What does Finrep do for SEC reporting teams?

Finrep provides purpose-built workflows for SEC reporting including roll-forward analysis, peer alignment benchmarking, comment letter risk detection, filing readiness checks, and AI-assisted disclosure drafting — all grounded in evidence and peer precedent.

How does Finrep help with 10-K and 10-Q drafting?

Finrep's Disclosure Drafting workflow drafts or refines 10-K and 10-Q sections using peer precedent, prior period language, and applicable ASC guidance as grounding sources. Every output is traceable to its source.

Can Finrep help respond to SEC comment letters?

Yes. Finrep's Comment Letter Response workflow drafts substantive, defensible responses to SEC staff comment letters by referencing peer company responses and applicable accounting guidance.

What workflows does Finrep offer for CFO and Controller teams?

Finrep offers Certification Readiness, Cross-Period Consistency, and Board Briefing workflows — covering pre-certification risk summaries, narrative consistency checks, and audit committee-ready disclosure summaries.

Does Finrep support ESG and sustainability reporting?

Yes. Finrep includes ESG Disclosure Benchmark and ESG Regulatory Monitoring workflows, supporting TCFD, SASB, and GRI framework alignment as well as SEC climate disclosure rule tracking.

Which teams in the CFO office does Finrep support?

Finrep supports SEC Reporting, Technical Accounting, Legal Counsel, Investor Relations, Disclosure Committee, CFO and Controller, Tax Team, and ESG Reporting functions.

What does the depth score measure?

Sub-topics addressed, quantitative disclosures present, narrative specificity, and required vs. provided data points. Score shown relative to peer median.

How are omitted sub-topics identified?

When 3+ peers cover a sub-topic within an ASC topic that your filing omits (threshold configurable). Flagged with source-linked peer excerpts.

How is this different from the peer alignment use case?

Peer alignment compares disclosures across the full filing. Note benchmark goes deeper on footnotes specifically, measuring depth scores by ASC sub-topic rather than aligned/thinner/missing classifications.

Can I define my own peer set?

Yes. Ticker, SIC, GICS, or market cap. Up to 15 peers. Methodology included in the output.

Are peer excerpts verbatim?

Yes. Linked to the specific EDGAR footnote paragraph.

When should I run the note benchmark?

Before final committee review. Run early to identify depth gaps while there is time to expand coverage.

SEC Reporting

Financial Statement Note Benchmark

Financial statement note benchmark measures your footnote disclosures against peer practice topic by topic. Finrep maps every footnote to its ASC topic, scores depth against your peer set, and flags sub-topics peers cover that you omit. Every peer excerpt links to the EDGAR source paragraph.

ASC-mapped

Every footnote to its governing topic

Depth-scored

Against your peer set

EDGAR-linked

Every peer excerpt

See sample reports

Sample Financial Statement Note Benchmark Reports

See what a Finrep note benchmark looks like on real public company filings. Download and review the full output.

Today's reality

Financial Statement Note Benchmark without Finrep

No depth measurement against peers. Footnote adequacy judged by feel, not data.
Manual comparison impractical across 10+ peer filings note by note
Omitted sub-topics invisible unless someone reads every peer footnote in full
Committee reviews footnotes without a peer depth view

SEC Reporting · Pre-Filing

Your footnotes are measured against peers. You just don't see the score.

The SEC staff and your auditors read peer filings. When your ASC 740 tax provision footnote is two paragraphs and four of your closest peers provide eight, with valuation allowance rollforwards and jurisdiction-level breakdowns, that gap is visible to anyone doing the comparison.

The problem is that the comparison requires reading dozens of footnotes across 10 or more peer filings, mapping them by ASC topic, and measuring depth. Within a close cycle, that does not get done. The filing routes on institutional memory, not data.

Without Finrep

Manual process

No depth measurement against peers. Footnote adequacy judged by feel, not data.
Manual comparison impractical across 10+ peer filings note by note
Omitted sub-topics invisible unless someone reads every peer footnote in full
Committee reviews footnotes without a peer depth view

With Finrep

Automated workflow

Every footnote depth-scored against the peer set by ASC topic
Peer comparison in minutes, not days
Omitted sub-topics flagged explicitly with peer excerpts showing what you are missing
Committee sees the gap report alongside the filing before it routes

From your footnotes to peer depth scores in four steps

Upload your filing

Drop your 10-K or 10-Q. Finrep parses every footnote and maps each to its governing ASC topic.

Define your peer set

Select by ticker, SIC, GICS, or market cap. Finrep retrieves peer footnotes from EDGAR and maps them to the same ASC topics.

Review depth scores and omissions

Each ASC topic shows your depth score against the peer median. Sub-topics peers cover that you omit flagged with source-linked excerpts.

Route to committee

Export the benchmark. Every gap shows your language, peer language, and the specific sub-topic missing.

What you get

ASC-topic depth scores with omitted sub-topic flags and source-linked peer excerpts

SEC SearchGrid Reports

SEC Reporting

What Financial Statement Note Benchmark does at a glance

Team: SEC Reporting
Filing phase: Pre-Filing
Output: ASC-topic depth scores with omitted sub-topic flags and source-linked peer excerpts
Modules: SEC SearchGrid Reports

What changes when footnote depth is measured, not assumed

ASC-topic mapping across all peer footnotes

Every footnote in your filing and every peer footnote mapped to its governing ASC topic regardless of note number or heading. ASC 842-20 maps to ASC 842-20 whether it is Note 5 or Note 14. Covers all major ASC topics: 842, 606, 740, 280, 350-40, 815, 820, 326, 230, 805.

Depth scoring by sub-topic

Each ASC topic scored on coverage depth: sub-topics addressed, quantitative disclosures present, narrative specificity, required vs. provided data points. Score shown relative to peer median, not an absolute standard. A filing can be above median on ASC 606 and below on ASC 740 within the same footnote set.

Omitted sub-topic flagging

When peers consistently cover a sub-topic within an ASC topic that your filing omits, the gap is flagged with the peer excerpts showing the specific language. Threshold configurable: flag when 3+ peers cover a sub-topic you do not.

Source-linked peer excerpts

Every peer excerpt links to the specific paragraph in the peer's EDGAR footnote. Verbatim language. Click through to verify the original in context.

Built for the people who sign off on whether footnotes are deep enough

SEC Reporting Lead

Every footnote depth-scored against peers by ASC topic. Omitted sub-topics flagged with peer language before the filing routes.

Technical Accountant

Depth scores by ASC topic with the specific sub-topics peers cover that you omit. Review starts with data, not intuition.

FAQ

All footnotes. Every note mapped to its governing ASC topic. Covers 842, 606, 740, 280, 350-40, 815, 820, 326, 230, 805, and all other major codification topics.