Research Report Interpretation

Research Report Interpretation Skill

这个 skill 用于解读券商、卖方、机构、专家或投资者研究报告。它的目标不是复述研报，而是把一份报告拆成可验证 claim、隐含假设、预期变量、估值驱动和对 Mira thesis 的增量影响。

研报在 Mira 中默认是 sellside_and_expert_research，通常是 L3 secondary / signal。它可以帮助识别框架、预期差、变量优先级、估值方法和叙事变化，但不能替代公司披露、监管文件、官方数据、市场数据或可复算模型。

Use When

• 用户提供或指定一份券商研报、机构研报、rating change、target price update、initiation note、industry note、专家研究、投资者信或研究 PDF。
• 用户问“这篇研报怎么看 / 靠谱吗 / 有什么新东西 / 对 thesis 有什么影响”。
• 需要从研报中提取可复用方法、变量框架或预期差线索，但当前任务仍围绕某个研究对象，而不是纯方法论研究。
• 需要把研报结论与已有 Mira thesis、company filing、earnings package、consensus proxy 或市场定价做差异检查。

如果用户问的是“这个研究方法本身是否值得纳入 Mira”，优先进入 loops/methodology-research-loop.md。如果研报解读触发 thesis 状态变化，再 handoff 到 loops/thesis-update-loop.md 或 loops/event-delta-loop.md。

Required Inputs

• research_object: ticker、company、industry、macro asset 或 methodology object。
• market_scope
• time_boundary
• report_title
• provider_or_submitter
• author_or_team，如可得
• report_date 或明确的 source_gap
• report_type: initiation、update、rating_change、target_price_update、industry_note、thematic_note、expert_research、investor_letter、other
• access_route: public_on_demand、user_material、authorized_provider 或 transient_only
• license_scope
• storage_scope
• redistribution_allowed
• user_goal: summarize、challenge、extract_claims、compare_to_thesis、update_thesis、reverse_engineer_method
• completeness_status: full_report、excerpt、screenshot、summary_only、metadata_only

Required Source Types

• Report source or user material intake record.
• restricted_source_note when the report is paid, confidential, licensed, user-provided, expert-network, or otherwise restricted.
• At least one independent L1 / L2 / L5 source when a report claim is used for a durable conclusion.
• Existing Mira thesis package, evidence log or expectation map when the user asks for thesis impact.
• Consensus or estimate source, or explicit source_gap, when the interpretation depends on market expectation baseline.

Ingestion And Permission Gate

Before using a newly supplied report, run data/ingestion-layer.md.

Default treatment:

• Public report URL: ingestion_route=public_on_demand; cite metadata and short summaries only.
• User upload, screenshot, clipped PDF or exported note: ingestion_route=user_material; keep private unless user explicitly approves promotion.
• Licensed vendor or paid research: ingestion_route=authorized_provider or user_material; tracked artifacts may contain metadata, short compliant effect notes and claim categories, not raw report content.
• Unknown permission: storage_scope=transient_only or private; public_case_use=blocked.

Do not commit full paid reports, substantial excerpts, expert-network transcripts, or vendor raw data. Do not quote long passages. Extract claim-level summaries instead.

Analysis Flow

1. Report Metadata And Source Posture

Record:

• report identity, date, provider, author/team and source URL/path
• permission and storage boundary
• whether the report is complete or only a fragment
• whether it is company-specific, industry-wide, macro, thematic or method-focused
• stale boundary: report date, event covered, next earnings, next data release or target price/rating update

If report_date, permission, completeness or object identity is missing, keep the output at working_view and mark the gap.

2. Thesis Of The Report

Separate:

• headline conclusion
• core variable the author believes matters most
• time horizon of the view
• catalyst or revision path
• base case, bull case and bear case
• rating / target price / valuation output
• evidence the report itself cites
• what the report asks the market to change its mind about

Never treat rating, target price or author conviction as evidence by itself.

3. Claim Extraction

Extract claim-level records into report-claim-map.csv.

Each row should identify:

• claim_type: fact, reported_metric, guidance, target, forecast, assumption, interpretation, opinion, market_pricing, sentiment or derived_calculation
• source_speaker: sellside, buyside, expert, company, market, media or mira
• variable: revenue, margin, pricing, volume, capex, cash flow, multiple, risk premium, market share, demand, supply, regulation or other
• time_horizon: current, next_quarter, FY1, FY2, long_term or unknown
• evidence_cited_by_report
• independent_verification_status
• treatment: use_normally, attribute, monitor, needs_cross_check, source_gap, exclude

Facts and reported metrics require independent verification before they can support a durable Mira conclusion. Forecasts, assumptions, interpretations and opinions remain attributed to the report.

4. Expectation And Variant-Perception Bridge

Ask:

• Is the report describing consensus, challenging consensus, or updating consensus?
• Which variable is the expectation baseline: revenue, EPS, margin, FCF, capex, TAM, unit volume, ASP, multiple or risk premium?
• Does the report cite consensus provider/data, or is it using author estimates?
• Is the claimed edge from better facts, better interpretation, different time horizon, or different risk weighting?
• What would prove the author right or wrong?

If no reliable consensus proxy exists, write source_gap; do not replace consensus with a single analyst view, media tone or price action.

5. Valuation And Model Decomposition

If the report includes target price, rating, valuation multiple, DCF, SOTP or scenario math, decompose:

• forecast driver: revenue, margin, EPS, FCF, capex, share count, net cash/debt
• valuation anchor: P/E, EV/Sales, EV/EBITDA, EV/FCF, DCF, SOTP, NAV, replacement cost or other
• terminal assumptions and discount rate if available
• multiple change versus estimate change
• sensitivity: which input moves the conclusion most
• hidden assumption: margin normalization, utilization, terminal growth, TAM share, customer concentration, dilution or cost of capital

If Mira relies on these numbers for a conclusion, run skills/data-analysis-quality-gate/SKILL.md and record formulas or calculation_gap.

6. Evidence Cross-Check

Cross-check the report's material claims against:

• issuer primary disclosure or filing
• current or recent earnings package
• transcript / management Q&A where relevant
• market price, valuation and estimate data
• peer disclosure or industry data
• previous Mira evidence log or expectation map

Classify each material claim:

• confirmed: independently supported by higher-weight evidence
• plausible_unverified: directionally plausible but not yet confirmed
• contested: contradicted or weakened by other evidence
• opinion_only: useful framing, not evidence
• source_gap: cannot be checked with available sources

7. Bias, Incentive And Framing Check

Check for:

• rating or target-price anchoring
• model-driven precision without source detail
• selective peer set or date window
• company-access bias
• event-chasing after price movement
• bull-case assumptions embedded in base case
• TAM-to-revenue leap
• channel-check anecdote presented as broad demand fact
• valuation multiple change without explicit risk-premium or growth rationale

Bias check does not reject the report automatically. It determines treatment and confidence.