Author: admin

Last month, tech billionaire Elon Musk launched Grokipedia, an AI-powered platform, to rival online encyclopedia Wikipedia.

“Grokipedia will exceed Wikipedia by several orders of magnitude in breadth, depth and accuracy,” Musk posted on X the day after his site went live on October 27.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

In the age of generative artificial intelligence and AI-assisted search engines, Wikipedia remains an information repository authored by humans.

Grokipedia will exceed Wikipedia by several orders of magnitude in breadth, depth and accuracy https://t.co/Nt4M6vqEZu

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 28, 2025

Yet PolitiFact found Grokipedia’s articles are often almost entirely lifted from Wikipedia. And when the entries differ, Grokipedia’s information quality and sourcing are problematic and error-prone, making it a less reliable research tool.

Musk said on an October 31 episode of the “All-In” tech and business podcast that his team instructed his company’s chatbot, Grok, to go through the top 1 million Wikipedia articles and then “add, modify and delete”.

“So that means research the rest of the internet, whatever is publicly available, and correct the Wikipedia articles, fix mistakes, but also add a lot more context,” he said on the podcast.

Grokipedia articles often contain the text “Fact-checked by Grok“.

PolitiFact reviewed Grokipedia articles and found that when they include language that’s different from what appeared on Wikipedia, the new content:

• Is not supported by citations;
• Does not provide references; or
• Introduces misleading or opinionated claims.

Grokipedia often also removes context from its articles.

A sample of Grokipedia’s 885,279 articles reveals they are subject to a similar AI-related phenomenon we first saw in May, prior to the tool’s unveiling. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr then released a Make America Healthy Again report that contained several erroneous citations, including crediting sources that did not exist.

Joseph Reagle, Northeastern University associate professor of communication studies, said Grokipedia misunderstands Wikipedia’s and AI’s strengths.

“Wikipedia’s merits are that it is the result of a community of thousands of people diligently working to create high-quality content,” Reagle said, while AI is useful when it’s interactive and accepts pushback.

Hundreds of thousands of volunteers worldwide contribute content to Wikipedia, guided by the platform’s editorial policies and guidelines.

The Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit that operates Wikipedia, is aware of Grokipedia’s copying problem.

“Even Grokipedia needs Wikipedia to exist,” said Selena Decklemann, chief product and technology officer at the Wikimedia Foundation, in a statement to PolitiFact. “Wikipedia’s content is open source by design; we expect it will be used in good faith to educate. This issue is especially urgent as platforms like Grokipedia increasingly draw on our articles, selectively extracting content – written by thousands of volunteers – and filtering it through opaque and unaccountable algorithms.”

Entries are nearly identical, except for wrong or missing references

We looked at Grokipedia articles covering various topics including science, music and economics. In many articles we reviewed, Grokipedia links to Wikipedia articles with this statement: “The content is adapted from Wikipedia, licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License.”

That means Wikipedia’s licensing allows Grokipedia to copy, redistribute and adapt the content with an attribution. It also requires Grokipedia to give the same permissions for its adapted content. (There are some articles that don’t copy from Wikipedia and don’t feature this statement, such as the article for Joseph Stalin.)

Grokipedia’s article structure is similar to Wikipedia’s, which features reference lists at the bottom. But in some instances, Grokipedia copies Wikipedia articles while omitting their citations and reference lists.

Grokipedia’s article for “Monday,” for example, includes information about the day of the week’s etymology, related religious observances and cultural references. But it contains no citations other than to say it was adapted from Wikipedia.

The Grokipedia article was a 96 percent match of Wikipedia’s “Monday” article, according to Copyscape, a plagiarism checker. The Wikipedia article, however, listed 22 references.

Sometimes Grokipedia botches citations. In the entry for “culminating point,” Grokipedia cited the wrong book chapter in which military theorist Carl von Clausewitz introduced the concept. The rest of the article text is copied from Wikipedia.

One article that differs significantly from its Wikipedia counterpart is the entry for “Hello”, a song by British singer Adele. Multiple items in the Grokipedia reference list are Instagram reels that provide secondhand, unattributed information and commentary. Wikipedia’s standards say such user-generated content is “generally unacceptable as sources”.

In the entry for the Canadian singer Feist, Grokipedia copied from Wikipedia but added a line saying her father died in May 2021. The citation led to Vice’s 2017 ranking of the 60 best Canadian indie rock songs, an article that doesn’t mention the death of Feist’s father, who was still alive that year.

Grokipedia lacks transparency on correcting errors

PolitiFact found at least one instance when Grokipedia introduced misleading information.

The Grokipedia and Wikipedia articles for “Nobel Prize in Physics” are largely the same, but one sentence Grokipedia added said, “Physics is traditionally the first award presented in the Nobel Prize ceremony.” It did not provide a citation, and it appears to be wrong: In at least the past few years, the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine was awarded first.

“Unlike Grokipedia, which relies on rapid AI-generated content with limited transparency and oversight, Wikipedia’s processes are open to public review and rigorously document the sources behind every article,” Decklemann said.

Wikipedia allows anyone to contribute and edit articles, and ensures transparency by making the history of an article viewable. Some volunteers have advanced permissions and are equipped to address negative behaviour on the platform.

However, Wikipedia has come under scrutiny after an editor blocked changes to an article on the Gaza genocide page.

On Grokipedia, registered users can suggest edits to published articles. But Grokipedia has no feature allowing readers to view what edits have been made. It is unclear what happens when there are errors – whether a human or Grok corrects them, how those changes are deliberated, and how long it takes to update pages.

PolitiFact Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report.

