Research & Corrections Standards
The standard is simple: say no more than the evidence allows. NIGEL KAVOR research separates the question being investigated from the evidence collected, the interpretation of that evidence, its limitations, the resulting verdict, and any later updates.
Research Standard
Question → Evidence → Interpretation → Limitations → Verdict → Updates
Research begins with a defined question. The method, assumptions, data, and relevant constraints should be documented clearly enough for the conclusion to be understood in context. Descriptive findings are not presented as proof of profitability, and a decision to continue investigating is not presented as validation.
Evidence & Conclusions
Conclusions must stay inside the boundaries of the evidence. Backtests, forward tests, simulations, personal trading results, and market observations are identified for what they are. Material limitations, incomplete data, uncertainty, and conflicting evidence should be disclosed rather than hidden to make a result appear stronger.
Research and trading are separate decisions. A market behavior can exist without producing a viable strategy, and a strategy result can change when assumptions, execution, costs, risk, or market conditions change.
Changes & Corrections
New evidence may strengthen, weaken, or overturn an earlier conclusion. When a material conclusion changes, the update should explain what changed and why. Earlier evidence is not rewritten to make a later conclusion appear inevitable.
Material factual, methodological, or calculation errors should be corrected openly when discovered. Corrections should preserve enough context for readers to understand the original issue and the effect of the correction.
Commercial Independence
Research conclusions are not determined by sponsors, affiliates, partners, platforms, or other commercial relationships. Relevant commercial relationships are disclosed separately. Compensation does not convert a claim into evidence.
The Standard
Evidence Over Hype means the presentation should never be more certain than the underlying work. PASS, FAIL, INCONCLUSIVE, PROCEED, HOLD, or another research status describes the evidence at that stage—not a promise about future results.
Never let the image become more important than the truth.