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.

How are open items identified?

From the draft itself: TBD placeholders, pending confirmations, sections flagged for legal review, and unvalidated cross-references. Supplemented by any open items the team provides at upload.

What does the peer alignment gap summary show?

Sections below peer practice by gap type: absent topic, thin coverage, or below-median depth. Condensed from the full peer alignment output to the gaps material at the committee level.

What is the overall readiness rating based on?

Number and severity of coverage gaps, open item count and resolution status, and peer alignment gap profile. Three ratings: ready to route, ready with noted items, not ready.

Does it replace the individual review passes?

It synthesizes their outputs. The guideline alignment check, open item tracker, and peer alignment benchmark each run as underlying checks. The summary is the executive view.

Can I update the summary as items resolve?

Yes. Rerun after open items are resolved or gaps are addressed. Summary updates to reflect the current state.

When should I run this?

One to two weeks before the committee review meeting. Enough lead time to resolve open items and address coverage gaps before the meeting.

Disclosure Committee

Pre-Filing Completeness

Pre-filing completeness is the executive readiness summary a disclosure committee needs before reviewing a filing: disclosure coverage gaps, open items, and peer alignment gaps assembled in one artifact. Finrep runs the underlying checks and produces a single committee-ready summary before the first review meeting.

3 readiness dimensions

Coverage, open items, peer alignment

Single artifact

All checks synthesized, not listed separately

Committee-ready

Format designed for executive review

See sample reports

Sample Pre-Filing Completeness Reports

See what a Finrep pre-filing readiness summary looks like. Download and review the full output.

Today's reality

Pre-Filing Completeness without Finrep

Readiness picture assembled from separate outputs: alignment check, open item tracker, peer benchmark
Committee receives disconnected artifacts and builds the summary themselves
Open items tracked in spreadsheets with no link to the disclosure sections they affect
No single readiness view before the first committee meeting

Disclosure Committee · Pre-Filing

The committee asks three questions. Getting the answers takes three separate review passes.

Before a 10-K or 10-Q reaches the disclosure committee, the same three questions need answers. Are the disclosures complete against applicable requirements? Are there open items the team has not resolved? Where does the filing sit relative to peer practice?

Today those answers come from separate review passes: a guideline alignment check, a status tracker in a spreadsheet, and a peer benchmarking exercise. The committee receives the outputs separately, assembles the picture themselves, and starts the meeting without a readiness view.

Without Finrep

Manual process

Readiness picture assembled from separate outputs: alignment check, open item tracker, peer benchmark
Committee receives disconnected artifacts and builds the summary themselves
Open items tracked in spreadsheets with no link to the disclosure sections they affect
No single readiness view before the first committee meeting

With Finrep

Automated workflow

Single executive readiness summary covering all three dimensions in one artifact
Coverage gaps, open items, and peer alignment synthesized, not listed separately
Open items linked to the disclosure sections they affect
Committee starts the meeting with a readiness view, not a discovery exercise

From filing to committee-ready readiness summary in four steps

Upload your draft and define context

Drop your near-final 10-K or 10-Q. Provide peer set and any known open items for inclusion.

Finrep runs the underlying checks

Disclosure coverage mapped against applicable SEC and ASC requirements. Open items identified from the draft. Peer alignment scored by section against the defined peer set.

Readiness summary generated

Three-section executive summary: coverage status (complete, thin, absent by section), open items (unresolved issues linked to the affected sections), and peer alignment gaps (sections below peer practice with the specific gap). Overall readiness rating included.

Route to committee

Export the summary as the first artifact in the committee review package. Each gap and open item links to the relevant filing section for drill-down.

What you get

Single readiness summary with coverage status, open items, and peer alignment gaps

Checklist BenchmarkingDashboard

Disclosure Committee

What Pre-Filing Completeness does at a glance

Team: Disclosure Committee
Filing phase: Pre-Filing
Output: Single readiness summary with coverage status, open items, and peer alignment gaps
Modules: Checklist BenchmarkingDashboard

What changes when the committee starts with a readiness view, not a reading assignment

Disclosure coverage status

Every section of the filing assessed against applicable SEC rules and ASC disclosure requirements. Status per section: complete (requirements met), thin (present but below required specificity), or absent (required disclosure not present). Sourced to the specific ASC paragraph or S-K item. Same output as the guideline alignment check, synthesized for executive consumption.

Open item register

Unresolved items identified from the draft: disclosures marked as TBD, numbers flagged as pending confirmation, sections awaiting legal review, and cross-references not yet validated. Each open item linked to the section it affects and the person or team responsible. Status: resolved, in progress, or unresolved.

Peer alignment gap summary

Sections where the filing sits below peer practice summarized by gap type: absent topic, thin coverage, or below-median depth. Each gap shows the peer median and the filing's current position. Sourced from the peer alignment check, condensed to the gaps that matter at the committee level.

Overall readiness rating

Single executive-level readiness indicator: ready to route, ready with noted items, or not ready. Rating based on the number and severity of coverage gaps, open item count, and peer alignment gap profile. Provides the committee chair with a one-line view before the meeting starts.

Built for the people who start the committee meeting

Disclosure Committee Member

Single readiness view across coverage, open items, and peer alignment before the meeting starts. Every gap and item linked to the relevant section.

CFO / Controller

Overall readiness rating before certification. Coverage gaps, open items, and peer alignment gaps visible before the sign-off meeting.

FAQ

All filing sections assessed against applicable SEC and ASC requirements. Status per section: complete, thin, or absent. Sourced to the specific paragraph or S-K item.