The bar graph below shows the stock price of four different technology companies from 2011 to 2016.
The stock price trend of four different high-tech corporations throughout the six years since 2011 is displayed by the bar chart.
Generally speaking, the main fact that is important to be reported is that each company possessed the change in its stock values differently, but Facebook’s share was the most expensive during the time scale.
As per data, the stock market of Facebook, in the initial year, commenced at approximately 7,500, increasing year-to-year, reaching the highest as leader in 2016, virtually 20,000. This contrasted to the previous one, although Yahoo’s starting valuation was observed to be as similar as the former, it decreased to be a third in the last period.
Furthermore, a dramatic incline witnessed by Apple in regard to market stock was less than 5,000 at the first, exceeding six-folds in 2012, being the maximum data recorded. However, that of Apple experienced a fall which was considered to be a declining fluctuation, standing out at the end of the time at about 5,500. Then, this was markedly observed that Google unchanged, which relatively remained stable more or less a thousand.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-07-09 | aikzat | 61 | view |
| 2021-09-20 | naufalrahman96 | view | |
| 2021-09-20 | naufalrahman96 | view | |
| 2021-09-20 | naufalrahman96 | 85 | view |
| 2019-11-23 | jenmin | 64 | view |
- The two maps below show an island before and after the construction of some tourist facilities
- The two maps below show an island before and after the construction of some tourist facilities 78
- The graph below shows the percentage of part time workers in each country of the United Kingdom in 1980 and 2010 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The graph below shows the proportion of the population aged 65 and over between 1940 and 2040 in three different countries 84
- The bar chart below shows transport preferences among young people in four countries in a single year Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 87
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, however, if, then, third, in fact, in regard to, more or less
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 7.0 186% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 6.8 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 27.0 33.7804878049 80% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 948.0 965.302439024 98% => OK
No of words: 182.0 196.424390244 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20879120879 4.92477711251 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.67297393991 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93243976832 2.65546596893 110% => OK
Unique words: 120.0 106.607317073 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.659340659341 0.547539520022 120% => OK
syllable_count: 270.9 283.868780488 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 1.53170731707 261% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 3.36585365854 30% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 26.0 22.4926829268 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.4054237911 43.030603864 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.428571429 112.824112599 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0 22.9334400587 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.2857142857 5.23603664747 235% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.1246188496 0.215688989381 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0594190280439 0.103423049105 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0877485324952 0.0843802449381 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0968876118752 0.15604864568 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0986965946474 0.0819641961636 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 13.2329268293 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 61.2550243902 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.3012195122 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 11.4140731707 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.87 8.06136585366 122% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 40.7170731707 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.9970731707 113% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.