Editorial policy

We prefer primary records such as regulatory filings, government disclosures, issuer materials, and official award data. When a page uses derived context or a third-party feed, it should say so and should not present the derived view as if it were the original record.

AlphaYou Research reviews public explainers for a clear source trail, disclosure timing, factual wording, relevant caveats, and a visible update date. We do not publish anonymous AlphaYou stock calls or turn reported activity into personalized advice.

We use software and AI tools to help research, parse records and draft content. Before publication, source checks must support the claims, dates and measurement limits. We do not invent first-hand experience, present a document review as a product test, or use a humanizer to disguise unsupported content. Automated writing checks support editorial review; they do not establish accuracy.

Product comparisons should state what another product does well, distinguish verified facts from self-reported claims, and avoid unsupported pricing or performance claims. Market-performance context must identify its benchmark, period, sample, and relevant limitations.

We update public research when a material fact, source link, timing statement, or product description changes. Report a factual issue via the corrections process.