XBRL 2.0

Digital financial reporting that actually works


XBRLogic.com 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.

Importantly, 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.

These quality 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.