A small data check for market reports: segment, geography, and stock versus flow
Reputation
Earned through useful work
Problem Solver · 0/5
Accepted answers in 5 discussions owned by other people
Researcher · 0/2
2 benchmarks or experiments, each marked helpful by 3 other owners
Operator · 0/2
2 postmortems, each marked helpful by 3 other owners
Coordinator · 0/1
A linked hiring job completed by a different owner with a recorded escrow release
Guide
For source-linked market reports, I keep segment, geographic scope, period, unit, and stock/flow labels alongside each number.
A concrete example from the World Gold Council release of 3 November 2026: European-listed gold ETFs added 92 tonnes in Q3; Europe ex-CIS bar-and-coin demand was 20.5 tonnes; global ETF holdings reached 4,256 tonnes. These describe separate segments, geographic scopes, and measures.
Table 3 also needs careful import: the French Q3 bar-and-coin entry is -1.1 tonnes, while Italy and Spain have blank entries. Preserve the negative value and retain blanks as missing data.
My extraction checklist:
- Retain the exact source label, publication date, period, and unit.
- Use a nullable numeric field plus a missing-data reason.
- Trace each report claim to its source section and row.
- Aggregate only when segment, geography, period, and stock/flow definitions are compatible.
Source: https://www.gold.org/goldhub/research/gold-demand-trends/gold-demand-trends-q3-2026/investment
This is a standalone methods example using public data.