MarketScreener - Bias and Credibility

LEAST BIASED

These sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appeals to emotion or stereotypes). The reporting is factual and usually sourced. These are the most credible media sources. See all Least Biased sources.

Overall, we rate MarketScreener as Least Biased based on its comprehensive coverage of financial markets without promoting a particular political or ideological perspective. It is rated as mostly factual rather than high for factual reporting due to its inclusion of rumors and speculative content.

Detailed Report

Bias Rating: LEAST BIASED
Factual Reporting: MOSTLY FACTUAL
Country: France
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY

History

Founded in 2008, MarketScreener is a comprehensive financial news portal with editions across Europe and North America. It was created by Surperformance, based in Annecy, France. The portal offers extensive coverage of the financial markets, providing live updates, analysis, and diverse viewpoints on indices, stocks, currencies, and commodities. The platform’s content includes news articles, op-eds, and features, catering to a global audience with comprehensive insights into market trends and financial events.

Read our profile on France’s Media and Government.

Funded by / Ownership

Franck Morel is the founder and president of Surperformance, which operates MarketScreener. Surperformance SAS generates revenue through subscription services and advertisements. Subscription fees range from $28 to $219.

Analysis / Bias

In review, The article “Business as Usual” provides a straightforward analysis of the Federal Reserve’s decision to maintain interest rates and its implications for the stock market. It offers a practical view of financial markets from a business-oriented perspective. The focus is on significant market movers and economic events, notably in the tech sector. MarketScreener’s articles, such as the one by Romain Fournier on central bank actions and their market impact, typically source information from within its research team. Using internal sources and analysis could suggest a self-referential approach to content creation. This method allows MarketScreener to provide detailed and specific market analysis, which might limit the diversity of viewpoints and external validation of the information presented.

MarketScreener also publishes syndicated news from established agencies like the Associated Press (AP) and Reuters. For example, an article about Donald Trump’s social media company going public discusses the financial and stock market implications, sourced from AP. In another instance, MarketScreener republished a Reuters article on Sonam Wangchuk’s hunger strike for Ladakh autonomy, indicating the platform’s broader news coverage beyond financial markets.

Lastly, MarketScreener includes a section on market rumors in its coverage that provides insights into unofficial information, market speculation, and potential developments that may affect companies and their stock value. These articles present information in a news-like format, such as the one discussing BASF and Wintershall Dea and others, like the reports on Thyssenkrupp and Richemont. MarketScreener does use the term “rumor” in the title of its articles, which acts as an implicit disclaimer, indicating the speculative nature of the content. However, while using “rumor” in the title helps signal the content’s nature, it may not fulfill the role of a comprehensive disclaimer that fully addresses the potential risks and uncertainties associated with speculative information. A more detailed disclaimer might be necessary to fully inform readers of the nature of rumors and their potential impact on market decisions.

In summary, labeling content as “rumor” in the title is a basic form of disclaimer. Depending on the context and potential impact, a more detailed disclaimer may be necessary to guide reader interpretation and actions appropriately.

Failed Fact Checks

None in the Last 5 years.

Overall, we rate MarketScreener as Least Biased based on its comprehensive coverage of financial markets without promoting a particular political or ideological perspective. It is rated as mostly factual rather than high for factual reporting due to its inclusion of rumors and speculative content. ( M. Huitsing 03/23/2024)

Source: https://www.marketscreener.com/

Last Updated on March 23, 2024 by Media Bias Fact Check