How Stock Verdict works

Every stock is weighed through two lenses — a value lens (is it cheap relative to what it earns and owns?) and a growth lens (is it growing fast enough to justify its price?) — and we surface whichever fits the company better. The yardstick is sector-aware: a bank, a utility, and a software company are each judged against what's normal for their industry, not one blanket standard.

Instead of a single "target price," we show a ladder of levels — where a stock looks heavily discounted, reasonably buyable, fairly valued, and expensive — each built with a margin of safety. The fair-value anchor reflects what the market typically pays for a company like this, tempered by its own growth. When the math produces an implausible result (often a sign of one-off or peak earnings), we say so and withhold the levels rather than show a misleading number.

Reported profit isn't always backed by cash. We cross-check each company's earnings against its actual cash generation, its accruals, and its receivables trends — the kinds of forensic signals that can flag aggressive accounting — and surface them in plain English. This is the "we check the accounting so you don't have to" layer.

Not every read deserves equal confidence. We summarize how much to trust a given verdict based on how complete the underlying data is, what the earnings-quality checks found, and how well-covered the company is — so a thin-data microcap is never presented with the same certainty as a widely-followed large cap.

• We don't give personalized investment advice or buy/sell recommendations.
• We don't guarantee accuracy — data can be delayed, incomplete, or wrong; always verify before trading.
• Our verdicts are impersonal and rules-based, generated from public data.