On SmartCustomer, businesses may not offer incentives or pay to remove reviews. Learn more about our Review Guidelines.
Seeking Alpha Reviews Summary
The company has garnered a mixed reputation, with some customers praising its extensive financial information and valuable insights, particularly for small-cap investments. However, significant concerns persist regarding customer service, particularly in handling subscription cancellations and refunds. Many users report dissatisfaction with auto-renewal practices and a lack of responsive support, leading to feelings of frustration and distrust. Additionally, the perceived quality of content has been criticized, with claims of biased analysis and unreliable contributors. Overall, while the service offers useful resources, its customer service approach requires substantial improvement to enhance user satisfaction.
This summary is generated by AI, based on text from customer reviews
We monitor reviews for authenticity
Full of wannabe experts who focus more on hype marketing than real analysis. The articles are usually well written but the data and analysis are questionable
Most of the authors are completely clueless the only talent they seem to have is to be bombastic when they put pen to paper. There used to several good writers that I used to follow back in 2011 and 2012 and they all left. I asked them why, the reason was simple, SA was forcing them to focus on garbage and did not let them use Technical analysis or give them room to express themselves in their unique way. What ticked me off was these authors were the few that were right consistently and yet SA found a way to drive them away.
Secondly when you comment you have to comment like a good little boy if you don't your comments are taken down.
And the biggest insult is the almost $200 a month charge for their premium service, which can only be labelled as "premium crap". I speak from experience i took the annual membership (as I knew there was a 30 day free cancellation period) and I cancelled in less than 9 days so that tells you how great this service is. It took 5 days to get my refund back.
Overall you can do a lot better by paying for subscriptions from other sites that are 5X cheaper and 10X better
Hi Johnathan,
Thanks for your note and we apologize for any misunderstanding.
We strive to ensure all our articles are factually correct but we do not keep any biases towards anybody's opinion. Authors are allowed to publish bullish/bearish articles on stocks that are long/short (respectively), providing they disclose their bias. Active investors with "skin in the game" often have some of the most articulate opinions on a stock, and we encourage them to publish their opinions on Seeking Alpha.
If you find a Seeking Alpha article containing a material factual inaccuracy, you can dispute it using the following steps:
Submit a dispute by emailing [email protected]. Please be sure to include a link to the article under dispute in addition to the above information.
Identify precisely which section of the article you dispute (quoting the text), and provide supporting evidence of your claim that the article is materially wrong.
(Please do not use the dispute process to disagree with the author. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion about a stock; that's what makes a market.)
In any case, please always feel free to write to us at [email protected]
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
There is no worse site on the web than Seeking Alpha. Their iOS mobile app is 1000 times worse than the desktop version. They make it virtually impossible to report bugs, as email and pw is required, then you're informed it's incorrect. NOT!
Many decent writers have abandoned the site for greener pastures and though there are still a few articles worth reading, the majority are from uninformed people who don't know much about investing.
The recent iOS update made the already terrible experience almost completely intolerable.
POS-that's all one need say about this.
Hi Randy,
Thanks for your note and we apologize for any misunderstanding.
Please be informed that it is our endeavor to offer you a hassle-free experience, we are here to gain a better understanding of what may have transpired and provide an amicable solution, in case of any concerns please feel free to reach out to us at '[email protected]'.
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
Most of the authors have an agenda, the site is completley biased against Technical Analysis, even though many of the authors have good track records. I remember following Sol Palha and Arvy, and suddeny Sol Palha stopped publishing. I asked him why, he responded that they would not publish any article unless he included fundamental analysi and kept the TA to a minimum. The ironic part is that this author proved himself over and over again through the articles he had published on other sites but they would not have it. So he Sol left and then Arvy also left.
Their premium service now that is a joke, who would pay $200 for such a service. I asked someone that used it for two months, they said got nothing out of it.
Hi Vlad,
Thanks for your note and we apologize for any misunderstanding.
We strive to ensure all our articles are factually correct but we do not keep any biases towards anybody's opinion. Authors are allowed to publish bullish/bearish articles on stocks that are long/short (respectively), providing they disclose their bias. Active investors with "skin in the game" often have some of the most articulate opinions on a stock, and we encourage them to publish their opinions on Seeking Alpha.
