Once upon a time Matt Cutts used the example of 'a cure for cancer' marked up badly with poor HTML structure but providing the true result versus a well marked

Once upon a time Matt Cutts used the example of 'a cure for cancer' marked up badly with poor HTML structure but providing the true result versus a well marked up site with the wrong info. Which should rank better? The same IMO can be applied to speed as a factor. A slow site, (due to depth of content?) badly marked up but providing the correct result should outrank the fast site providing wrong info.