Scrolling through the stock list, I can see a few examples:
Aston Martin - Fancy Cars (Automotive)
AstroZeneca - Drugs (Pharmaceutical)
BT - Slow Internet (Telecommunications)
Would it be better to have impartial descriptors, like i have suggesed in brackets? It seems more professional and does not influence peopleās opinions of stocks.
Following the chat about BTās description, letās try something different for this topic & use a poll so that we can see how many people like the alternative too..
0 voters
Iāve used āunconventionalā to try to keep the description as neutral as possible 
Iām in the camp of unconventional descriptions but with the proviso that they are at worst neutral.
For example, Drugs for Astrozeneca I converge to indifference although Medicine would be my suggestion. And when it comes to Slow Internet for BT, Iām not a fan of it and would like @Freetrade_Teamās āBig Towerā descriptor more.
Ultimately, unconventional gets my vote.
Yeah, Toby made a good call with that
+1 from me on this.
I like the quirky descriptions as long as a bit more serious detail is provided as well in the longer summary, but feel the BT one crosses a line into snarky.
So Iāve voted for unconventional with the caveat that it doesnāt stray into negative. Iād like to see the BT one changed if only because itās going to waste a lot of support time as you scale.
I donāt want Freetrade to be accused of influencing investment decision as that may lead to all sorts of trouble.
Be impartial and provide the trading platform (boring I know, sorry)
I donāt have a strong view on this so just be consistent.
Shouldnāt the poll have a āunconventional and neutralā option?
I canāt change the options now that people have voted so if youāre neutral, please donāt vote 
Man, if someone wants to invest in BT and is put off by the description āslow internetā then theyāre clearly not doing any sort of research on their investments.
Fair point and if you donāt know what BT does then maybe their marketing department needs to rethink all their adverts 
The humour is much appreciated here 
I have a feeling this is going to be as controversial and divided a topic as the āhot coral or plain colourā threads that have plagued Monzo since day 1.
A significant minority of people just donāt want humour or anything different or interesting in their financial services/lives.
(Tongue in cheek warning) How about a toggle in the app with 3 settings - Serious (what this topic is calling for), Facetious (what it is now) and Damn Right Crude (what Iād have it set to).
eg. āBP - large dividends, larger oil spillsā.
Iād volunteer to help with the crude listings 
Even if I voted for the neutral descriptions I donāt mind and I quite like the unconventional approach. What concern me is that many people are unfortunately very sensitive and make a big deal out of nothing. I know is a bit comparing apples and oranges but a comedian went to jail just because was joking about his dog making a nazi gesture.
My point is just to be wary because not everyone has sense of humor, unfortunately, and lawyers are expensive.
If someone hires a law firm then it gets changed at that point, although personally I think the legal arguments on what constitutes slow internet would be fascinating.
I like the unconventional ones. Itās more fun! And as mentioned, youād be daft to make investment decisions based on those. Brokers also make all sorts of disparaging comments about PLCs.
Even the boring normal descriptions can be āwrongā to some people. I donāt have access yet, but I noticed on a screenshot in another thread that Associated British Foods is classed on Foods. But to me ABF is Primark, and in fact Primark is by far their biggest individual business. It makes about Ā£7bn in revenue while their grocery brands make less than half of that.
I donāt think people are judging BT by this, but they are judging freetrade.
But one of the main points of Freetrade is to appeal to those who are not investment savvy (yet, they are just starting out) and they will absolutely look at some shares and (maybe) be pursuaded by the description.
I sound like a killjoy I know, but I want this to be a huge success (for many reasons).
Iād argue that Freetrade might also appeal to experienced investors (eg those maxing out their S&S ISAs year on year) who want to pay lower transaction fees for their investments. Some may be put off by the āquirkyā descriptions and not see FT as a serious company but then again, some others may see them as a breath of fresh air.
As some people have said above, maybe it should use neutral descriptions, but they can still be unconventional. I.e. donāt use negative descriptions.