Certainly there are many factors that contribute to aerodynamic stability but ...

The idea is, that at high alpha, the air flow is blocked by the elevator reducing the effectiveness of the rudder. That is why inverted harriers are more solid. The rudder is not blocked and gets direct airflow. The UCD has a flat bottom, so when at high alpha the rudder is blocked and the fuselage acts like a wing not a rudder making the high alpha unstable. Kinda like droping a piece of paper. The UCD is much more stable in inverted high alpha manuvers (I have one). The top of it is round and skinny, not flat, and the huge rudder is in the main air flow. Check out the Harrier 90. They made the back of the fuselage tall and skinny. No doubt for high alpha stability. The whole back half of the fuselage is like a vertical stabilizer.

As for the Goldberg Extreme 330 profile, my understanding is that is has a lot of bad tendencies and there are always exceptions to the rule. A forward CG or warped fuselage could also be hurting you there. But in general, the profiles are fantastic at high alpha.

At the same time, I am not completely ruling out wing design. I just don't think it is the main culprit for wing rock.

Dave