1. Define the decision question
Decide whether the task is sector research, a specific project, or portfolio allocation; this prevents general analysis from becoming a purchase decision.
Database evidence coverage of investment research
Published investment studies31
Published feasibility studies153
Financial models marked planning153
Models marked internally validated0
Studies without a recorded financial model0
Structurally complete models (not financial verification)153
Recorded models with missing elements0
Studies with their own source links153
Total registered source links419
These counts only describe records and statuses in the database, not independent checks of prices, returns, URLs or taxes. An internal “validated” status does not imply external certification. Feasibility-library ROI figures remain planning ranges until project-specific assumptions are evidenced and calculated.
Having every model section filled does not verify assumptions or returns.
How a study is built
2. Collect primary evidence
Start with the government authority, registry or original document when available, recording period and verification date.
3. Separate data from assumptions
Verified facts, market data and planning assumptions are explicitly separated and never given equal evidentiary weight.
4. Build project economics
Revenue, cost, CAPEX, OPEX, working capital, financing and tax are built from the actual operating unit.
5. Scenario & stress test
Base, Conservative and Upside cases plus shocks to price, volume, cost, delay and currency where relevant.
6. Due diligence
Critical assumptions are replaced by contracts, registries, licences, quotations and legal/technical reviews appropriate to the deal.
7. Decision gates
Opportunity, Risk, Data Confidence, liquidity and exit are reviewed separately; there is no single magic score.
8. Review & update
Research is reviewed periodically and after material changes; errors are corrected at the source record.
Source hierarchy
A source-register entry or HTTPS link does not earn grade A automatically. Verify the primary authority, metric, date and applicability to the project; sector statistics alone cannot verify project price or returns.
| Grade | Meaning | Decision use |
|---|---|---|
| A | Official/primary and auditable source | Used as a reference fact with period and verification date. |
| B | Documented market data or reproducible methodology | Used as context or a benchmark with methodology and limitations stated. |
| C | Declared planning assumption that must be replaced by deal evidence | Used only in scenarios and stress-tested. |
| D | Unverified; excluded from decision outputs | Excluded until replaced by a verifiable source or document. |
Benchmark rule
An official indicator describes an economy or market for a defined period; it does not automatically become a project return forecast. Feasibility must connect it to project revenue, costs, financing and risk.
Official Benchmark CenterCorrections policy
When a figure changes or an error is found, the source record is corrected at origin. The error is not hidden with a display layer or fallback. Review date and data period remain visible so historical data never appears real-time.
Review cycle
Maximum 120 days for studies, immediately after a material change; benchmarks follow the source publication cycle.
Specialist professional review is required when relevant to the actual deal and is never assumed merely because this guide exists.