RECENT POSTS
Wednesday, August 21, 2019
WeWork Liabilities, Part II

Tuesday, August 20, 2019
WeWork’s Liabilities in Perspective

Wednesday, August 14, 2019
Comparing LinkedIn, Twitter Revenue

Wednesday, August 7, 2019
Leasing’s Effect on Retail Balance Sheets

Thursday, August 1, 2019
Using Calcbench to Find China Exposure

Tuesday, July 30, 2019
Leasing Details: The Comcast Example

Monday, July 29, 2019
Easy Fundamental Equity Analysis in Python

Monday, July 22, 2019
Calcbench Data and Tax Reform Insight

Wednesday, July 17, 2019
Downshifting in the Trucking World

Tuesday, July 16, 2019
New Report: Adoption of New Lease Accounting Standard

Friday, July 5, 2019
More Consequences of Lease Accounting

Monday, July 1, 2019
Another Example of Tax Reform Twisting Bottom Line

Thursday, June 27, 2019
The Latest Share Repurchase Data

Tuesday, June 18, 2019
Popping the Lid on Smuckers’ Goodwill

Tuesday, June 11, 2019
Not Much Fizz in LaCroix Right Now

Wednesday, May 29, 2019
An Example of Calcbench, Excel, and Insight

Monday, May 20, 2019
Research Paper: Capex Spending

Thursday, May 16, 2019
Psst: Got Any Weed?

Wednesday, May 15, 2019
Open Letter: SEC Proposed Rule for BDCs

Friday, May 10, 2019
General Motors and Workhorse

Archive  |  Search:

Guest blog post by Robson Glasscock, CPA and Ph.D Candidate. Robson uses Calcbench data in his
dissertation project and is sharing some of his findings here.

One of the benefits of using XBRL data from Calcbench is the ability quickly obtain data that would otherwise only be available via manual searches of EDGAR filings.  As accounting rules and disclosures evolve other database services may eventually be updated to include the new information, but real-time access to machine-readable data from fillings is advantageous for a variety of reasons. 

The current example is related to firms that hold Level 3 instruments per Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 820, and recognize valuation changes in instruments still held at the balance sheet date (i.e., mark-to-market adjustments) in earnings.  ASC 820 defines Level 3 assets and liabilities as being valued using “unobservable” inputs.  The standard goes on to say that unobservable inputs, “… reflect the assumptions market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability.”  This post explores whether these assets and liabilities are typically held by financial services firms and, if not, which non-financial services industries tend to hold more Level 3 instruments.

Between January 1, 2009 and July 1, 2013, XBRL data is available for approximately 186 firms that report unrealized gains/losses on Level 3 instruments in earnings. Of these, 103 firms are financial services firms and 83 firms are non-financial services.  Contrary to what many people might think, including many academics I have spoken to, Level 3 holdings do not appear to be dominated by financial services entities.  Within the non-financial services firms, the two-digit SIC codes with the largest representation are 49 and 13, respectively.  Industry specifics are reported below:    

image






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.