Editorial illustration: diverse documents at the top whose lines converge like a watershed into an orange verification mark

From many diverse sources to a single verified data point: traceability is the principle that holds up every figure we put in a report.

01

Every figure carries its source next to it

You won't find a loose data point in any of our reports. Next to every figure we put who published it, when, and how it was reached. So anyone on your team can verify it on the spot or defend the report in a committee.

"The drone market in Spain is worth 340 million euros and growing at 23% year-on-year (Eurostat, 2024)."
02

For critical data, two sources instead of one

When a data point drives the recommendation, we don't settle for the first source we find. We look for at least one independent source confirming it. If the two match, confidence is high. If they disagree, we show you both versions so you can decide which one to use.

The sources we use: official European and national records (over twenty official sources such as Eurostat, the World Bank, the Spanish Official Gazette, EUR-Lex, the Spanish judicial documentation centre), sector databases and international bodies. The hierarchy is always the same: official first, specialised second, generalist only as complement.

03

If we cannot verify a data point, we tell you

When a figure isn't verifiable (because the source isn't accessible, no public data exists, or sources contradict each other), we don't paper it over with a comfortable estimate. We flag it explicitly in the report. We'd rather hand you an incomplete but honest report than a complete one that won't survive a question.

How we flag every data point in the report

Every data point you receive carries one of these four markers. At a glance you know what you can rely on and where to read with care.

Verified
The data is confirmed against an official source

You can rely on it to make the decision. The source is identified and accessible.

Partial
The data exists but does not cover everything we'd want

The source is good, but the figure is estimated or covers only part of the period or geography. Useful with caveats.

Not verified
We haven't found a reliable source

The data is mentioned somewhere but we couldn't confirm it. We flag it so you don't lean on it without verifying yourself.

Conflict
Sources don't agree

Two or more different figures for the same data point. We show you both versions, their origin and our assessment of which one is more reliable.

What we do and what we don't

So you know exactly what to expect before commissioning a report.

What we always do
  • Cite the source next to every figure in the report
  • Cross-check critical data with at least two independent sources
  • Flag explicitly anything we couldn't verify
  • Hand you a complete bibliography at the end
  • Tell you the temporal and geographic scope of every figure
  • Document conflicts between sources rather than picking the convenient one
What we never do
  • Fill gaps with made-up estimates so the report looks complete
  • Use as the only source a blog, a forum or an aggregator without traceability
  • Cite generative AI («according to ChatGPT») as if it were a source
  • Hand you a data point with no year or temporal context
  • Turn an adjective into a conclusion: «the sector looks promising» is not a recommendation

See the methodology on a real case

Ask us for a quick exploration of your sector and check on your own data what the above actually looks like in practice.

Request your analysis