Online Tools for Mining Research: A Filing-First Workflow

Online tools can make mining research faster, but speed is not the same as reliability. A screener may carry stale production, a price feed may use a different currency, and a database may copy a company-defined cost metric without its reconciliation.

This guide describes a research process, not a stock-selection system or recommendation.

Source check: 27 July 2026.

Layer 1: official filing systems

Start with the venue where the issuer files:

• SEC EDGAR for U.S. reporting companies;
• SEDAR+ for Canadian filings;
• ASX market announcements for Australian-listed issuers;
• the relevant exchange or regulator for another listing.

Capture the document title, filing date, reporting period, direct link, and any effective date. For a technical report, record the qualified person, reporting code, commodity-price assumptions, cutoff grade, and whether the document reports an exploration target, mineral resource, or mineral reserve.

Layer 2: issuer documents

Use the company’s investor-relations site to locate annual and interim reports, technical reports, presentations, and releases. Reconcile promotional slides to the filed document. If a presentation says “low cost,” find the numeric definition and audited or reconciled measure.

Company guidance is not an observed result. Keep guidance in a separate field with its publication date and later compare it with actual results.

Layer 3: screeners and data services

Screeners are useful for discovery: exchange, market capitalization, commodity label, location, or production stage can narrow a list. Their fields should be treated as leads until verified.

Common problems include:

• stale shares outstanding and therefore stale market capitalization;
• consolidated production shown as attributable production;
• resources added to reserves;
• ounces or pounds mixed with tonnes;
• U.S., Canadian, and Australian dollars combined;
• AISC compared across issuers without definitions;
• a “silver” label despite material revenue from other metals.

Record the provider and retrieval time, then replace material screener values with primary-source values where possible.

Layer 4: a source log

A spreadsheet or database can use one row per fact:

Never overwrite an old value without preserving its date and source. A history makes revisions and missed guidance visible.

Layer 5: review triggers, not trade signals

A review trigger says when to reopen the evidence. Examples include:

• a new annual, quarterly, or technical filing;
• production or cost guidance changed;
• a permit decision was published;
• capital cost or financing terms changed;
• a resource or reserve estimate received a new effective date;
• share count or project ownership changed;
• a source field passed its staleness threshold.

A price move can also prompt review, but it does not explain itself. Check company news, commodity exposure, liquidity, financing, and the broader market before assigning a cause.

Quality-control routine

For every material comparison:

1. use the same currency, unit, period, and ownership basis;
2. preserve issuer definitions;
3. distinguish actuals from guidance and scenarios;
4. reconcile calculations to their inputs;
5. list missing or conflicting evidence;
6. record who checked it and when.

NZ Dog’s proposed MIS dashboard is intended to support this kind of provenance-led workflow, but it remains in development. It should not be treated as a live or validated data source unless a later release explicitly documents that status.

Primary and authoritative sources

• SEC: EDGAR
• SEC: mining disclosure guide
• SEDAR+
• ASX: market announcements

mining screenerwatchlistresearch toolsgold stocksinvesting education