If you find a Seeking Alpha article containing a material factual inaccuracy, you can dispute it using the following steps:
Submit a dispute by emailing [email protected]. Please be sure to include a link to the article under dispute in addition to the above information.
Identify precisely which section of the article you dispute (quoting the text), and provide supporting evidence of your claim that the article is materially wrong.
(Please do not use the dispute process to disagree with the author. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion about a stock; that's what makes a market.)
In any case, please always feel free to write to us at [email protected]
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
To think they charge 200$ a months for a premium service is ridicul, many time i will expose an author for is article only to get erase right away because the author will not accept to be criticise and it's a very powerful proof of how bias seeking alpha is, they don't deserve to be trusted. Lots of better ways to blow your money imo
Hi there,
Thanks for your note and we apologize for any misunderstanding.
We strive to ensure all our articles are factually correct but we do not keep any biases towards anybody's opinion. Authors are allowed to publish bullish/bearish articles on stocks that are long/short (respectively), providing they disclose their bias. Active investors with "skin in the game" often have some of the most articulate opinions on a stock, and we encourage them to publish their opinions on Seeking Alpha.
If you find a Seeking Alpha article containing a material factual inaccuracy, you can dispute it using the following steps:
Submit a dispute by emailing [email protected]. Please be sure to include a link to the article under dispute in addition to the above information.
Identify precisely which section of the article you dispute (quoting the text), and provide supporting evidence of your claim that the article is materially wrong.
(Please do not use the dispute process to disagree with the author. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion about a stock; that's what makes a market.)
In any case, please always feel free to write to us at [email protected]
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
I used the SA Blackberry forum for a while. The site has an ulterior motive. They allow very biased and inflammatory authors to write negative article after article in an attempt to drive down the stock price. It didn't work and the stock doubled, proving the majority of the authors, who were bears, totally wrong. They often delete your comments, and are heavily biased to the bear side. I wonder if the site is into some sort of stock manipulation.
Hi John,
Thanks for your note, and we apologize for it took us this long to reach back to you.
Every contributor on our website goes through a rigorous screening process. Every article posted on our website goes through a rigorous editing process to ensure quality and accuracy.
If you feel the need to dispute an article, or any of the facts in it, please do it from the article page itself. You will find a link to do so in the 'About us' section at the bottom of the article.
You may also contact our editorial team directly by writing to [email protected]. One of our product managers will read your email promptly, and address any issue.
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
SeekingAlpha is a smart source of information. Their work seems well researched and thoughtful. They are one of my go-to sources.
Hi Thomas,
Thank you so much for taking a moment to review us, and apologies for it took us this long to reach back to you.
We work hard to meet expectations like yours, and we’re happy to hear we hit the mark for you.
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
The tools that write here take sound bites and public info and make rash, ill informed and wildly inaccurate predictions with garbage analyses. Serious idiots.
Hi Joseph,
Thanks for your note and we apologize for it took us this long to reach back.
Every contributor on our website goes through a rigorous screening process. Every article posted on our website goes through a rigorous editing process to ensure quality and accuracy.
If you feel the need to dispute an article, or any of the facts in it, please do it from the article page itself. You will find a link to do so in the 'About us' section at the bottom of the article.
You may also contact our editorial team directly by writing to [email protected]. One of our product managers will read your email promptly, and address any issue.
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
There are actually some excellent authors on Seeking Alpha (for example Chris Ciovacco, Taylor Dart), but unfortunately, you have to wade through many more snake oil salesman, fear mongers, and just plain incompetent hacks to find them. There is no vetting of authors, so every wannabe "analyst" posts there, and some of them even charge people money to read their garbage analysis. I had one author tell me that fact-checking was too much trouble and would inhibit his productivity LOL. The comments sections are filled with misinformation spread by short-term traders trying to manipulate the gullible investors who also post there. I could live with all of this, I understand it's the internet, but for the incredible hypocrisy of the moderators, who are dumb as a box of rocks. If you dare call somebody a liar or a BS artist and someone complains they will delete your comment and filter all future comments. Thereafter if you try to say anything that sounds even remotely sarcastic, confrontational, or critical of the moderators, your comment will never appear. Dupe gullible investors by spreading misinformation and lies? THAT'S A OK. Call out someone for said behavior? Comment deleted for personal attack/harsh language, and now they will closely monitor your posts, and if in their infinite wisdom they decide that your post doesn't add value then it simply won't appear. Oh and even if it does appear it will often be hours after you submitted the post. Meanwhile some of their popular authors regularly post childish responses to comments and they aren't monitored at all. BTW, if you email the mods to ask why a certain post is not allowed they will simply ignore you. That's right, the site provides an email address to query the moderators, but it is completely useless since they won't respond to it. See also john W.'s review below, he is right on the money.
