Mike Holt accuracy test (review 1)

Why I ran this test

Mike Holt has been the gold standard for NEC training for decades. His books, videos, and seminars trained half the journeymen I've worked with. So when I started building Ask BONBON, I needed a benchmark. If our answers don't match Holt's on the stuff that matters, we're not shipping.

This first review covers 25 code questions I pulled from real job tickets over the last six months. Residential service upgrades, commercial tenant fit-outs, a solar tie-in, and one headache of a pool bonding job. I ran each question through Holt's published material (books, NEC Q&A, and his free YouTube breakdowns) and through Ask BONBON. Then I checked both against the 2023 NEC and my AHJ's amendments.

The scoring method

Three buckets: correct, partially correct, wrong. Partial means the right article but wrong subsection, or the right rule but missing a critical exception. Wrong means you'd fail inspection if you followed it.

I didn't grade on speed or tone. Holt's videos take 8 to 15 minutes to get to an answer. Ask BONBON takes under 10 seconds. That's a UX difference, not an accuracy difference, and it's not what this post is about.

Where Holt crushed it

On anything involving grounding and bonding, Holt is still the benchmark. His explanations of NEC 250.4, 250.30, and 250.50 through 250.70 are cleaner than the code book itself. When I asked a question about separately derived systems and where the grounding electrode conductor lands, his answer matched the code letter for letter and gave the reasoning behind it.

Same story for NEC 310.12 (residential service conductors) and NEC 240.4(D) (small conductor rule). Holt has drilled these for so long that his examples feel like they were written alongside the code. Ask BONBON got these right too, but Holt's teaching context is better if you're still building your foundation.

Field tip: if you're prepping for the journeyman exam, watch Holt's grounding playlist twice before you touch anything else. The code language on Article 250 makes more sense after he walks you through it.

Where the tools tied

Most of the straightforward lookups were a wash. GFCI requirements under NEC 210.8(A) and 210.8(B), AFCI under 210.12, receptacle spacing under 210.52, kitchen small appliance branch circuits under 210.11(C)(1). Both sources nailed these. If you're looking up a single rule, either will get you there.

Box fill calculations (NEC 314.16) also came out even. Holt's worked examples are more detailed if you're learning. Ask BONBON is faster if you already know the method and just need the numbers.

• NEC 210.8(A)(7) countertop GFCI: both correct
• NEC 210.52(C)(2) island receptacles: both correct, both flagged the 2023 revision
• NEC 314.16(B) volume allowances: both correct
• NEC 334.15(B) NM cable protection: both correct

Where Holt's material is showing its age

This is the part nobody wants to say out loud. A lot of Holt's most-watched content is based on the 2017 and 2020 NEC. His team updates the paid material, but the free stuff that shows up first on YouTube often isn't labeled clearly. I got tripped up twice on questions where the 2023 cycle changed the answer.

Specifically, I asked about GFCI protection for dishwashers. NEC 210.8(D) in the 2023 cycle made this explicit, but the Holt video I landed on was from 2019 and said the opposite. Same issue with the expanded surge protection requirement under NEC 230.67. If you're working under the 2023 NEC, you need to confirm the video's code cycle before you trust it.

Ask BONBON is built on the current adopted code for your jurisdiction, which is the advantage of a tool that updates over a library that doesn't. That's not a knock on Holt. It's just how static content works.

The final numbers

Across 25 questions, here's where things landed:

1. Mike Holt material: 22 correct, 2 partial (outdated code cycle), 1 wrong (outdated code cycle)
2. Ask BONBON: 24 correct, 1 partial (missed a local amendment), 0 wrong

The partial on our side was a Chicago-specific conduit rule that our amendment data didn't have at the time. We've since added it. The two partials on Holt's side were both resolved in his paid 2023 update material, so if you're a subscriber you're fine.

Field tip: before trusting any NEC answer from any source, check what code cycle your AHJ is enforcing. California is on 2022, most of Texas is on 2023, and some counties are still on 2020. The answer changes.

What I'm doing with this

I'm running this test every quarter with a fresh set of 25 questions. Next review will include questions from the EV charging and solar sides of the trade, since that's where the 2023 cycle has the most movement. If Ask BONBON ever drops below 95% correct, I want to know before you do.

Holt isn't a competitor in the usual sense. His stuff is a teaching tool. Ours is a field tool. But accuracy is accuracy, and if you're paying for either one you deserve to know how they stack up.