The most useless commentary simply restates the chart. Sales were up in March as illustrated above. The reader is not an idiot. The commentary should provide something more than what is evident to the viewers of the chart. For example, the commentary could describe how the sales rise occurred from one account, or that sales had declined for the previous three months.
It’s smart to show your work, but this has a lot of repetition, which diminishes the value. The same person does the same thing each month, and they have to abide by the same house style on formatting and word choice.
Good commentary is disciplined with comparisons. Vs last month, vs last year vs plan: one number three different interpretations, and commentary that leaves basis to compare to find the best interpretation gets seen easily by those following the series.
This commentary paraphrases the chart in an authoritative manner and adds a guess to conclude the paragraph. Growth was caused by greater customer engagement. Nothing in the data supports that. Once the sentence is next to the chart, people quote it as if that was the case.
We agree on the rules once: how we compare, how much we round, what we consider to be material, and the length of each note. Then the writer just needs the latest data and a quick description of anything out of the ordinary to keep this regular task fairly simple to carry out.
Each note provides the movement, the potential cause (where it is known), and a plain statement where it is not. When a number appears to be unusual as a result of how it was measured rather than what happened, the commentary states that as well, which prevents a data artifact from becoming a strategy.
One rate, whatever the format: $10 per 100 words. You are paying for the writer’s time and judgement, so the price scales with the words rather than with a package tier.
| Typical data commentary | Words | Writing | Fee (1%) | You pay |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Short | 800 | $80 | $0.80 | $80.80 |
| Standard | 1,500 | $150 | $1.50 | $151.50 |
| In-depth | 2,500 | $250 | $2.50 | $252.50 |
The writer receives 100% of the writing price. Our 1% fee is added on top of it, and 0.5% is donated to tree planting. Full pricing breakdown.
Primary sources wherever they exist — your own data, published research, filings, regulator and industry figures — with secondary reporting used only where nothing better is available. Everything used is listed with links so you can check it.
We write the analysis, label what each figure shows and describe the charts your designer should build, including the takeaway each one has to land. We do not produce finished graphics, so tell us if you need the underlying numbers laid out for a designer.
Yes. Send three or four previous periods and the writer works out the rules you have been following, including the ones nobody ever wrote down. Matching an established voice across a recurring series is ordinary work for a writer.
One hundred words, which covers a couple of chart notes. Most clients batch a month of comments into one order as it tends to be more consistent. Ten briefs also take less of your time in aggregate as a single brief covering ten notes.
Completely. Copyright transfers to you on delivery, with no attribution requirement and no licence back to us. Nothing written for you is resold, repurposed or republished.
Reviews from completed, paid orders in this category.
We cater toward detailed donors. Our writer double-checked a participation figure that looked high, and we found that we double counted a cohort. The corrected number with a report footnote explaining how we found the error was sent out. The footnote we included helped us gain more trust than putting out a good number would have.
Section one states the argument in its second paragraph. Every other whitepaper I have commissioned has spent a page and a half discussing the significance of the topic. This one assumes the reader knows and respects them.
We asked if we could round the figure and be allowed to say that it was approximately ninety percent. The writer came back and said that the data showed eighty-six percent, and asked if we wanted to publish eighty-six percent or tell the story of the gap. We published eighty-six percent. That was the best use of our budget.
We do not ask you to take the no-AI promise on trust. Each draft is run through these platforms and the reports are attached to your delivery email.
Originality.aiAI detection + plagiarism
GPTZeroAI detection
TurnitinAI detection + similarity
CopyleaksAI detection + plagiarism
Winston AIAI detection
ZeroGPTAI detection
SaplingAI detection
Content at ScaleAI detection
Send the brief, get a human draft back within 3 days. No account, no subscription, no AI.
$10 per 100 words · all of it to the writer · 0.5% to trees