A big computer system that helps people trade things called stocks and other stuff talked about how some important numbers went up or down. Some of these numbers were about how many houses people want to buy, how much oil we have stored, and which companies are doing well or not so well. This is important for people who want to make money by buying and selling things quickly. Read from source...

First, the title of the article is misleading and sensationalized. It implies that Nasdaq gained 50 points because US crude inventories rose last week, but there is no causal relationship between these two events. The article does not provide any evidence or analysis to support this claim, which could be confusing and misleading for the readers who are not familiar with the stock market dynamics.

Second, the article focuses too much on specific companies like Aehr Test Systems (NASDAQ:AEHR) and Aclaris Therapeutics (NASDAQ:ACRS), but does not explain how they are related to the main topic of the article, which is the Nasdaq performance. The readers might wonder why these two companies are mentioned in an article about the Nasdaq index, rather than the general factors that influence it. This could create a false impression that these companies have a significant impact on the Nasdaq, when in reality they are just individual components of the index that may or may not perform well depending on their own business situations.

Third, the article does not provide any historical context or comparative analysis to show how the Nasdaq performance compares to previous periods or other indices. For example, it would be useful to know how the Nasdaq performed in the same week last year, or how it stacks up against other major indexes like the S&P 500 or the Dow Jones Industrial Average. This would help the readers to understand the current trends and patterns of the stock market, rather than just focusing on one isolated event.

Fourth, the article contains some factual errors and inconsistencies that undermine its credibility. For example, it states that mortgage applications in the U.S. rose by 9.9% in the first week of the year, compared to the 10.7% decline from the prior period. However, this contradicts the previous sentence, which says that mortgage applications fell by 10.7% in November. This is a clear contradiction and shows that the article did not undergo proper editing or fact-checking before publication.

Fifth, the article uses emotional language and exaggerated claims to appeal to the readers' emotions rather than their rationality. For example, it says that "US wholesale inventories declined by 0.2% month-over-month in November compared to a revised 0.3% fall in the previous month." This implies that the decline was unexpected and negative, but in reality, it was just a slight adjustment from the initial estimate of -0.1%. The use of words like "declined" and "revised" suggest that there is something wrong or alarming about this situation, when in fact it