RECENT POSTS
Tuesday, January 8, 2019
A Look at Climate Change Disclosures

Wednesday, January 2, 2019
Quants: Point-in-Time Data for Backtesting

Friday, December 28, 2018
Now Showing: Controls & Procedures

Thursday, December 27, 2018
A Reminder on Non-GAAP Reporting Rules

Monday, December 17, 2018
Researching PG&E’s Wildfire Risk

Wednesday, December 12, 2018
Tracking Brexit Disclosures

Thursday, December 6, 2018
Campbell Soup: Looking Behind the Label

Sunday, December 2, 2018
SEC Comment Letters: The Amazon Example

Wednesday, November 28, 2018
Measuring Big Pharma’s Chemical Dependency

Monday, November 26, 2018
Analysts, Can You Relate? A True Story

Monday, November 19, 2018
Digging Up Historical Trend Data: Quest Example

Sunday, November 11, 2018
Cost of Revenue, SG&A: Q3 Update

Monday, November 5, 2018
Lease Accounting: FedEx vs. UPS

Saturday, November 3, 2018
New Email Alerting Powers

Wednesday, October 31, 2018
PTC and Two Tales of Revenue

Tuesday, October 30, 2018
10-K/Q Section Text Change Detection

Sunday, October 28, 2018
Finding Purchase Price Allocation

Sunday, October 21, 2018
Charting Netflix Growth in Three Ways

Wednesday, October 17, 2018
Interesting Data on Interest Income

Thursday, October 11, 2018
The Decline of Sears in Three Charts

Archive  |  Search:

It’s the latest rage in financial reporting: to harp about and frown upon companies’ use of non-GAAP financial metrics.

The Securities and Exchange Commission has been squinting at non-GAAP measures of performance for a while now, wondering whether such metrics have become so convoluted that they mislead investors (“excluding reality, we had a great quarter”) or so common that investors can’t easily compare results of multiple companies. SEC Chief Accountant James Schnurr addressed non-GAAP metrics at a conference in March, saying he was “particularly troubled by the extent and nature of the adjustments to arrive at alternative financial measures of profitability, as compared to net income; and alternative measures of cash generation, as compared to the measures of liquidity or cash generation.”

You can find more cynicism about non-GAAP metrics at the Analyst’s Accounting Observer or the Accounting Onion, plus plenty of other places on the Internet, we’re sure.

Occasionally the SEC will sanction a company for a non-GAAP metric. In 2011, for example, the agency told Groupon it was less than pleased with the e-tailer’s “adjusted consolidated segment operating income.” Groupon stopped using the metric just before its IPO in November 2011, and then had to restate financials and disclose a material weakness within the first year of the IPO anyway. More recently, OM Asset Management had to delay its 2015 Form 10-K because of ongoing conversations with the SEC about its use of a non-GAAP metric it called “economic net income.” So non-GAAP metrics can definitely warrant skepticism.

That said, non-GAAP metrics aren’t always bad; sometimes they can provide illuminating glimpses into a company’s operations that traditional GAAP wouldn’t reveal. They are also allowed under Regulation G, which says non-GAAP disclosures are permissible so long as a company also discloses the most directly comparable GAAP metric, and reconciles the two.

The SEC currently has no specific plans to curb non-GAAP metrics, beyond the occasional speech chiding corporate filers to make sure the practice doesn’t get out of hand. If you want a detailed study of how large companies use non-GAAP metrics, visit the team at the Analyst’s Accounting Observer—they have conducted yearly studies since 2013, although the 2015 report is not out yet.

Here at Calcbench, we are working on a few plans to bring you more data about non-GAAP metrics and hope to announce more details later in the year. From an analysis perspective, non-GAAP is tricky because those metrics generally aren’t tagged in XBRL. You can find some non-GAAP metrics for specific companies right now, by researching their earnings releases or Form 8-Ks (where non-GAAP metrics are typically disclosed).

Then comes the task of reconciling those non-GAAP numbers back to their closest GAAP metrics—say, matching non-GAAP net income to “traditional” net income. That’s not always easy to do, especially if a company has errors in its numerical values or XBRL tags. So we’re on the case, and expect to have more non-GAAP functionality for our customers soon.

Meanwhile, if you want to mull over a controversial financial reporting subject—you found it.


FREE Calcbench Premium
Two Week Trial

Research Financial & Accounting Data Like Never Before. More features and try our Excel add-in. Sign up now to try the Premium Suite.