Exposure Draft 2026

Step 1 of 6

IVS General Standards

The following questions relate to proposed updates to the 'General Standards' section of the IVS, covering IVS 100: Valuation Framework; IVS 101: Scope of Work; IVS 102: Bases of Value; IVS 103: Valuation Approaches; IVS 104: Data & Inputs; IVS 105: Valuation Models; IVS 106: Documentation & Reporting; IVS 107 Quality Control, as well as the Glossary. This section is applicable to all valuations.

1. The IVS Glossary had been revised to include new definitions for business, financial instrument, non-financial liability, quality control and sustainability. Do you agree with the definitions of the newly added terms? If not, please provide your proposed revisions to the definitions contained within the Glossary.

2. The IVS Glossary had been revised to include minor revisions to the definitions of ESG, liability, liquidation value, professional scepticism, significant, tangible asset and valuation review to provide additional clarity. Do you agree with the revised definitions for the existing terms? If not, please provide your proposed revisions to the definitions contained within the Glossary.

3. The definition of valuation risk has been revised within the IVS Glossary to provide additional clarity. Do you agree with the revised definition of valuation risk? If not, please provide your proposed revision to the definition of valuation risk contained within the Glossary.

4. IVS 101 Scope of work has been revised to include mandatory requirements, where applicable, in relation to; (i) range, (ii) the proposed significant use of artificial intelligence or other technology-based tools and resources, (iii) service organisations, (iv) sustainability considerations, and the IVS asset standards to be considered within the valuation. Do you agree with the inclusion of these additional mandatory requirements? If not, why not, and what specific changes would you make?

5. IVS 104 Data and Inputs now include mandatory requirements in relation to the significant use of artificial intelligence or other technology-based tools. Do you agree with the inclusion of these additional mandatory requirements? If not, why not, and what specific changes would you make?

6. IVS 104 Data and Inputs: Appendix has been revised to include sustainability considerations in addition to the consideration of ESG factors. Do you agree with the inclusion of sustainability considerations within the IVS 104 Data and Inputs Appendix? If not, why not, and what specific changes would you make?

7. IVS 105 Valuation Approaches now includes mandatory requirements in relation to the significant use of artificial intelligence or other technology-based tools. Do you agree with the inclusion of these additional mandatory requirements? If not, why not, and what specific changes would you make?

8. IVS 106 Documentation and Reporting now includes mandatory documentation requirements in relation to the significant use of artificial intelligence or other technology-based tools. Do you agree with the inclusion of these additional mandatory requirements? If not, why not, and what specific changes would you make?

9. The reporting section within IVS 106 Documentation and Reporting has been revised to include mandatory requirements, where applicable, in relation to; (i) range, (ii) the proposed significant use of artificial intelligence or other technology-based tools and resources, (iii) service organisations, (iv) sustainability considerations, and (v) the IVS asset standards considered within the valuation. Do you agree with the inclusion of these additional mandatory requirements? If not, why not, and what specific changes would you make?

10. The section on "Allocation of Value" previously contained within IVS 102 Bases of Value has been moved to IVS 106 Documentation and Reporting. Do you agree that this section should now be contained within IVS 106 Documentation and Reporting? If not, why not, and where would you place this section?

11. Do you agree that quality controls should be mandatory within IVS? Do you agree with the level of standards as proposed, or are they too weak or stringent? If not, why not, and please provide your reasoning?

12. Do you have any other comments or observations in relation to IVS 107 Quality Controls? Please provide your reasoning for any additional comments or observations.

13. Do you have any other comments or observations?

Asset Standards - Business Valuation & Intangibles

The following questions relate to proposed updates to the asset-specific standards covering IVS 200: Business and Business Interests; IVS 210: Intangible Assets; IVS 220: Non-Financial Liabilities and IVS 230: Inventory .

14. The Exposure Draft proposes introducing additional sections aiming to provide for better alignment of the Business Valuation asset standards with the General Standards. These sections also seek to improve comparability between Business Valuation asset standards and other Asset Standards, most notably with IVS 300 and IVS 400. These sections include Valuation Framework (Section 30), Scope of Work (Section 40), Data and Inputs (Section 100), Valuation models (Section 110), and Documentation and Reporting (section 120). The introduction of those sections has resulted in the reallocation of some text to those new sections. (a) Do you find that these additional sections improve the structure and intelligibility of the Standards? (b) If you disagree, please explain your reasoning. (c) Where relevant, please provide specific suggestions for changes that you believe would enhance these standards.

15. Across the Business Valuation Standards (IVS 200, IVS 210, IVS 220, and IVS 230), the text was streamlined. (a) Do you find that the proposed Exposure Draft includes an appropriate level of detail for valuation professionals? (b) Do you find that the rephrasing of the Standards to include more direct sentences that emphasise what the valuer “must” or “should” implement to abide by the principles of the IVS is appropriate? (c) If you disagree, please explain your reasoning. (d) Where relevant, please provide specific suggestions for changes that you believe would enhance these standards.

16. In IVS 200 Businesses and Business Interests, a suite of paragraphs (?) on “Scenario Based Methods (SBM)” replaces the current text on “Probability-Weighted Expected Return Method (PWERM)” found in 130.23 to 130.27. (a) Do you agree that this change is appropriate? (b) If you disagree, please explain your reasoning. (c) Where relevant, please provide specific suggestions for changes that you believe would enhance these standards.

17. IVS 200 Businesses and Business Interests introduces a new section on Calibration, which is a technique widely used in the valuation of certain assets for specific bases of values, for example, when the intended use of the valuation is financial reporting. (a) Do you agree that the introduction of this section is appropriate? (b) If you disagree, please explain your reasoning. (c) Where relevant, please provide specific suggestions for changes that you believe would enhance these Standards.

There are more than 200 member organisations
of the IVSC, operating in 137 countries worldwide. Join them.

Standards

About

Get involved

Join our mailing list