Shariah screening, measured

The blog explains how Shariah screening works and how to build with the API. A research report publishes a measurement: a number we counted, the date we counted it, and the method that produced it. Every figure in these reports is read out of the same data the API serves rather than written into the page, so a report cannot quietly disagree with the product it describes.

Our own screening engine. Companies are screened on their business activity and their balance sheet against five rulebooks; funds are screened as a weighted roll-up of what they hold. Nothing here is licensed from another screening provider, which is why we can publish the disagreements between standards rather than one blended answer.

Because the disagreement is the fact. Five recognised standards apply different thresholds to different denominators, so on a real basket they reach different answers — 35 of the 150 funds on this site are called permissible by one and impermissible by another. A single blended verdict would hide the one thing a reader needs in order to decide which standard they actually follow.

No. They report what a published methodology produces when applied to disclosed data. They do not tell anyone what to buy and they do not issue a religious ruling; the standards named in them are the work of their own scholars and boards, and we are not affiliated with any of them.

Yes, with attribution and the measurement date beside them — the date is part of the figure. Coverage and verdicts move as providers republish baskets and as companies report, so a count quoted without its date stops being true without anyone editing it.