GradeHack
Uncover hidden university grade data to pick modules
Hype can't move this line. Only verifiable outcomes do.
No money. No seat. It doesn't move the price. It goes on your record — and in 28 days reality settles it.
by reality anchor — the price money can't pump
Analytics. Launched 8d ago on PeerPush, where it placed #479. Today, it's live, but nothing on the site has changed since we started watching. It's anchored at 755 pts.
It placed #479 on PeerPush with 10 votes.
A launch's opening price comes from where it placed on its own board, normalised across all 12 platforms we watch. That's deliberate: #1 on a small board beats #40 on a huge one. It's how a launch nobody saw can still be worth more than one everybody did.
No matter how much money goes in. There is no pump here — you can't make yourself right by buying more. The line only moves on things that actually happened: an award, revenue that grew, a new platform, code that shipped — or silence.
Quiet for 3 days — no penalty yet. Bleeding begins on day 7.
We fetch this site every day and hash what's on it. A founder can post “still working on it” — but if they actually shipped, the page changes. That's the only claim we price: evidence, not announcements. The real question isn't “will this be huge?” — it's “will they still be moving in four weeks?”
The story so farEVERY MOVE, AND WHY▾
1 quiet day in between are left out — nothing happened on them. Repriced every day, no cliffs. A launch that goes quiet bleeds a little at a time, so there's never a drop you could have run from the night before.
Momentum on its boardDOESN'T MOVE THE PRICE▾
How the launch is moving on its own board, day by day. This is the crowd's attention — it does not move the reality price. Only verifiable outcomes do.
A flat line is normal: votes stop within a day or two of launch, on every board. What's unusual — and what actually counts — is a launch that keeps pulling votes long after its day is over.
About
GradeHack helps UK university students improve their academic outcomes by providing access to unpublished grade distributions. By utilizing data sourced through Freedom of Information requests, the platform reveals which modules historically yield higher marks, allowing students to make data-driven choices when selecting their university modules. The data universities won't put on a prospectus Discover Uni and league tables tell you the headline. We tell you which modules within a course actually deliver the grades, and which ones quietly tank cohorts every year. Real grade distributions, not vibes FOI requests force universities to release actual mark distributions. We collect, normalise, and structure them so you can compare like-for-like. Module by module, year by year See how many students got a First, where the bunching is, how marks have drifted over the last decade. The kind of detail your tutor wouldn't tell you. Picks tuned to your goal Optimising for a 1st? Career? Genuine interest? Different optimisations point to different modules, even on the same course. Anonymised by default Cohorts under ten are suppressed by design. We're publishing aggregated insight, not individual student data.
Where it launched1 PLATFORM▾
| Platform | Votes | Counts toward price | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| PeerPush | 10 | sets the price | ↗ |
The board it did beston sets the price. Every other board only adds to it if the launch also landed in that board's top 25% — because just showing up somewhere isn't an achievement. Listing on twelve directories is free; placing well on them isn't.