Summary
The issuer-relevance gate rejects coverage of the issuer's own market. Every ticker in the 2026-08-11 batch lost material to it, and it is unchanged from the August 10 write-up where it was already the largest coverage cost.
| Ticker |
Rejected |
Why it is the issuer's market |
| DSSA |
Global coal price ×3, Kaltim's 114Mt shortfall, INDEF on RKAB revision |
Coal price and quota are the issuer's entire P&L |
| AGRO |
"Perang Bunga Bank Digital", "Waspada Bunga Tinggi Bank Digital" |
Bank Raya is a digital bank; this is its funding cost |
| ANTM |
INCO's forecast earnings jump, Vale's Tanamalia partner, downstreaming policy |
INCO is the closest listed nickel peer |
| BBCA |
"Survei BI: Harga Properti Residensial Masih Naik" |
BCA is a top mortgage lender |
| MORA |
APJII ×2, "AI Factory Butuh Rp 895 Triliun" |
Moratelindo is an APJII ISP and a data-centre operator |
| TLKM |
Mitratel's H1 net profit of Rp1.11T |
Mitratel is Telkom's own listed subsidiary |
The new evidence: the gate is not deterministic within a single batch
| Ticker |
Story |
Accepted |
Rejected |
| TLKM |
Indosat Zankore launch |
12× at 0.60 |
1× |
| AGRO |
POJK 8/2026 pindar reporting |
3× at 1.00 |
2× |
| DSSA |
Bahlil RKAB royalty priority |
2× at 0.80 |
1× |
| AMAN |
i-Sentra Lamongan |
1× at 0.80 (shipped) |
1× (Antara's version) |
| MORA vs TLKM |
APJII internet quality |
TLKM, 0.80 industryPulse |
MORA, rejected |
The MORA/TLKM split is the most diagnostic: identical article, same batch, opposite verdicts for two telecom issuers, where the ISP association sits closer to Moratelindo than to Telkom. That points at issuer-context injection rather than at the article, and it means alias and competitor lists alone will not stabilise this.
Scope
- In scope: per-ticker subsidiary and brand aliases, per-ticker named-competitor lists, and a commodity-to-issuer mapping derived from
business_activity and sub_industry, all stored as data rather than code.
- Out of scope: prompt rewording, until a baseline exists.
Acceptance criteria
Notes
Recurs from item 5 of reviews/2026-08-10/IMPROVEMENTS.md; the mechanism analysis there still stands, including MARKET_ANCHOR_OVERRIDE_MIN and the issuerNamedInTitle fallback.
The baseline requirement is not process for its own sake: re-running article-analysis on unchanged code moves 15–25% of articles between sections, so a single before-and-after run cannot distinguish a real gain from noise. getDataSourcesForTicker already loads profile.competitors and issuerAliases, so the data plumbing exists on the generation side and needs mirroring into classification.
Summary
The issuer-relevance gate rejects coverage of the issuer's own market. Every ticker in the 2026-08-11 batch lost material to it, and it is unchanged from the August 10 write-up where it was already the largest coverage cost.
The new evidence: the gate is not deterministic within a single batch
industryPulseThe MORA/TLKM split is the most diagnostic: identical article, same batch, opposite verdicts for two telecom issuers, where the ISP association sits closer to Moratelindo than to Telkom. That points at issuer-context injection rather than at the article, and it means alias and competitor lists alone will not stabilise this.
Scope
business_activityandsub_industry, all stored as data rather than code.Acceptance criteria
Notes
Recurs from item 5 of
reviews/2026-08-10/IMPROVEMENTS.md; the mechanism analysis there still stands, includingMARKET_ANCHOR_OVERRIDE_MINand theissuerNamedInTitlefallback.The baseline requirement is not process for its own sake: re-running article-analysis on unchanged code moves 15–25% of articles between sections, so a single before-and-after run cannot distinguish a real gain from noise.
getDataSourcesForTickeralready loadsprofile.competitorsandissuerAliases, so the data plumbing exists on the generation side and needs mirroring into classification.