While some investors are already well versed in financial metrics (hat tip), this article is for those who would like to learn about Return On Equity (ROE) and why it is important. By way of learning-by-doing, we’ll look at ROE to gain a better understanding of YSX Tech. Co., Ltd (NASDAQ:YSXT).

Return on equity or ROE is a key measure used to assess how efficiently a company’s management is utilizing the company’s capital. Simply put, it is used to assess the profitability of a company in relation to its equity capital.

AI is about to change healthcare. These 20 stocks are working on everything from early diagnostics to drug discovery. The best part – they are all under $10bn in marketcap – there is still time to get in early.

ROE can be calculated by using the formula:

Return on Equity = Net Profit (from continuing operations) ÷ Shareholders’ Equity

So, based on the above formula, the ROE for YSX Tech is:

15% = US$4.0m ÷ US$28m (Based on the trailing twelve months to March 2025).

The ‘return’ is the amount earned after tax over the last twelve months. Another way to think of that is that for every $1 worth of equity, the company was able to earn $0.15 in profit.

View our latest analysis for YSX Tech

Arguably the easiest way to assess company’s ROE is to compare it with the average in its industry. However, this method is only useful as a rough check, because companies do differ quite a bit within the same industry classification. You can see in the graphic below that YSX Tech has an ROE that is fairly close to the average for the Consumer Services industry (17%).

So while the ROE is not exceptional, at least its acceptable. While at least the ROE is not lower than the industry, its still worth checking what role the company’s debt plays as high debt levels relative to equity may also make the ROE appear high. If a company takes on too much debt, it is at higher risk of defaulting on interest payments. You can see the 3 risks we have identified for YSX Tech by visiting our risks dashboard for free on our platform here.

Companies usually need to invest money to grow their profits. That cash can come from retained earnings, issuing new shares (equity), or debt. In the first and second cases, the ROE will reflect this use of cash for investment in the business. In the latter case, the use of debt will improve the returns, but will not change the equity. In this manner the use of debt will boost ROE, even though the core economics of the business stay the same.

Although YSX Tech does use debt, its debt to equity ratio of 0.22 is still low. The combination of modest debt and a very respectable ROE suggests this is a business worth watching. Judicious use of debt to improve returns can certainly be a good thing, although it does elevate risk slightly and reduce future optionality.

Return on equity is useful for comparing the quality of different businesses. Companies that can achieve high returns on equity without too much debt are generally of good quality. If two companies have around the same level of debt to equity, and one has a higher ROE, I’d generally prefer the one with higher ROE.

Having said that, while ROE is a useful indicator of business quality, you’ll have to look at a whole range of factors to determine the right price to buy a stock. It is important to consider other factors, such as future profit growth — and how much investment is required going forward. You can see how the company has grow in the past by looking at this FREE detailed graph of past earnings, revenue and cash flow.

Of course YSX Tech may not be the best stock to buy. So you may wish to see this free collection of other companies that have high ROE and low debt.

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com.

This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.

As you might know, Vinci Compass Investments Ltd. (NASDAQ:VINP) last week released its latest quarterly, and things did not turn out so great for shareholders. Results showed a clear earnings miss, with R$241m revenue coming in 4.4% lower than what the analystsexpected. Statutory earnings per share (EPS) of R$0.74 missed the mark badly, arriving some 47% below what was expected. The analysts typically update their forecasts at each earnings report, and we can judge from their estimates whether their view of the company has changed or if there are any new concerns to be aware of. With this in mind, we’ve gathered the latest statutory forecasts to see what the analysts are expecting for next year.

We’ve found 21 US stocks that are forecast to pay a dividend yield of over 6% next year. See the full list for free.

Following the latest results, Vinci Compass Investments’ five analysts are now forecasting revenues of R$1.14b in 2026. This would be a notable 19% improvement in revenue compared to the last 12 months. Statutory earnings per share are predicted to soar 105% to R$5.67. Yet prior to the latest earnings, the analysts had been anticipated revenues of R$1.14b and earnings per share (EPS) of R$4.84 in 2026. Although the revenue estimates have not really changed, we can see there’s been a decent improvement in earnings per share expectations, suggesting that the analysts have become more bullish after the latest result.

Check out our latest analysis for Vinci Compass Investments

The consensus price target was unchanged at US$13.39, implying that the improved earnings outlook is not expected to have a long term impact on value creation for shareholders. It could also be instructive to look at the range of analyst estimates, to evaluate how different the outlier opinions are from the mean. Currently, the most bullish analyst values Vinci Compass Investments at US$14.43 per share, while the most bearish prices it at US$11.96. With such a narrow range of valuations, the analysts apparently share similar views on what they think the business is worth.

Of course, another way to look at these forecasts is to place them into context against the industry itself. The period to the end of 2026 brings more of the same, according to the analysts, with revenue forecast to display 15% growth on an annualised basis. That is in line with its 16% annual growth over the past five years. By contrast, our data suggests that other companies (with analyst coverage) in a similar industry are forecast to see their revenues grow 6.9% per year. So it’s pretty clear that Vinci Compass Investments is forecast to grow substantially faster than its industry.

The biggest takeaway for us is the consensus earnings per share upgrade, which suggests a clear improvement in sentiment around Vinci Compass Investments’ earnings potential next year. Happily, there were no major changes to revenue forecasts, with the business still expected to grow faster than the wider industry. The consensus price target held steady at US$13.39, with the latest estimates not enough to have an impact on their price targets.

With that said, the long-term trajectory of the company’s earnings is a lot more important than next year. We have forecasts for Vinci Compass Investments going out to 2027, and you can see them free on our platform here.

And what about risks? Every company has them, and we’ve spotted 4 warning signs for Vinci Compass Investments (of which 1 is a bit concerning!) you should know about.

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com.

This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.