Could you explain how this is even remotely accurate? It makes no sense to me at all.
View attachment 550778
I can explain both cases to you:
(i) The tooltip says that the trade value decreases if you control a large share of a node and some nations which have trade power there do not collect there.
In your case in the Channel you have a share of 81% but check if some of the nations having TP there do not collect, if so the actual share of the trade value you get is higher than 81%, if no other nation collected it would be 100% for example. The tooltip now compares two values, your current trade income 156.08 which is:
trade node value * trade value share * trade efficiency,
and the trade income with the added light ships:
trade node value * trade power share with ships * trade efficiency.
Now if enough of the trade is not collected your actual trade value share can be higher than the trade power share you have even with the light ships added. This is probably the case in your example but to be sure one needs more information, in particular the trade node interface of the Channel.
(ii) The calculation for nodes in which you steer is actually very strange. It does not tell you the increase in trade income you get globally but it tries to calculate the trade value you steer in the node which is just
trade node value * trade power share, (does not include trade steering!)
but it does so wrongly. I don't know why but it does not take into account province trade power and transfers from traders downstream but only merchant TP and ship TP.(Might be smth. wrong in the code). So it calculates the share of merchant and ship TP you have before and after the added ships and calculates the quotient and multiplies it with your current steered value to get the new value. This leads to the increased value shown being extremely inflated if you have a decent amount of province TP in the node or a downstream node.
Therefore I would never trust the tooltip on nodes where you do not collect!
In nodes where you do collect the tooltip is, besides the point explained in (i) which I am also unsure how to improve on, as far as I know correct.