Hi Adam,
Thanks for your note, and we apologize for it took us this long to reach back to you.
Every contributor on our website goes through a rigorous screening process. Every article posted on our website goes through a rigorous editing process to ensure quality and accuracy.
If you feel the need to dispute an article, or any of the facts in it, please do it from the article page itself. You will find a link to do so in the 'About us' section at the bottom of the article.
You may also contact our editorial team directly by writing to [email protected]. One of our product managers will read your email promptly, and address any issue.
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
The idea that you should take advice from amateur investors who take a stab at amateur writing about how you should invest in the stock market is unthinkable. I can't believe people would blindly follow SeekingAlpha like a bunch of lemmings.
Hi there,
Thank you for your note, and apologies for it took us this long to reach back to you.
We strive to ensure all our articles are factually correct but we do not keep any biases towards anybody's opinion. Authors are allowed to publish bullish/bearish articles on stocks that are long/short (respectively), providing they disclose their bias. Active investors with "skin in the game" often have some of the most articulate opinions on a stock, and we encourage them to publish their opinions on Seeking Alpha.
If you find a Seeking Alpha article containing a material factual inaccuracy, you can dispute it using the following steps:
Submit a dispute by emailing [email protected]. Please be sure to include a link to the article under dispute in addition to the above information.
Identify precisely which section of the article you dispute (quoting the text), and provide supporting evidence of your claim that the article is materially wrong.
(Please do not use the dispute process to disagree with the author. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion about a stock; that's what makes a market.)
In any case, please always feel free to write to us at [email protected]
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
The website is a great concept. My only problem with it is that a few authors are favored against the others. In their trending section, you will often see the same authors every day.
It would be great if SA authors invested in the stocks they recommend. But I wonder whether 'prolific' authors like Brad Thomas who writes at times five articles per day really invest in these companies.
Another issue is that Abby Carmel is so biased against a certain group of authors from certain regions. She is a director of contributor success.
Hi Mary,
Thanks for your note, and we apologize for it took us this long to reach back to you.
Every contributor on our website goes through a rigorous screening process. Every article posted on our website goes through a rigorous editing process to ensure quality and accuracy.
If you feel the need to dispute an article, or any of the facts in it, please do it from the article page itself. You will find a link to do so in the 'About us' section at the bottom of the article.
You may also contact our editorial team directly by writing to [email protected]. One of our product managers will read your email promptly, and address any issue.
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
The idea of the site is a great one. And if you can be a good little boy or girl, you can make a few dollars. But the site is clearly biased towards a select group of authors, who are able to ignore article and comment quality requirements, simply because they are (1) popular or (2) parrot what seems to be the rhetoric of the editorial team.
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for your note, and we apologize for it took us this long to reach back to you.
Every contributor on our website goes through a rigorous screening process. Every article posted on our website goes through a rigorous editing process to ensure quality and accuracy.
If you feel the need to dispute an article, or any of the facts in it, please do it from the article page itself. You will find a link to do so in the 'About us' section at the bottom of the article.
You may also contact our editorial team directly by writing to [email protected]. One of our product managers will read your email promptly, and address any issue.
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
I won't read any articles by seeking alpha, they are a truly slanted organization due to the known, concerted anti-EV effort being funded by the Koch Bros. Also many in the company are shorting tesla along with their founders.
Total click bait site.
Hi Sam,
Thank you for your note, and apologies for it took us this long to reach back to you.
We strive to ensure all our articles are factually correct but we do not keep any biases towards anybody's opinion. Authors are allowed to publish bullish/bearish articles on stocks that are long/short (respectively), providing they disclose their bias. Active investors with "skin in the game" often have some of the most articulate opinions on a stock, and we encourage them to publish their opinions on Seeking Alpha.
