I am going to do a comprehensive analysis of each of the IFRS reporting styles that are used by the 406 listed companies that submit reports to the SEC. The analysis will use POSITIVE and NEGATIVE evidence to support each reporting style. The evidence includes a working validator that exercises the rules of the reporting style using an Excel spreadsheet that I created. I provide two spreadsheets: one for companies that pass 100% of tests and one that fails one or more tests. I also provide additional documentation. You can get the analysis of IFRS-BSC-ISFUNC6-SCI1-CF1 here in this ZIP file.
The bottom line is the following for this most popular reporting style:
- 98% of the information in the 92 XBRL-based reports is consistent with my machine-readable validation rules.
- 62% of filings are consistent with 100% of my machine-readable rules.
- I have provided high-quality documentation for 23 confirmed filer errors that is an excellent learning tool. (That is the same document that is in the ZIP file.)
- The documenation both explains the filer error and provides links to the actual SEC filing page of the report and to the XBRL Cloud Viewer that enables you to look at XBRL taxonomy information related to the filer error.
If you are not clear on what a reporting style is, I would encourage you to have a look at this documentation which explains each of those funny looking codes that make up a reporting style.
Below is a summary of the reporting styles of all 406 IFRS reports in the set of companies that I am analyzing. I am choose not to analyze all of these reporting styles, but I certainly will analyze the most popular reporting styles.
If you still don't grasp why I am going through all this trouble, you might want to read (or re-read) the Computer Empathy document. Trust me when I say that there is a method to my madness.
(Click image for detailed information about each reporting style)