Editorial Standards

How what you read on Stockopedia is produced, checked and paid for.

This page explains how Stockopedia's editorial - the Daily Stock Market Report, features, data studies, explainers and methodology pages - is produced: who writes it, what it is based on, how it is checked, what our writers must disclose, and how we are paid. It applies to everyone who writes for us, employed or freelance. It describes our practice today, and will be updated if that changes.

Stockopedia is paid for by its subscribers. Our revenue comes entirely from subscriptions to our service. We take no commission and no affiliate income from brokers, investment platforms or any other provider we may write about. We accept no paid placement and no sponsored content in our editorial. We never sell our customers' data. Our editorial is accountable to our readership alone.

We publish to educate and inform self-directed private investors: to help them understand what actually drives returns in the stock market, and to find and judge opportunities for themselves.We publish three kinds of editorial:

The test we apply to anything we publish is whether it leaves the reader better equipped to invest for themselves. We write about the drivers of stock market returns (quality, value, momentum), and whether individual shares are exposed to them. We never recommend a share for purchase or sale. Our example portfolios and screens demonstrate rules-based processes, and our company analyses show those processes applied to a single share; none of them are buy lists. We do not publish share tips.

How we choose what to cover in the Daily Report. Each morning the market publishes hundreds of company announcements. We cover the ones that matter most, judged on two things: how material the news is - results, trading statements and anything that changes expectations for a company's profits come first - and the level of investor or market interest. Our own news-scoring tools rank the morning's announcements on these measures to help our analysts; which stories get a note is our analysts' call. Our editorial choices are our own, and are not influenced by company PR or broker house views.

Our editorial is written by experienced investment analysts. Between them they hold professional qualifications and have spent their careers in the industry - managing institutional portfolios, analysing company accounts and investing their own money through more than one market cycle.

Every article carries a named person's byline. Each byline links to that person's author page, where you can learn who they are, what they cover and how they invest. Every author is a real person: we never publish under invented names or a general “Stockopedia” credit.

Our editorial begins with evidence. Every piece rests on primary material - company announcements and filings, published accounts and market data - read at source, or from our data providers, rather than taken second hand. The value we add is judgement about what the facts mean.

We separate what a source says from what we think of it. Facts are attributed to where they came from; our assessment of them is opinion, and we write so that a reader can tell the two apart. Where a company describes its own performance or prospects, we attribute that description to the company and then give our own view of it. In the daily report's summary table, where space is tight, a single line may carry both; the analyst's note beneath it keeps them apart.

Where a claim about an investing strategy can be tested against data, we test it before we publish. When we say something works, we publish the evidence with it, including the period it covers and the methodology. Our StockRanks and other metrics are calculated every day and stored as they stood on that day, so when we test a strategy we use the figures an investor would actually have seen at the time, not restated ones. Where we cannot evidence something, we say so and present it as a view rather than a finding.

We ask hard questions of company accounts where the evidence warrants it, and have flagged accounting issues at companies that later proved to be frauds. Questions are not accusations; findings of wrongdoing are for the authorities.

A reader should be able to check our work. We publish our data, link to original announcements, show the reasoning behind a conclusion, and say plainly what we do not know. We aim to write in plain language a non-professional investor can follow. All material information in our editorial comes from public sources - announcements by listed companies and other publicly available information.

The named author is responsible for the accuracy of every piece. We check figures against the company's own announcements and other public records, and where possible by peer review or with AI assistance. The Daily Stock Market Report is edited by Graham Neary. Explainers and methodology pages pass a reviewer before they are published. Every article shows the date it was published. Explainers about market rules and company reporting are re-checked at least once a year.

We use AI tools to support our writers, but the analysis and opinions in everything we publish are our analysts' own. The Daily Stock Market Report is written by our analysts; AI may assist with checking facts against source documents, additional research, summarising the morning's announcements before the market opens, mechanical work to help prepare an article for publication or editing content for supporting use cases. Explainers and methodology pages may be researched and drafted with AI assistance from primary sources and proprietary data context, then manually verified, edited and published by the named author. In every case the judgement on the page - what a set of results means, whether a number is as good as it looks, what a reader should take from an announcement - is a named author's, and they stand behind it. This is our editorial practice today.

Our writers, or their related interests, may hold shares in the companies they write about. Where they do, they say so on the page - in line, as they comment on the company, or at the end of the article. The same rule applies to everything we publish, the daily report included: if we write about a share, we disclose our holding in it. The writer declares a personal interest, and is not required to name the holder or the size of the holding.

Writers do not deal in a share, or in derivatives or spread bets on it, in the two working days before or the two working days after they publish on it. We are not a regulated investment firm; this is a house rule we choose to keep. On the daily report, where the news cannot be planned, a writer in that position hands the coverage of a stock to a colleague.

When we review or write about our own tools and products - the StockRanks, our analysts' ratings, our screens and model portfolios - we say so, and we hold them to the same standard of evidence as everything else we publish: any performance claim comes with the evidence behind it, including the periods in which the method did not work.

Full detail is on our disclosures page.

When we get something wrong, we amend the page in place and add a note or comment recording the change. Correcting a page is our first response to an error, not removing it.

If you think something we have published is wrong, contact us through the green chat icon at the bottom right of the site, or email us at support@stockopedia.com. We reply within one working day and correct as soon as we have checked the issue. If you disagree with an analyst's opinion or rating, the comments under every article are the place for it, and we read them.

Full detail is on our corrections page.

We treat the service as a civilised place for discourse. We respect and encourage contrarian points of view - disagreement is how investors test an idea - and we expect the same professionalism from our editorial staff, freelance and full-time alike. Our editorial is respectful to all our readers, whoever they are. The rules for community contributors, and how we moderate, are in our content guidelines and moderation rules.

Editorial responsibility for Stockopedia rests with Ed Croft, founder and CEO. Graham Neary is editor of the Daily Stock Market Report. Editorial correspondence goes to support@stockopedia.com, where it is read by our team and passed to the editor concerned.

Ed Croft, founder and CEO - last reviewed 5th October 2026.

Our analysts give their opinion of a company and its shares, drawn from their professional experience. It is their view, not personal advice to you, and never a solicitation to buy or sell. Stockopedia publishes information and education for self-directed investors; we are not authorised or regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority, and nothing we publish takes account of your circumstances. Shares can fall as well as rise, and you can lose money.

Please read our disclaimer and terms of use.