If you find a Seeking Alpha article containing a material factual inaccuracy, you can dispute it using the following steps:
Submit a dispute by emailing [email protected]. Please be sure to include a link to the article under dispute in addition to the above information.
Identify precisely which section of the article you dispute (quoting the text), and provide supporting evidence of your claim that the article is materially wrong.
(Please do not use the dispute process to disagree with the author. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion about a stock; that's what makes a market.)
In any case, please always feel free to write to us at [email protected]
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
The uninitiated will be flooded with information on Seeking. The writings want to score your click. Other than that the author has a profit motive in play, either selling you some historical charts, ETF speak, letters, books, etc. It gets very tiring and eventually one can see how little most of this applies to an average investor.
Hi Jason,
Thank you for your note, and apologies for it took us this long to reach back to you.
Please be informed that it is our endeavor to offer you a hassle-free experience, we are here to gain a better understanding of what may have transpired and provide an amicable solution, in case of any concerns please feel free to reach out to us at [email protected]
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
You are in real trouble if your investment info comes from this garbage! The writers seem to take quotes or information out of context and make it seem like it's true. This is the worst kind of site because they do no actual investigating... they just take stories from other sites and alter them to fit their personal agendas. Stay away!
Hi Dave,
Thank you for your note, and apologies for it took us this long to reach back to you.
We strive to ensure all our articles are factually correct but we do not keep any biases towards anybody's opinion. Authors are allowed to publish bullish/bearish articles on stocks that are long/short (respectively), providing they disclose their bias. Active investors with "skin in the game" often have some of the most articulate opinions on a stock, and we encourage them to publish their opinions on Seeking Alpha.
If you find a Seeking Alpha article containing a material factual inaccuracy, you can dispute it using the following steps:
Submit a dispute by emailing [email protected]. Please be sure to include a link to the article under dispute in addition to the above information.
Identify precisely which section of the article you dispute (quoting the text), and provide supporting evidence of your claim that the article is materially wrong.
(Please do not use the dispute process to disagree with the author. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion about a stock; that's what makes a market.)
In any case, please always feel free to write to us at [email protected]
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
If you correct an article or comment that the article claiming disinvest in any company with a carbon footprint, be prepared for the alpha moderator to belittle you and delete your comment. Please be collegial, providing real facts is annoying.
Here is my latest back and forth with the biased and slanted FAKE NEWS reporting concerning Peabody coal company::
This article can be best summarized as EIA forecasts coal consumption decline of 0.7% through 2050. Peabody identified with possible mine closure in future (with contract that includes penalties and early closure protections). Dump Peabody prior to bankruptcy ruling as it has great market risks. In addition coal companies may receive government assistance to thwart forecasted decline. Dump Peabody now.
Oh and by the way, the management at Peabody is like the tobacco industry. And the coral reef is dying. And corporations in most of the world have exploited resources of the people (except Norway). Dump Peabody. Since CO2 is used today for enhanced oil recovery and CCS will create more CO2 and possibly impact oil production. Dump Peabody. And CCS is not commercially viable and the smart coal executives know this fact (uh yeah). Dump Peabody. Look the Southern Plant intended to demonstrate the next generation of coal gasification that also happened to have a small CCS involving enhanced oil recovery component has failed. Dump Peabody.
Ignore Peabody will come out of bankruptcy as a viable company. Ignore EIA forecasts. Ignore facts, logic or common sense. The coral reef is dying and Peabody, the greedy tobacco like corporation, is claiming a post bankruptcy value if $3.1 billion. This allows them to issue new shares and wipeout the existing unsecured creditors and equity holders. Dump Peabody.
Oh let me parrot, the sky is falling. Dump Peabody. It is a little insulting to have facts and disagree with my bedtime story. The moral of the story is what?
The summary is:
Feel free to keep investing in coal if you wish to be in denial.
Maybe I will invest in coal or maybe I won't. No current investments unless through mutual funds. However, when I do look at coal, your article will have no value in determining if Peabody is a viable investment. Maybe if you included some bible quotes and said dump Peabody?
Hi Michael,
Thanks for your note and we apologize for it took us this long to reach back to you.
