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.

Which quantitative thresholds are applied?

The applicable line items based on event type: revenue, net income, total assets, segment metrics. Multiple threshold bases shown. Calculation documented with the specific figures used.

What SAB 99 qualitative factors are assessed?

All factors from the Staff's framework: intentionality, concealment potential, trend masking, loss-to-income conversion, regulatory significance, management compensation implications, investor and analyst expectations, and all remaining factors.

How is peer precedent identified?

By matching event type and magnitude against EDGAR filings. Disclosure form, timing, and whether the approach generated a comment letter identified per peer.

What does the disclosure form recommendation cover?

Whether an 8-K is required within four business days, whether disclosure belongs in the next periodic filing, or whether no separate disclosure is required. Reasoning documented.

Is the memo structured for the committee record?

Yes. Format designed for the disclosure committee record: event summary, analysis, conclusion, open questions, and dissenting views section if applicable.

Can I use this for a potential restatement assessment?

Yes. Quantitative threshold and SAB 99 analysis applied. Prior period impact calculated. Peer restatement disclosure precedent surfaced.

Legal Counsel

Material Event Triage

Material event triage assesses whether a specific event crosses the materiality threshold and what disclosure form it requires. Finrep produces a memo covering quantitative thresholds, SAB 99 qualitative factors, and peer disclosure precedent for comparable events, ready for the disclosure committee record inside the decision window.

Quantitative + SAB 99

Both dimensions assessed

Peer precedent

Comparable events from EDGAR

Committee-ready

Memo structured for the decision record

See sample reports

Sample Material Event Triage Reports

See what a Finrep materiality assessment looks like. Download and review the full output.

Today's reality

Material Event Triage without Finrep

Materiality assessed informally, without a structured SAB 99 qualitative factor analysis
Quantitative threshold analysis done manually against the most recent financials
Peer precedent research deprioritized when the decision window is short
No memo in the committee record documenting how the materiality decision was reached

Legal Counsel · Pre-Filing

The event happened. The committee needs an answer before the window closes.

A material event does not arrive with a disclosure memo attached. It arrives as a phone call or an email, and the disclosure committee has a finite window to assess it: is this material, what does the guidance require, what form of disclosure applies, and what have peers done when something comparable happened to them?

Assembling that assessment requires quantitative threshold analysis against the financials, SAB 99 qualitative factor analysis, and peer precedent research. Under a decision window, those steps happen sequentially if they happen at all.

Without Finrep

Manual process

Materiality assessed informally, without a structured SAB 99 qualitative factor analysis
Quantitative threshold analysis done manually against the most recent financials
Peer precedent research deprioritized when the decision window is short
No memo in the committee record documenting how the materiality decision was reached

With Finrep

Automated workflow

Quantitative thresholds calculated against your financials with the basis documented
SAB 99 qualitative factors assessed systematically, each factor addressed and concluded
Peer precedent for comparable events surfaced from EDGAR with disclosure form and timing
Committee-ready memo produced inside the decision window with the full analysis documented

From event description to committee-ready memo in four steps

Describe the event and financials

Enter the event type, magnitude, and relevant financial context. Finrep identifies the applicable materiality framework and quantitative threshold basis.

Finrep applies quantitative and qualitative analysis

Quantitative thresholds calculated against your financials. SAB 99 qualitative factors assessed: intentionality, concealment potential, regulatory significance, investor expectations, and all other factors in the Staff's framework.

Review peer precedent

For comparable events, how peers assessed materiality and what disclosure form they used surfaced from EDGAR. Includes timing of disclosure and whether the event generated a comment letter.

Review the committee-ready memo

Full materiality memo returned: event summary, quantitative analysis, SAB 99 qualitative factor assessment, peer precedent, disclosure form recommendation, and open questions for committee judgment.

What you get

Committee-ready materiality memo with quantitative analysis, SAB 99 factors, and peer precedent

Ask FinaDashboard

Legal Counsel

What Material Event Triage does at a glance

Team: Legal Counsel
Filing phase: Pre-Filing
Output: Committee-ready materiality memo with quantitative analysis, SAB 99 factors, and peer precedent
Modules: Ask FinaDashboard

What changes when the materiality analysis is documented before the committee meets

Quantitative threshold analysis

Quantitative materiality calculated against the applicable financial statement line items: revenue, net income, total assets, and relevant segment metrics. Multiple threshold bases shown where applicable. Calculation documented with the specific financial figures used.

SAB 99 qualitative factor assessment

All SAB 99 qualitative factors assessed and concluded: whether the misstatement or event arises from intentional action, whether it masks a change in trends, whether it changes a loss to income, regulatory significance, management compensation implications, and all remaining factors from the Staff's framework.

Peer precedent for comparable events

How peers have assessed and disclosed comparable events surfaced from EDGAR: what they disclosed, in what form (8-K, 10-K amendment, footnote only), and when relative to the event. Whether the peer's disclosure approach generated a comment letter flagged.

Disclosure form and timing recommendation

Based on quantitative analysis, SAB 99 factors, and peer precedent, a disclosure form recommendation produced: 8-K required within four business days, next periodic filing, or no separate disclosure required. Reasoning documented for the committee record.

Built for the people who need the analysis before the committee convenes

Legal Counsel

Quantitative thresholds, SAB 99 factors, and peer precedent documented before the committee meets. The analysis is in the record regardless of the conclusion.

Disclosure Committee Member

Full materiality memo with peer precedent and disclosure form recommendation. Your deliberation starts with the analysis, not the question.

FAQ

Any event requiring a materiality assessment: financial restatements, regulatory investigations, cybersecurity incidents, executive departures, litigation developments, M&A transactions, and operational events with financial impact.