Filings only

Teniq does not read earnings call transcripts. It does not read press releases, analyst notes, news coverage, or investor presentations. It does not look at prices.

This surprises people, because all of those sources contain information and some of them are faster than filings. Leaving them out looks like a gap waiting to be filled.

It is not a gap. It is the constraint the rest of the product depends on.

What makes a source checkable

A claim is only as good as the reader's ability to go settle it. That requires three things from the source: it exists at a fixed address, it does not change after the fact, and everyone can reach it.

Filings have all three. A 10-Q filed in August is at one address forever, with an identifier that never gets reused. If the company later decides it said the wrong thing, it files an amendment, which is a new document. The original stays. And it is public, free, and complete, which means a reader can check a quote without a subscription or a relationship with anyone.

Almost nothing else clears that bar. Transcripts are produced by vendors, differ between them, and get corrected silently. Press releases get replaced on company websites. Analyst notes are not public. Investor presentations are reposted, revised, and taken down. A claim sourced to any of these is a claim the reader mostly has to take on faith.

Speed is not the property we are optimizing

A great deal of what makes the other sources attractive is that they are earlier. An executive says something on a call in the first week of the quarter that will not appear in a document until the tenth.

But the reason to own a company is a claim about structure, and structural claims do not usually change in a week. What changes in a week is the narrative around the company, and narrative is what everyone else in this market is already selling. Being third to a durable observation is better than being first to a fragile one.

There is also a quieter problem with spoken material. What an executive says on a call is not subject to the same preparation, review, and liability as what the company writes in a filing. That is precisely what makes calls interesting to listen to and a poor foundation to build an argument on. The words are looser because the stakes on the exact wording are lower.

Why no prices

Prices are excluded for a different reason.

The moment a system reads prices, every output it produces becomes a statement about value. An observation that a company's cost advantage narrowed is a description of a business. The same observation next to a price is an implied argument that something is cheap or expensive. We did not add that second thing, but the reader will infer it, and they will be right to, because we put the two next to each other.

Keeping prices out means every output stays what it claims to be. A reason held, or it weakened, or the filing did not say. None of those are recommendations and none of them can be read as ones.

That is also why there is no watchlist performance view, no return column, and no way to sort anything by how it did. Each of those would convert a record of arguments into a record of outcomes, which is a different product with different obligations.

The cost

The constraint costs real coverage. Some things that genuinely matter to a business never make it into a filing, or arrive in one much later than they arrived somewhere else. Teniq will be silent on those, and silence will occasionally be the wrong answer.

We take that trade because the alternative degrades everything. A corpus that mixes checkable sources with unverifiable ones is only as trustworthy as its weakest source, and the reader has no way to tell which claims came from where. One unsourceable line in a thousand is enough to make the other nine hundred and ninety-nine a matter of trust rather than evidence.

Filings only is a narrower product. It is the only version of this product where the word checkable means anything.