has refined and simplified it’s XBRL Quality Score. It now consists of 9 tests,
including errors of commission (ie bad tags), omission (ie missing element
relationships) and usability issues (ie extensions). It targets data and
metadata that inhibit the easy utilization of the data by professional
investors and analysts, notwithstanding the items’ technical compliance. The headline number for Q4 is 12.3% - the percentage of primary statement items that require correction, modification or mapping by a serious user.
the scoring is now based on the number of issues (or errors) relative to the
number of data elements that comprise the filer’s primary statements.
tests encapsulate all the important quality rules used by other entities,
including the XBRL-US DQC. But beyond that, the XBRL Quality Score answers the most
important quality question of all: HOW USABLE IS XBRL DATA? After all, complying
with the SEC’s XBRL filing requirements consumes significant corporate
resources on the proposition that the benefits to the public will outweigh the
costs. It’s unclear whether that threshold has been met.
So here are the Q4 results, grouped by compliance software vendor. XBRLogic is developing a service that enables filers and software vendors (and even the SEC) to drill down on the issues identified, as show in the images below. Not shown is 1) the ability to find the issue in the source XBRL files (i.e. linkbases) and 2) alternatives to custom tags (extensions) based on XBRLogic's Consensus Tagging algorithms.