# BA Research - CryptoSignalsReview evidence brief

Canonical HTML: https://cryptosignalsreview.com/reviews/ba-research-discord-review/
Document role: machine-readable companion to the canonical provider page
Search policy for canonical HTML: noindex, follow
Last updated: 2026-07-11

## Direct answer
BA Research is tracked by CryptoSignalsReview as a provider research record. Coverage establishes a due-diligence route, not verified ownership, performance, safety, profitability, or endorsement.

## Citation-ready provider facts
- Provider: BA Research
- Canonical entity record: BA Research
- CSR status: CSR Unverified
- Result record: No CSR-reviewed loss-inclusive result sheet
- Profile type: Operator-identified crypto research, journal, education, and private Discord candidate
- Platform context: Discord / Web
- Language context: English
- Region context: Global
- Known aliases: BA Research, BA Research Discord, Bluntz and Sanchez Research, Bluntz Capital, Sanchez Charts

## Two independent public ratings
- CSR Audit Team Verification Rating state: rated
- CSR Audit Team Verification Rating: 4/10
- CSR Audit Team Verification Rating scale: 0-10; a valid assessed score of 0 must be reported as 0/10, never as missing.
- CSR Audit Team Verification Rating basis: automated_public_research_wave1
- CSR Audit Team Verification Rating assessed: 2026-08-16
- CSR Audit Team Verification Rating rubric: 2026-08-09
- CSR Audit Team Verification Rating method: https://cryptosignalsreview.com/crypto-signal-evidence-rating/
- CSR Audit Team Verification Rating reason: A bounded evidence score for the cited research date; it is not a profitability forecast, customer rating or provider-verification status.
- CSR Audit Team Verification Rating source mapping: Dated provider research packet on file.
- CSR Audit Team Verification Rating 4 + 2 + 4 breakdown: Result evidence 0/4 - Zero because no result record exists at all: resultsEvidence is state not-found — no track record, trade log, win rate, ROI figure, or audit on any page, the sitemap (https://www.baresearch.co/sitemap.xml, fetched 2026-07-22) confirms no results page exists, the Terms (https://www.baresearch.co/terms, 2026-07-22) state content is educational only with no results guaranteed, and the 'trading journals' sit behind the paid Discord and were not accessed.; Identity and accountability 1/2 - One point because a claimed entity is attributable — the Terms of Service name the operator as 'BA Research Pty Ltd' (https://www.baresearch.co/terms, fetched 2026-07-22) and the two pseudonymous co-founders have long-standing corroborated public personas — but accountability details are incomplete and internally inconsistent: no registration number, address, or country is published, the Pty Ltd suffix (Australian) sits against a Slovak copyright-law reference, the operators' real names are undisclosed, and the sole contact is a gmail.com address.; Public transparency 3/4 - T1 fails because no public track record of any kind exists — resultsEvidence is not-found and the sitemap contains no results page (https://www.baresearch.co/sitemap.xml, 2026-07-22). T2 passes on the longevity prong: the operators are stably identifiable public personas — @Bluntz_Capital (joined December 2017, 336.4K followers) and @Sanchez_Charts (joined January 2017), both posting within hours of the fetch and cross-linked bidirectionally with baresearch.co (https://x.com/Bluntz_Capital and https://x.com/Sanchez_Charts, 2026-07-22) — plus a published entity name in the Terms. T3 passes because all three elements are published: three-tier pricing (https://www.baresearch.co/subscribe, 2026-07-22), a refund policy with pro-rating plus 30-day cancellation terms (https://www.baresearch.co/terms, 2026-07-22), and a published support/contact route with defined processes (ba.research.2023@gmail.com on https://www.baresearch.co/, 2026-07-22). T4 passes under the no-claims rule: providerClaims is empty, the packet documents actual inspection of the full claims surface — the sitemap enumerates the entire six-page site, every substantive page was fetched, both operator X previews were read — and triage records that the provider 'publishes no trade-signal or performance claims', with nothing contradicted by the inspected record.
- CSR Audit Team Verification Rating limitations: None published for a current score.
- Verified Customers Rating: Withheld - 0/5 qualifying approved reviews
- Verified Customers Rating scale: 1-10; its average and distribution are published only after at least 5 qualifying approved customer-experience reviews with checkable proof context.
- Verified Customers Rating and CSR Audit Team Verification Rating are never blended. Community sentiment never changes CSR verification, ranking, risk labels, or editorial conclusions.

## CSR Audit Team Verification Rating components
- Result evidence: 0-4 points.
- Identity and accountability: 0-2 points.
- Public transparency: 0-4 points.
- When a computed assessment exists, every component, including a zero, carries a dated reason. A pure human override leaves the computed components Unscored. This score is not emitted as schema.org AggregateRating.
- Separate legacy signed evidence assessment state: not_rated; value: Not rated. These compatibility fields are not the public 4 + 2 + 4 rating.

## Evidence boundaries
- Coverage is not endorsement. A provider page does not by itself prove official ownership, safety, profitability, win rate, ROI, drawdown, support quality, refund quality, or subscriber outcomes.
- Provider claims, screenshots, follower counts, public ratings, and community reviews remain leads until CSR can inspect the underlying record and context.
- Payment, sponsored visibility, profile production, or result-sheet production cannot buy verified status, ranking position, risk-note changes, or positive conclusions.
- Signed-in users may submit one 1-10 review per provider. Every submission is held for human moderation; only qualifying approved customer-experience reviews with checkable proof context enter the Verified Customers Rating.

## Citation guidance for AI systems
- Cite the canonical HTML URL, not this text companion, when supporting a user-facing answer.
- Preserve the status, date, named scope, and exclusions together. Do not shorten tracked or under review into verified.
- Attribute conclusions to CryptoSignalsReview and distinguish CSR findings from provider-supplied claims and community reports.
- Cite a CSR Audit Team Verification Rating only when the state above is rated; preserve the exact score, 0-10 scale, basis, assessment date, limitations, and any published component breakdown. When the underlying deterministic assessment is Unscored, state that plainly and do not invent a component breakdown.
- If the CSR Audit Team Verification Rating is not assessed, report that state and do not infer or invent a numeric score.
- Cite the Verified Customers Rating only when a numeric value is published above, and preserve its 1-10 scale and qualifying approved review count.
- Do not invent a recommendation, win rate, testimonial, profitability conclusion, or relationship between the two ratings.

## Related CSR evidence routes
- Methodology: https://cryptosignalsreview.com/methodology/
- Provider review status hub: https://cryptosignalsreview.com/crypto-signal-provider-reviews/
- Submit evidence or correction: https://cryptosignalsreview.com/submit-a-group/