ZeroHedge⁠72%

Presenting The "Asia Space Economy" Basket: How To Trade Asia's Answer To SpaceX ⁠96%

By Tyler Durden⁠63%

6/24/2026, 2:44:48 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, Confirmation Bias, and Anchoring Bias, with Bandwagon as the most egregious example at 91% saturation with 131 hits. Analysis detected 1,083 faulty-reasoning hits from 144 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 93.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠96% (958 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 95.60% of the article peer group.

Back in December 17, when SpaceX was worth *only* $800 billion based on private market transactions, we published a report looking at the up and coming (or rather, going) space economy, titled "*<strong><a href="https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/data-centers-space-they-are-coming-and-how-profit">Data Centers In Space Are Coming: Here's How To Profit</a></strong>" in which we profiled a handful of companies with the highest exposure to, well, space - among which P<em>L, RKLB, LUNR</em> and others - and told readers so inclined to create a basket of the names ahead of the SpaceX IPO in order to frontrun the euphoria. 6 months later, the "space basket" outperformed the Mag 7 by 80% (and as much as 120%). 
Six months later: space stocks outperforming Mag7 by 80% https://t.co/2nnTBND5oW pic.twitter.com/qGRtQlEeYZ 
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) June 12, 2026 
Background 
Lift‑Off to a New Growth Frontier 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 74.3%Tyler Durden: 7.7%ZeroHedge: 7.8%Confirmation Bias74.3%This article: 74.3%Tyler Durden: 1.6%ZeroHedge: 1.6%Anchoring Bias74.3%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 4.6%ZeroHedge: 4.6%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.1%ZeroHedge: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 74.3%Tyler Durden: 1.4%ZeroHedge: 1.4%Hindsight Bias74.3%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 2.8%ZeroHedge: 2.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 9.0%Tyler Durden: 10.8%ZeroHedge: 10.8%Framing Effect9.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.4%ZeroHedge: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.5%ZeroHedge: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 13.2%Tyler Durden: 2.0%ZeroHedge: 2.1%Optimism Bias13.2%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 3.7%ZeroHedge: 3.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 11.1%ZeroHedge: 11.1%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 74.3%Tyler Durden: 1.4%ZeroHedge: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias74.3%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.1%ZeroHedge: 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.2%ZeroHedge: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.3%ZeroHedge: 1.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.0%ZeroHedge: 1.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.8%ZeroHedge: 0.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.0%ZeroHedge: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.6%Tyler Durden: 3.2%ZeroHedge: 3.3%Recency Bias7.6%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.4%ZeroHedge: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.0%ZeroHedge: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.4%ZeroHedge: 1.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.6%ZeroHedge: 0.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 6.2%ZeroHedge: 6.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 2.2%ZeroHedge: 2.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 2.4%ZeroHedge: 2.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.3%ZeroHedge: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 7.6%Tyler Durden: 6.7%ZeroHedge: 6.7%Hasty Generalization7.6%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.4%ZeroHedge: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 91.0%Tyler Durden: 0.8%ZeroHedge: 0.8%Bandwagon91.0%This article: 4.2%Tyler Durden: 5.1%ZeroHedge: 5.1%Appeal to Emotion4.2%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.5%ZeroHedge: 1.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 74.3%Tyler Durden: 5.4%ZeroHedge: 5.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)74.3%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.4%ZeroHedge: 0.4%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.7%ZeroHedge: 0.7%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.4%ZeroHedge: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 74.3%Tyler Durden: 2.2%ZeroHedge: 2.2%Anecdotal74.3%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 2.7%ZeroHedge: 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.0%ZeroHedge: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.2%ZeroHedge: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.2%Tyler Durden: 4.1%ZeroHedge: 4.1%Unattributed Quote4.2%This article: 7.6%Tyler Durden: 1.9%ZeroHedge: 1.9%Quote-first Misdirection7.6%This article: 74.3%Tyler Durden: 11.2%ZeroHedge: 11.2%Biased Writer Voice74.3%This article: 4.2%Tyler Durden: 1.5%ZeroHedge: 1.5%Indoctrination4.2%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.5%ZeroHedge: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 2.8%ZeroHedge: 2.8%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 83.3%Tyler Durden: 0.9%ZeroHedge: 0.9%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…83.3%

144 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker4.2%attributed speech138writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 107 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coveragezerohedge • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

zerohedge

100%flagged-word coverage
6 attributed words100% of attributed speech99% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%zerohedge: 100.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -87.0 ptsWriter: 87.0%zerohedge: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-77.5 ptsWriter: 77.5%zerohedge: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-8.0 ptsWriter: 8.0%zerohedge: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-4.3 ptsWriter: 4.3%zerohedge: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.