Hacker News Reader

Comment by myroon5 | Hacker News Reader

Guess who organized decades-long misinformation campaigns to make them as essential as they currently are: https://wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_denial

Regardless, most companies I checked have multiple different ratings because that site can't even do basic data cleaning:

https://inspireinsight.com/AAPL/US https://inspireinsight.com/AAPL/PT

https://inspireinsight.com/GOOGL/GT https://inspireinsight.com/GOOGL/MX

https://inspireinsight.com/MSFT/AU https://inspireinsight.com/MSFT/US

https://inspireinsight.com/AVGO/US https://inspireinsight.com/0YXG/GB

https://inspireinsight.com/TSM/US https://inspireinsight.com/5425/TW

https://inspireinsight.com/LUBEREF/SA https://inspireinsight.com/2223/SA

so even they disagree with their own ratings ;)

View on HN

They update ratings every year I think... there's a spreadsheet with before/after values for each company that you can download.

Most of the examples I provided are due to differing country codes; their site fails to recognize things like Alphabet trading on a Mexican stock exchange is still the same company: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/GOOGL.MX/

$GOOGL.MX scoring differently than other $GOOGL listings makes me extremely skeptical that humans are diligently creating these scores (finance professionals should've recognized that secondary listings like $GOOGL.MX don't need their own scoring)

Scores on different exchanges may be due to varying behavior by international subsidiaries -- MSFT in Australia may be doing something objectionable that MSFT US does not do, for example. I'm not sure though.

What I think is more likely is that it's a dumb oversight in the web app and/or data - maybe an intern stubbed out international stocks and it got pushed to production

> international subsidiaries

Secondary listings allow entire companies to trade on multiple exchanges (not just corresponding subsidiaries)

So I agree that it was likely just a mistake to list multiple listings of the same companies, but the fact that they usually receive different scores proves their process isn't diligent:

* $GOOGL.MX is dinged for multiple non-Mexico-specific violations that the other listing isn't

I think there's 2 sides of the company:

- (1) Insight scores

- (2) ETF management

I think the pipeline between (1) and (2) is probably tight within the company (probably a few big Excel spreadsheets) and the (2) side has a lot of brains.

But the (1) side needs to do more work on the pipeline between those spreadsheets and the Web, and maybe hire more/better software dev help for that. They'd do better to use Postgres as their source of truth.

> (1) Insight scores

> (2) ETF management

(1) seems like their (stated) differentiator itself; plenty of organizations already offer ETFs that omit selected companies

I doubt their data is cleaner internally than it is on their website. They're bringing in millions annually from their expense ratios:

https://www.inspireetf.com/etfs

and overpromising/underdelivering on their ability to diligently deliver (1)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com