Methodology

Transparent by Design

Methodological skeleton of Saker Index. The weights and pillars below are explicit placeholders — product communication; final calibration depends on the application domain.

Stage 1 Sources and Eligibility

Indicators enter the pipeline only with an identifiable source, known frequency, and a clear operational definition. We prefer official series and auditable repositories; proprietary data, when used, is flagged on the indicator record.

Minimum metadata: unit, temporal coverage, geographic or sectoral scope.
Documented exclusion when a series is inconsistent or not comparable.
Record of source revisions (historical corrections).

Stage 2 Treatment and Normalization

Raw values are aligned to a common scale (typically 0–100) via a monotonic transformation suited to the variable type. Gaps follow explicit rules — not opaque imputation.

Winsorization or clipping only when justified and declared.
Sensitivity to outliers reported in version notes.
No black box between raw data and the pillar score.

Stage 3 Pillars and Aggregation

The composite index is the weighted average of the pillars. The weights below are placeholders for communication; final calibration depends on the domain (market, territory, sector).

Illustrative weights — sum 100%

25%

Capacity

Resources, infrastructure, and operational scale relevant to the domain.

20%

Resilience

Ability to absorb shocks and sustain performance over time.

20%

Transparency

Availability, quality, and timeliness of public or reported information.

20%

Access

Effective reach to users, markets, or target populations.

15%

Innovation

Signals of renewal, technology adoption, or continuous improvement.

Stage 4 Publication and Versioning

Each release carries a version identifier, source cut-off date, and changelog. Historical rankings are not rewritten without a note; when methodology changes materially, we republish the series with a break flag.

Changelog readable by humans and machines.
Structured exports (CSV/JSON) aligned to the version.
Errata channel for post-publication corrections.

Limitations

Every index is a simplification. Saker Index does not capture qualitative nuances that only field analysis or deep due diligence reveal. Use it as a comparable starting point, not as an absolute verdict.

Review

The methodology is reviewed periodically. Technical critique is welcome via contact.