Burkenroad Reports
Open-knowledge reference entry
Burkenroad Reports are widely circulated financial reports on small- to medium-sized companies around the Gulf Coast that are traditionally under-followed by bulge bracket stock analysts. Colloquially the Burkenroad-followed companies are referred to as "stocks under rocks". The reports are published by the Freeman School of Business at Tulane University. Under faculty supervision, students work in small groups to produce the reports after visiting companies and interviewing top management. This procedure gives students the opportunity to develop practical stock analysis skills.
History
Burkenroad reports was founded by Peter Ricchiuti in 1993. Since its founding, the reports have gained national attention for their "quality and for avoiding the conflicts inherent when analysts follow a company in which they have financial stake" (The Wall Street Journal, October 1995). Over 40 company reports have been published since the project's inception. Twenty-one companies under Burkenroad coverage have been taken over since 1993. The Latin American expansion of the program began in 2001.
The public source identifies “Burkenroad Reports” as open-knowledge reference entry. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Burkenroad, Reports and Open-knowledge.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Burkenroad Reports”, the useful work is to connect “open-knowledge reference entry” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 23, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q4998973. 2 of 2 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1993, 1995 and 2001.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Burkenroad Reports”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Burkenroad Reports primary sources, Burkenroad Reports archive and Burkenroad research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Burkenroad Reports”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Burkenroad Reports” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.