusion are reviewed by BDD to a level proportionate to the publication.
Valuation work is intended to be inspectable. Material assumptions necessary to understand a published valuation are stated in the report or accompanying materials. Where reasonably practicable, arithmetic is reconciled to disclosed financial information, and inputs that reflect judgment rather than reported figures are identified as judgments, estimates, or scenarios.
Where reverse-engineered valuation is used, BDD seeks to state the material market-implied assumptions so that readers can assess the embedded expectations independently of BDD’s view.
Use of artificial intelligence, technology, and analytical tools
BDD uses modern research and editorial tools, which may include artificial-intelligence systems such as ChatGPT, Claude, and comparable services. The extent and purpose of their use may vary by publication and task.
Depending on the work, these tools may assist with:
Searching and navigating large document sets
Extracting and organizing data from disclosures
Summarizing filings, transcripts, presentations, and technical documents
Locating passages and comparing disclosures across companies or reporting periods
Identifying questions and lines of inquiry
Structuring financial and operating information
Supporting calculations, coding, model review, and internal consistency checks
Developing outlines, analytical frameworks, hypotheses, scenarios, and valuation approaches
Generating counterarguments and alternative interpretations
Supporting drafting, rewriting, restructuring, editing, and quality control
Improving clarity, grammar, and presentation
Artificial-intelligence output is treated as working material, not as authoritative evidence. It may contain factual errors, false citations, unsupported inferences, outdated information, or fabricated material. Material factual claims produced or identified with AI assistance should therefore be checked against identifiable underlying sources where reasonably practicable.
AI systems may propose hypotheses, interpretations, conclusions, valuation approaches, or draft language. BDD does not adopt those proposals automatically. The named author evaluates the evidence, selects the assumptions, determines the final analytical view, and approves the publication.
AI-generated language may be retained in whole or in part where it accurately expresses BDD’s intended analysis and has received substantive human review, source checking where relevant, and revision as appropriate. BDD does not publish unreviewed bulk-generated material or treat fluent AI output as proof that a claim is correct.
BDD does not knowingly use AI to fabricate:
Sources
Quotations
Interviews
Financial results
Expert opinions
Data
Events that did not occur
The use of AI does not transfer authorship or editorial accountability to the system or its provider. BDD remains responsible for the analysis, conclusions, presentation, and final publication.
BDD may provide report-specific disclosure where the production process differs materially from the ordinary process described on this page.
Confidentiality and data handling when using AI
BDD does not knowingly submit material non-public information to third-party AI systems.
Confidential, restricted, client, personal, or licensed material is not submitted to a third-party AI system unless its use is authorized and applicable confidentiality, privacy, contractual, security, and access-control requirements are satisfied.
With appropriate permission, BDD may use interview notes, expert-network material, or other authorized research inputs with identities removed, anonymized, or otherwise protected where appropriate. Such use must remain consistent with the source’s permission, the applicable contractual terms, and BDD’s prohibition on seeking or using material non-public information.
Provenance marking and automated detection
As of this version, Anthropic’s published documentation states that Claude models launched in the European Union on or after August 2, 2026 support machine-readable marking at launch, including embedded watermarks in generated text and provenance metadata for supported files. Anthropic also states that detection of a supported mark indicates only that content may have been processed by Claude; it does not establish full provenance or original authorship. The absence of a detected mark does not establish that AI was not used.
These measures relate in part to transparency requirements under Article 50 of the EU AI Act. Other AI providers may adopt comparable marking or provenance mechanisms as legal requirements and industry practices develop.
BDD does not treat a watermark, provenance signal, or automated AI-authorship classifier as conclusive evidence of who originated a document’s ideas, analysis, or final text. BDD’s underlying sources, working papers, drafts, revision history, and the named author’s approval are the relevant record of its research and editorial process.
Authorship, originality, and attribution
At the date of this version, BDD research is authored and finally approved by BDD’s founder. BDD may add researchers, analysts, editors, and other employees as it grows. Each future publication will identify the person or persons responsible for its substantive views and, where applicable, the editor responsible for final approval.
Authorship reflects responsibility for the substantive analysis, intellectual judgment, and final published work. It does not imply that the author worked without research assistance, editing, software, data services, AI systems, or other technological tools.
