Compare periods and use the reviewer brief

Who can perform the task

Reviewers and administrators can inspect the comparison and reviewer brief. Preparers or administrators with permission can add evidence-backed movement explanations while the filing allows that action.

Before you begin

The reporting entity needs an earlier filing. Confirm that the compared periods and taxonomy context are appropriate. Agree the absolute and percentage materiality thresholds and the treatment of a zero baseline under your organization’s review policy.

Absolute and percentage thresholds use grouped thousands and the decimal separator of your interface language. Enter the full non-negative threshold; formatting changes how the value is displayed, without changing materiality rules or the underlying comparison value.

Quick path

1. Open the filing review workspace and choose the comparison period.
2. Inspect material movements, unchanged values, new rows, and removed rows.
3. Trace significant changes to their source, comments, validation, and audit evidence.
4. Use the reviewer brief as a navigation aid, not as a replacement for review.
5. Record conclusions and request clarification for unexplained movements.

Detailed guidance

1. Open the current filing and find Prior filing comparison and reviewer brief.
2. Confirm the displayed prior and current period.
3. Set the absolute threshold, percentage threshold, and zero-baseline behavior.
4. Review the counts for added, removed, changed, unchanged, and material facts.
5. Expand Exact fact comparison.
6. For each material fact, inspect the table, row, column, prior value, current value, origin, absolute movement, and percentage movement. Comparison labels, statuses, origins, explanations, and generated reviewer statements follow your selected interface language. Exact filing values, table and cell identifiers, user-entered explanations, validation findings, and evidence references remain unchanged.
7. When an explanation is required, record both the explanation and its exact evidence reference.
8. Replace a stale explanation when the fact or comparison settings changed.
9. Expand Reviewer brief and review:
   • material movements;
   • manual overrides;
   • mapping changes;
   • resolved validation issues;
   • enrichment conflicts; and
   • remaining blockers.
10. Follow the evidence listed below every brief statement before relying on it.

Expected result

The reviewer can distinguish source, mapping, manual, calculated, validation, and enrichment changes. Every material explanation and every generated brief statement remains traceable to exact filing evidence.

How to verify

Select a material comparison fact and reconcile its current and prior values in the two filings. Confirm the explanation is not marked stale. For each brief section, follow at least one evidence reference back to the source event, fact, finding, or decision.

Common problems

• No earlier filing for this reporting entity is available means the product cannot build a period comparison.
• Changing materiality settings can change which facts need explanations.
• An explanation becomes stale when its fact signature no longer matches the current comparison.
• None in a brief section means no qualifying recorded evidence was found; it is not proof that the underlying risk does not exist.

Audit and data consequences

Saving a movement explanation creates attributable filing evidence. The reviewer brief summarizes recorded state and does not change filing values.

Product and regulatory limitations

Materiality settings are organization review controls, not regulatory thresholds supplied by the product. The brief supports review; it does not replace professional judgment, complete source reconciliation, or authority validation.