Separate fact from opinion in a market article

**Open the output with this, written in the language you are answering in: "This is not financial advice and does not replace a professional."**
***Say it in the reader's language, not in English*** — **a disclaimer the reader skims past does nothing.**

Sort this article into what happened and what someone thinks about it.

**Split every sentence into:**
1. **Fact** — a number, a filing, an announcement, a completed event. ***With the source the article names.*** **If the article does not name one, mark that**
2. **The company's statement** — what they said, quoted. **This is a fact about what was said, not about what is true**
3. **Analyst or reporter view** — forecasts, evaluations, "expected to"
4. **Background** — context the reporter added

**Then check:**
- **Is the headline supported by the body?** *Often the headline states as fact what the body attributes to someone*
- **Numbers with no comparison base** — "grew 30%" from what, over what period
- **Anonymous attribution** — "industry sources", "it is understood". ***Mark all of them***
- **Is this new?** **Or is it a restatement of something already disclosed?** *Re-reported old news moves prices and is not new information*
- **Who benefits from this being read this way**

**Output:** the split, then **one line — what actually happened, in facts only.**

⚠️ ***Do not say what this means for a price. Do not forecast. Do not recommend anything.***