A person named as the author or editor of a BDD publication is accountable for the final work regardless of whether research assistants, software tools, AI systems, employees, contractors, interviewees, or external contributors participated in its preparation.
Routine research assistance, editing, data organization, fact checking, and technological support may not receive individual attribution. Material external contributions may be acknowledged where appropriate.
BDD does not knowingly publish plagiarized material. Direct quotations should be identified as quotations and attributed to the appropriate source. Substantial third-party ideas, frameworks, charts, data, or analysis should be credited where appropriate.
BDD will not present ghostwritten, syndicated, contributed, or third-party work as the founder’s or another named author’s original work. Guest contributions, externally authored work, interviews, and other contributed material may be published only when they are identified clearly enough for readers to understand who is responsible for the relevant views.
Customer-requested or commissioned research remains subject to the same authorship and editorial-responsibility standards. The fact that a client requested or paid for the work does not make the client its author and does not confer control over its conclusions.
Interviews and expert sources
BDD may use interviews, industry specialists, consultants, customers, suppliers, former employees, executives, investors, or other knowledgeable sources.
BDD seeks to:
Represent a source’s comments fairly
Distinguish a source’s opinion from verified fact
Identify the source where appropriate and permitted
Avoid presenting one source as representative of an entire market without sufficient basis
Corroborate material claims where reasonably practicable
Anonymous sources may be used where there is a legitimate reason to protect the source’s identity, the source has agreed to the permitted use of the information, and the information is sufficiently important and credible to justify anonymity.
BDD may use paid expert networks or compensated specialists. Any compensation is for the source’s time and expertise, not for a predetermined opinion or favorable conclusion.
Confidential and material non-public information
BDD’s public research is intended to rely on information that is:
Publicly available
Properly licensed
Lawfully obtained
Provided with appropriate authorization for publication or use
BDD does not seek, solicit, or knowingly accept material non-public information about a covered company for the purpose of research, publication, or securities trading, and it does not knowingly publish research derived from such information.
Where BDD conducts primary research involving company personnel, former employees, customers, suppliers, industry participants, or expert-network sources, it does so on the basis that no material non-public or unlawfully disclosed information is sought or received.
Information obtained through an interview or expert source may be used where it is lawfully provided and the source has authorized its use. BDD may agree to protect a source’s identity or use information on an anonymized basis where appropriate. Anonymity does not permit BDD to use material non-public, unlawfully disclosed, or contractually restricted information.
If BDD becomes aware that information may be confidential, unlawfully disclosed, or material and non-public, it may suspend the relevant work, restrict use of the information, and seek appropriate professional advice. Where the status or permitted use of information is unclear, BDD may decline to use it.
BDD will not promise absolute confidentiality where doing so would conflict with applicable law or a binding legal obligation.
Conflicts of interest
BDD, its owner, directors, employees, contractors, contributors, or affiliates may hold investments in securities, companies, industries, or financial instruments discussed in its research or may have other relationships connected to the subject matter.
Where a financial interest, customer commission, commercial relationship, ownership or financing relationship, advisory role, consulting relationship, or other circumstance could reasonably be material to a reader’s assessment of a publication, BDD seeks to disclose the nature of that interest or relationship in the relevant report. Where lawful confidentiality prevents identification of a party, BDD may describe the nature of the relationship without naming the party.
Relevant conflicts may include:
A direct or derivative investment position in a company or security discussed
A customer-requested or commissioned research engagement relating to the subject
An advertising, sponsorship, subscription, or other commercial relationship with the subject company
Compensation connected to the subject matter
An advisory, consulting, employment, or direct operating relationship
An ownership, financing, or affiliate relationship
Other circumstances that could reasonably affect the perceived independence of the research
Disclosure does not eliminate the possibility of bias. Readers should consider disclosed interests when evaluating BDD’s conclusions.
BDD does not publish research for the purpose of improperly manipulating the price of a security or coordinating undisclosed trading activity.
Personal account dealing and trading blackout
For this section, the policy applies to BDD and any account it controls, as well as BDD’s owner, directors, employees, contractors, contributors, and any other person who participates in, or receives advance access to, unpublished BDD research. These persons are referred to as covered persons.
