Evidence Before Opinion
Material financial claims should be supported by credible evidence and the rules that actually apply.
Our Editorial Promise
Standards designed to make financial analysis worth trusting.
Every FMB article should show the evidence, preserve the context, and resist incentives that could distort the conclusion.
Context Over Certainty
Assumptions, limitations, tradeoffs, and circumstances that could change the answer should remain visible.
Clarity Over Hype
Headlines and conclusions should reflect the analysis—not manufactured urgency, fear, or sensational claims.
Our Research Standard
Start with the strongest evidence available.
The right source depends on the claim. FMB generally gives the greatest weight to information closest to the rule, data, or evidence being examined.
Primary & Official Sources
Laws, regulations, government guidance, agency publications, official datasets, plan documents, and other first-party materials.
IRS · SEC · DOL · Federal Reserve · Official filingsResearch & Established Institutions
Peer-reviewed research, academic studies, professional organizations, and established institutions with transparent methods.
Academic research · Professional bodies · Institutional analysisReputable Secondary Analysis
High-quality reporting, technical explanations, and industry analysis used to add context or help interpret stronger underlying sources.
Established publications · Technical commentary · Industry researchReader stories, surveys, and public discussions can surface useful questions, but they are not treated as proof of a universal financial claim.
How Content Is Reviewed
A consistent process from question to publication.
The depth of review changes with the complexity of the topic, but the core sequence stays the same.
-
1
Research
Gather relevant primary evidence and credible supporting sources.
-
2
Analyze
Evaluate the financial implications, assumptions, tradeoffs, and exceptions.
-
3
Verify
Check material facts, calculations, dates, limits, citations, and logic.
-
4
Publish
Present the conclusion with appropriate context, limitations, and disclosures.
-
5
Update
Revisit important content when rules, data, evidence, or assumptions materially change.
Editorial Independence
Our conclusions aren't for sale.
Revenue can support FMB without controlling FMB. Commercial relationships may be disclosed, but they do not purchase editorial outcomes.
What commercial partners cannot buy
A guaranteed positive verdict or recommendation
Removal of material risks, limitations, or competing options
Suppression of an evidence-supported correction
Undisclosed promotion presented as independent analysis
What This Means for Readers
A financial conclusion should be understandable, traceable, and useful.
FMB editorial standards are designed to help readers distinguish a persuasive financial claim from a well-supported conclusion. Every analysis should make it possible to understand what was examined, which evidence was used, what the result depends on, and where reasonable uncertainty remains.
Commitment 01
Show the reasoning.
Readers should not be asked to trust a conclusion merely because it sounds confident or comes from someone with credentials.
- Define the exact claim being examined
- Identify the rules and evidence used
- Explain how the evidence supports the conclusion
Commitment 02
Show the limits.
Financial answers can change with income, taxes, timing, location, risk, behavior, and a household’s broader priorities.
- Separate known facts from estimates
- Identify assumptions capable of changing the outcome
- Avoid presenting a conditional result as a universal rule
Commitment 03
Remain accountable.
Publication does not make an analysis permanently correct. Material changes, errors, and better evidence should be addressed.
- Display relevant publication and update dates
- Correct material errors clearly and promptly
- Reassess conclusions when the underlying answer changes
Corrections & Accountability
When something changes, we update it.
Financial rules, limits, products, data, and evidence change. When FMB identifies a material error or outdated conclusion, the content is reviewed and the appropriate correction or update is made.
What may trigger a review
- A law, regulation, tax limit, or official guidance changes.
- New data or stronger evidence materially changes the context.
- A factual, calculation, citation, or interpretation issue is identified.
What readers can expect
- Material errors are corrected rather than knowingly left in place.
- Meaningful updates may include a revised date or explanatory note.
- Commercial relationships do not prevent an evidence-supported correction.
Important Boundaries
Financial education, not individualized advice.
FMB explains financial concepts, evidence, tradeoffs, and illustrative scenarios. It cannot evaluate every fact relevant to an individual reader, and examples should not be treated as personalized professional advice.
General education
Articles and resources are designed to inform decisions, not make them for a specific reader.
Illustrative examples
Calculations and scenarios depend on stated assumptions and may not reflect your complete circumstances.
No professional-client relationship
Reading, subscribing, using a tool, or contacting FMB does not create an accountant, adviser, attorney, fiduciary, or other professional-client relationship.