The Hype Index
Subscribe free
Run it yourself

Score the claim in front of you.

The same five components we use on every edition, applied to whatever statistic is sitting in your board packet. Nothing is sent anywhere. It runs in your browser and we never see it.

Source qualityPeer reviewed, preprint, self-published report, vendor material, or press release.
10/ 20
Peer reviewedPress release
Sample and methodSample size, how subjects were selected, and whether the underlying data is available.
10/ 20
Large, random, data publishedTiny or self-selected
IndependenceDoes the publisher sell the solution its own finding recommends.
10/ 20
No commercial interestPublisher sells the fix
ReplicationHas anyone independently reproduced it with a comparable method.
10/ 20
Independently reproducedNever reproduced
DriftHow far the popular use of the claim sits from what the source actually says.
10/ 20
Used exactly as measuredUsed far outside its scope
50Hype Index
Half True
Board-ready line

How to answer each one

Source quality

Ask what the artifact actually is. A peer-reviewed paper, a regulatory filing, and a vendor deck are three different objects and only one was reviewed by people with an incentive to find problems. Score low for peer review, high for marketing material. If nobody in the room can name the source at all, score it 20.

Sample and method

Look for the sample size and how subjects were selected. A few dozen volunteers is not a population. Self-selected survey respondents are not a random sample. Score low when the sample is large, randomly drawn, and the underlying data is available for inspection.

Independence

Ask whether the organization publishing the finding sells the remedy the finding recommends. This is not an accusation of dishonesty, it is a disclosure that should already be attached to the number. Score low for a neutral party, high when the publisher benefits directly from the conclusion.

Replication

Ask whether anyone independent has reproduced it with a comparable method. A single unreplicated result is a starting point, not a conclusion. Score low when several independent teams found the same thing, high when it has never been tested twice.

Drift

This one catches the most claims. Compare the population and conditions the study measured against the population and conditions the claim is now being applied to. A sound finding used far outside its scope still leads to a bad decision. Score high when the leap is large.

What the number means

Underrated0 to 19
The evidence is stronger than the attention it gets.
Holds Up20 to 39
The claim survives contact with its own source.
Half True40 to 59
Real finding, wrong scope. Correct in part, misapplied in practice.
Overstated60 to 79
Sound evidence, carried far past what it actually measured.
Unsupported80 to 100
No source that survives inspection.

This is a structured judgment, not a measurement, and every edition is scored by one person. If your score lands a few points from ours on the same claim, that is the tool working. Send the disagreement to [email protected] with the component you think is wrong. See it applied on the record.

Get every verdict

Two editions a week. One scored claim each.

Tuesday and Thursday at 1:00 PM Central. Every call is dated and graded in public, including the ones we get wrong.

2,844 subscribersFree foreverUnsubscribe anytime

One email, one scored claim, no pitch. We never sell or share your address. Subscriber figure taken live from our mail provider and last checked July 26, 2026; most of it carried over from the two publications that merged into this one.