stock-peer-comparison-review

# Stock Peer Comparison Review ## Purpose Most single-stock analyses fall into one of two failure modes: 1. **Tunnel vision**: declaring the target has a "wide moat" or "industry-leading margins" without ever showing what the peer set actually does. 2. **Peer-set selection bias**: comparing only against weaker peers to flatter the target. This worker fixes both. It loads a fixed 12-item ratio panel, computes the target and each peer on the same definition, and surfaces the rank position. The Industry and Business workers can claim "Azure is gaining share" — this worker reports the ratios that either confirm or contradict the claim independent of narrative. The output is a small, dense, rank-ordered comparison table. It is **not a recommendation**; it is the independent data the orchestrator uses to validate the moat and market-share claims of other workers. ## When To Use - Orchestrator dispatches in Standard or Strict depth. - User explicitly asks "how does X compare to peers". - A specific competitive claim ("losing share", "best-in-class margins") needs independent verification. ## When NOT To Use - Lite depth (orchestrator skips this worker to save tokens). - Companies with no comparable peers (rare, but e.g., single-issuer ADRs, novel asset classes). - Sector ETFs or funds (compose peer index instead). ## Mandatory Gates ### 1) Peer Set Validation Gate Must use 2–4 peers identified by the orchestrator (typically from the 10-K Item 1 Competition section + WebSe...