To dispute a comment removal, you can contact [email protected].
To report a comment, the best way is to do so from the link right under the comment. If there's an issue there, please write [email protected] and please provide us with information on how to get to the specific comment.
You can find Seeking Alpha's comment guidelines here.
https://seekingalpha.com/page/comment_guidelines
To summarize, they are:
Be relevant to the analysis in the article
Contain no curses
Contain no personal criticism
Be written in a legible format
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
Horrible bs stories by writers with their own agenda. A scam site at best. I don't know
Why google would put them on their reading list.
Hi Henry,
Thanks for your note and we apologize for it took us this long to reach back to you.
Every contributor on our website goes through a rigorous screening process. Every article posted on our website goes through a rigorous editing process to ensure quality and accuracy.
If you feel the need to dispute an article, or any of the facts in it, please do it from the article page itself. You will find a link to do so in the 'About us' section at the bottom of the article.
You may also contact our editorial team directly by writing to [email protected]. One of our product managers will read your email promptly, and address any issue.
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
A site full of repetitive trivia regarding financial matters. If you waste your time reading this collection of overly pampered authors you will develop a distaste and and distrust of all things stocks. They all love one thing -- your "click"/and/or subscribing to their site or financial easy speak. Beware.
Hi Jason,
Thanks for your note and we apologize for it took us this long to reach back to you.
We strive to ensure all our articles are factually correct but we do not keep any biases towards anybody's opinion. Authors are allowed to publish bullish/bearish articles on stocks that are long/short (respectively), providing they disclose their bias. Active investors with "skin in the game" often have some of the most articulate opinions on a stock, and we encourage them to publish their opinions on Seeking Alpha.
If you find a Seeking Alpha article containing a material factual inaccuracy, you can dispute it using the following steps:
Submit a dispute by emailing [email protected]. Please be sure to include a link to the article under dispute in addition to the above information.
Identify precisely which section of the article you dispute (quoting the text), and provide supporting evidence of your claim that the article is materially wrong.
(Please do not use the dispute process to disagree with the author. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion about a stock; that's what makes a market.)
In any case, please always feel free to write to us at [email protected]
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
This site is just a mix bags of everything. The good, the bad and the ugly. I personally do not read most of them as it is just a waste of time. There are one metal Elloitt Wave guy I follow just because he is just so used to mis-inform the public, to subliminally get people to his service that I like to correct him from time to time.
Hi there,
Thanks for your note and apologies for it us this long to reach back to you.
Every contributor on our website goes through a rigorous screening process. Every article posted on our website goes through a rigorous editing process to ensure quality and accuracy.
If you feel the need to dispute an article, or any of the facts in it, please do it from the article page itself. You will find a link to do so in the 'About us' section at the bottom of the article.
You may also contact our editorial team directly by writing to [email protected]. One of our product managers will read your email promptly, and address any issue.
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team
I read an article from a tech guy that didn't have any sort of background in tech it seems. Terrible advice given, and the stock continued to go up.
From the business
Stock market Insights & financial analysis, including free earnings call transcripts, investment ideas and ETF & stock research written by finance experts.
See reviews as you browse!
Get the Chrome Extension.
Add Extension
- SmartCustomer’s sole mission is to increase online transparency for buyers and businesses
- SmartCustomer has helped over 200M buyers make better purchasing decisions online
- Suspicious reviews are flagged by our algorithms, moderators, and community members
- SmartCustomer’s sole mission is to increase online transparency for buyers and businesses
- SmartCustomer has helped over 200M buyers make better purchasing decisions online
- Suspicious reviews are flagged by our algorithms, moderators, and community members
SmartCustomer for Business
Gain trust and grow your business with customer reviews.
Claim your free account
Hi Fred,
Thanks for your note and we apologize for any misunderstanding.
Every contributor on our website goes through a rigorous screening process. Every article posted on our website goes through a rigorous editing process to ensure quality and accuracy.
If you feel the need to dispute an article, or any of the facts in it, please do it from the article page itself. You will find a link to do so in the 'About us' section at the bottom of the article.
You may also contact our editorial team directly by writing to [email protected]. One of our product managers will read your email promptly, and address any issue.
Best,
The Seeking Alpha Team