Celadon turns a holding, theme, or regulatory question into a cited brief with a counter-thesis, confidence by dimension, and clear what-to-watch triggers. Built for firms running custom portfolios, direct indexing, and recurring research needs.
Revenue guidance revised upward to $4.2B for FY25, driven by 34% growth in enterprise subscriptions.
Verified · 10-K Filing, p. 47 · High confidence
Management cites "favorable regulatory environment" but Q3 risk disclosures reference two pending enforcement actions.
Conflict detected · Earnings transcript vs. 10-Q Risk Factors ·
EBITDA margin expanded 280bps YoY to 31.7%, consistent with three-year trendline and independent broker estimates.
Cross-validated · Supplemental Table 4 + CapIQ consensus ·
Give Celadon one live question your team is already working on. If the brief is good enough to forward, the value is obvious. If it isn't, you'll know in minutes.
Run a live research question →See how Celadon handles a holding review, a regulatory-impact question, and a theme brief.
See how Celadon frames a holding review with cited findings, a visible counterview, and what to watch next.
See how Celadon separates what is enacted, what is proposed, and what remains uncertain.
See how Celadon turns a strategic question into a structured brief with evidence, opposing arguments, and decision triggers.
Coverage gap
Undercovered names still need good briefs. When a holding has thin or no sell-side coverage, your team still has to decide, document, and revisit the view.
Methodology
Every source scored on authority, recency, independence, and incentive risk. Full provenance in every report.
Southeast Asia
Middle East & Africa
Latin America
Four capabilities. One auditable workflow.
Turn a live question into a structured memo with cited findings, a usable summary, and an evidence trail your team can inspect.
Celadon does not stop at the first answer. It deliberately searches for contradiction and rates the counterview before the brief is finalized.
Confidence is shown by dimension so your team can see whether the weak point is the evidence, the reasoning, the regime, or the scope of the claim.
Watch items are explicit and actionable, so the next review starts from the prior reasoning instead of from scratch.
Use your existing tools for market data and coverage. Use Celadon for the cited research artifact your team can actually defend.
Run a live research question