Corrections Log
This corrections log lists the factual corrections made to this site since the log began on 22 September 2026: the date it was corrected, the page, what the page said, and what it says now. Most were found by the site's own recompute checks rather than by readers.
How this log works
When a figure, a worked example or a claim on this site turns out to be wrong, the page is fixed and the fix is listed here. Each row gives the date the correction went live, the page, what it said before, and what it says now. Spelling, wording and layout changes are not listed; anything that changed a number, a calculation or a factual claim is.
Most of the errors below were caught by the site’s own checks: every worked example is recomputed by a script before a chart of it is drawn, and a chart cannot be drawn from a number that does not recompute. That process is described in the editorial policy.
Found an error? Leave a comment on any of my YouTube videos naming the page. I read them, and a confirmed error is fixed and added here.
Corrections
23 September 2026
| Page | What was wrong | What it says now |
|---|---|---|
| Original research | The video study was said to cover “10,608 channels”. That count mixed channel IDs (present on only 5,849 of the 24,971 rows) with channel names, so a channel seen both with and without an ID was counted twice. | 9,458 channels, counted by channel name on every row, the same way every topic page counts. |
| Every page (the byline) | The byline printed a raw timestamp, “Reviewed 2026-09-06 00:00:00 +0000 UTC”, on every page, and the date given to search engines as “last modified” was the same stored string, not the date the text last changed. | The byline shows “Published” and “Updated” as plain dates, and “Updated” moves only when the page’s text actually changes (a stored fingerprint of each page’s text is compared at every build). |
22 September 2026: worked examples that did not recompute
Found while drawing each page’s worked example as a figure: the drawing is generated from the numbers and checked against the page, and these did not match.
| Page | What was wrong | What it says now |
|---|---|---|
| Crypto DCA calculator | The average price paid was computed as the plain average of the prices, which is not what dollar-cost averaging pays. The example showed an average of 37,500, an end value of 3,120 (+20%), and for the V-shaped path 21,600, 3,616 and +39.1%. | The average is total dollars divided by total coins bought: 36,975, end value 3,164 (+21.7%); V-shaped path 21,754, 3,586 and +37.9%. The calculator itself uses the corrected formula. |
| How to handle a losing streak | At a 55% hit rate over 100 trades, a run of 6 losses was given a 54.71% chance (“more likely than not”), a run of 8 14.49% and a run of 10 3.05%. | Counted exactly, the same way as the losing-streak calculator: 36.29% (“about one time in three”), 8.37% and 1.71%. |
| Fractional shares | Buying whole shares only, about $100 was said to sit uninvested on average. | About $300 sits uninvested on average ($200 a month into a $640 share). |
| How to calculate portfolio beta | After holding A doubles, the portfolio beta was given as about 1.09. | About 1.06. |
| Concentration ratio | The Herfindahl example gave Market X a score of around 1,700. | About 1,620 if the twenty small firms are equal: 4 x 20 squared + 20 x 1 squared = 1,620. |
| Convenience yield | The example implied a convenience yield of “about 10”. | About 7 a barrel, roughly 9% of spot (83 - 76 = 7). |
| Active risk | The gap between a closet indexer and an index tracker was “roughly 15 percentage points”. | About 14 (20.2 - 5.8 = 14.4). |
| Gross profit | With revenue up 20% and expenses up 5%, the low-margin company’s operating income was said to rise to 58. | About 46 (1,200 x 24% - 241.5 = 46.5). |
| Trial balance | Four year-end adjustments were said to cut operating profit to 100, “a third” of it. | 56, nearly two thirds of it gone (150 - 45 - 30 - 12 - 7 = 56). |
| Intermarket sweep order | Venues C and D were each said to show 1,000 shares, which made the displayed total 2,600 against a 2,000-share order. | 700 each, so the four venues display exactly the 2,000 the order sweeps. |
| Market manipulation | Being stopped out and buying back a $10,000 position quoted 0.2% wide was said to cost $40. | About $20, one full spread, as the site counts a round trip everywhere else. |
| Penny stock | The spread was said to be paid on entry and again on exit. | A round trip gives up one full spread (10% at 0.50 bid, 0.55 ask), which matches the page’s next paragraph. |
| Trading the point of control | 43 against 35 on fifty observations was “about one and a half standard errors apart”. | A little under two standard errors apart (0.86 against 0.70 on 50). |
| Avalanche vs snowball | The saving was “about 4.9% of the interest”. | About 5% (140 / 2,890 = 4.8% and 140 / 2,750 = 5.1%, so neither figure is 4.9% exactly). |
22 September 2026: video counts recounted site-wide
Pages quote how many videos in the 24,971-video study name a subject in their title. Until 22 September the count matched raw text, so “ira” was counted inside “miracle” and “art” inside “chart”. Every count was recomputed with one method (whole words, plurals included), which changed 1,933 figures on 775 pages. Most moved slightly. These are the ones where a comparison the page drew from them was wrong:
| Page | What was wrong | What it says now |
|---|---|---|
| CCI vs MACD | “473 videos on one and 448 on the other”: almost identical coverage. | 471 against 67: seven times the coverage for MACD, and more than three times the audience per video for the commodity channel index. |
| Breaker block vs support and resistance | 22 against 145 videos: “seven times the coverage and nearly three times the audience”. | 22 against 275: twelve times the coverage and nearly twice the audience. |
| CHoCH vs MSS | 40 against 10 videos: a quarter of the coverage and “roughly ten times the audience per video”. | 100 against 12: an eighth of the coverage and roughly four and a half times the audience per video. |
| Day trading vs momentum trading | 1,021 against 82 videos: “nearly three times the audience”. | 960 against 82: two and a half times the audience. |
Pages that had said no videos existed on a subject now give a positive, recounted figure instead, since a title search that finds nothing proves little about a subject.
What is not in this log
Changes that do not alter a fact: rewording, spelling (the site moved to US spelling throughout on 22 September), new images, new sections and layout. Each page’s “Updated” date shows when its text last changed, and the methodology page explains how figures are sourced.
Related
How pages are researched, checked, reviewed and corrected is set out in the editorial policy. The datasets that every recount above was run against are on the research page, and who is accountable for all of it is on the about page.
This page is educational, not financial advice. Test every idea on your own charts before risking money.