A covered instrument includes the security principally discussed in a publication; other equity or debt securities issued by the same issuer; options, futures, swaps, contracts for difference, or other derivatives referencing that issuer or security; and any closely related instrument used to obtain materially equivalent economic exposure. Broad, diversified funds are not ordinarily treated as covered instruments unless they are used to create concentrated exposure to the covered issuer.
Covered persons must not trade on the basis of unpublished BDD research or advance knowledge of a planned publication.
Covered persons must not initiate, increase, reduce, close, or otherwise alter a position in a covered instrument during the 72 hours before publication or the 72 hours after publication. The restriction applies whether the publication is favorable, neutral, or adverse and whether the position was established before the research began.
A position held before publication may not be sold, reduced, closed, hedged, or otherwise altered during the 72-hour post-publication period. A person who holds no position may not establish one during that period.
Involuntary transactions, corporate actions, pre-existing automatic instructions, legal requirements, margin actions outside the person’s control, or exceptional risk-management circumstances may be treated as exceptions where appropriate. Any exception should be documented and disclosed where it could reasonably be material to a reader.
Where BDD or a covered person holds a direct or derivative position in a security under coverage, that position will be disclosed prominently at the top of the relevant report and again in the report’s disclosure section. Where no such position is held, the disclosure section will state that fact. Disclosures speak as of the publication date unless otherwise stated.
Corrections
BDD seeks to correct material factual, numerical, attribution, or presentation errors after they are identified and verified.
Material corrections are not made silently. Depending on the nature of the error, BDD may:
Correct the publication directly
Add a dated correction or editor’s note identifying what was wrong and what changed
Publish a separate update
Replace a materially defective version with a revised report
Notify subscribers separately where the error materially affects the publication’s conclusion
BDD seeks to retain prior versions of materially corrected reports where reasonably practicable.
BDD will not silently change a material analytical conclusion in a way that misrepresents the original publication. A significant change in thesis, valuation, or interpretation should ordinarily be identified through an update, editor’s note, revised version, or subsequent publication.
Minor changes involving grammar, spelling, formatting, broken links, or presentation may be made without a separate correction notice where they do not alter the substantive meaning.
Errors may be reported to BDD. Substantiated errors are corrected regardless of who identifies them.
Reader feedback and right of reply
BDD welcomes substantive corrections, additional evidence, and good-faith disagreement.
A company or individual discussed in BDD research may contact BDD to identify a possible factual error or provide relevant additional information. BDD will consider such submissions but retains sole editorial discretion regarding whether and how to respond, correct, or update its work.
Updates and publication dates
BDD research reflects the information reasonably available at the stated publication date.
Unless expressly described as continuously updated, a report should be treated as a point-in-time publication. BDD is not obligated to update a report following:
New financial results
A change in market price
A corporate transaction
A regulatory development
A change in management
New information
A change in BDD’s view
Where a publication is materially revised, BDD may identify an updated date or version.
Distribution
BDD research is licensed to the individual or institution that subscribes to it. Redistribution and internal-circulation terms are set out in BDD’s Terms: [LINK].
Investment conclusions and limitations
BDD research may discuss securities, valuation, investment cases, risks, expected outcomes, or potential opportunities. Such discussion reflects analytical judgment and is subject to uncertainty. Reasonable readers may interpret the same information differently, and BDD’s conclusions may ultimately prove incorrect.
Forecasts, scenarios, valuation ranges, estimates, and expected outcomes are not guarantees or promises of future performance.
BDD publishes research and analysis, not personalized investment advice. Nothing in a BDD publication is a personal recommendation or an offer to buy or sell any security. Readers are responsible for their own investment decisions and due diligence.
This standards page explains BDD’s editorial and research process. It does not replace BDD’s Important Disclosures, Terms, or Disclaimer.
Scope and status of this document
These standards describe how BDD research is produced. They are not terms of service and do not vary, supplement, or supersede BDD’s Terms and Disclaimer, which govern use of the publication and are set out in full here: [LINK].
BDD may revise these standards as its publication formats, research capabilities, team, products, funding, technology, and regulatory obligations develop.
Material amendments will be versioned and dated. The current version and date will remain publicly accessible, and prior versions will be retained where reasonably practicable.