// monsa vs seeking alpha
Seeking Alpha and Monsa answer different questions.
Seeking Alpha is other people's opinions and a lot of data. Monsa is your own criteria, applied without an opinion.
What Seeking Alpha is for
Articles, author ratings, quant grades, earnings coverage and a large body of commentary on individual names.
Monsa holds the rules you wrote down and checks your holdings against them every night.
The two pull in useful opposite directions. Reading arguments is how a thesis gets formed and also how it gets talked out of shape - the article that arrives when a stock is down is the one that tells you why it is fine. Monsa never has an opinion about a company; it only has the rules you set before you were invested in being right.
Side by side
| What you want to do | Seeking Alpha | Monsa |
|---|---|---|
| Read a case for or against a company | The reason it exists. | Never. Monsa states no view on any company. |
| Get a rating on a stock | Author ratings and quant grades. | A fit score against your rules, which is not a rating of the company. |
| Check a holding against what you required of it | Not what it does. | The whole product. |
When you do not need Monsa
If you want to be told what somebody thinks about a stock, Monsa is the wrong tool and will stay that way.
Monsa is also not a broker, does not place trades, and never says what to buy or sell. The other comparisons say the same thing about different tools, and a spreadsheet gets further than most people expect.
Rules written down while you still remember why you bought something survive the moment the price argues with you.