Batch 11 QA Notes — Sentinel Review

Date: 2026-03-24 Reviewed by: Sentinel (QA Agent) Result: NEEDS_FIXES (1 issue found across 5 files)

---

Files Reviewed

| File | SEO Frontmatter | 1200+ Words | No Fabricated Stats | No Buy Advice | No Return Guarantees | CTA → valueofstock.com | Coherent Prose | Status | |------|----------------|-------------|---------------------|---------------|----------------------|------------------------|----------------|--------| | batch-11-what-is-dividend-yield.md | ✅ | ✅ (1430w) | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | PASS | | batch-11-how-federal-reserve-affects-investments.md | ✅ | ✅ (1549w) | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | PASS | | batch-11-what-is-market-capitalization.md | ✅ | ✅ (1593w) | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | PASS | | batch-11-beginners-guide-to-bonds.md | ✅ | ✅ (1577w) | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | PASS | | batch-11-how-to-spot-stock-bubble.md | ✅ | ✅ (1785w) | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | FAIL |

---

Issues Found

File: batch-11-how-to-spot-stock-bubble.md

Issue: Incorrect historical statistic — Nasdaq dot-com rise understated

Location: Section "The Dot-Com Bubble (Late 1990s – 2000)"

Problematic text:

"The Nasdaq Composite index rose about 400% from early 1995 to its peak in March 2000."

Why it's wrong: The Nasdaq Composite opened January 1995 at approximately 750–752 and peaked in March 2000 at approximately 5,048–5,132. That is a gain of roughly 582%, not 400%.

• A 400% gain from ~752 would only reach ~3,760 — far short of the actual 5,048–5,132 peak.
• The actual rise was approximately 570–585% depending on the precise start date used within "early 1995."

This is a meaningful factual error. The dot-com Nasdaq rise is one of the most frequently cited and verifiable statistics in market history, and understating it by ~180 percentage points could undermine reader trust and the article's credibility.

Suggested fix: Replace:

"The Nasdaq Composite index rose about 400% from early 1995 to its peak in March 2000."

With:

"The Nasdaq Composite index rose approximately 580% from early 1995 to its peak in March 2000."

Or alternatively, anchor to a shorter window that supports a 400% claim:

"The Nasdaq Composite index more than quadrupled — rising over 400% — from the start of 1996 to its peak in March 2000." (Note: verify the exact 1996 starting value before using this version.)

The simpler and cleaner fix is to use the widely cited ~580% figure for the 1995–2000 window, which is historically accurate and consistent with published sources.

---

Notes on Passes

• Dividend yield article: S&P 500 historical yield range cited as 1.5–2.5% — accurate. Payout ratio benchmarks are reasonable educational ranges, appropriately framed as guides not rules.
• Federal Reserve article: Russell 1000 Growth ~29% decline and Russell 1000 Value ~8% decline for 2022 — both accurate. Fed rate-hiking cycle characterization is accurate.
• Market cap article: Fama-French size premium referenced correctly. Cap size ranges are standard approximations, appropriately hedged with "generally."
• Bonds guide: Bond mechanics, Treasury types, 2022 bond market losses — all accurate. Tax-equivalent yield formula is correct.
• Stock bubble article (aside from the flagged stat): Nasdaq 78% decline (peak-to-trough 2000–2002) ✅, S&P 500 57% decline (2007–2009) ✅, Bitcoin ~$69K peak November 2021 ✅, Bitcoin ~75% decline to November 2022 ✅, Shiller CAPE hitting 44 in late 1999 ✅, S&P 500 historical P/E range 15–20x ✅.

---

Sentinel QA — Batch 11 complete. 1 fix required before publishing.