Valuation Webinar Series 2026
Five interactive panel discussions on the developments reshaping how the world measures value.
Now in its seventh year, the IVSC Valuation Webinar Series brings together an audience from more than 100 countries, with over 8,000 people registering for the 2025 series. Across five hour-long sessions, it explores the major trends shaping valuation and assembles world-leading experts to share perspectives from across valuation, investment, regulation, standard-setting, business and academia.
The sessions are interactive, giving attendees the opportunity to shape the discussion and share their views on the pace of change and how valuation is being reshaped. The series is free to join, and everyone who registers gains access to the on-demand recordings and to digital resources that complement each session. We are grateful to our series sponsor, Kroll, for supporting the IVSC Valuation Webinar Series in 2026.
Sports assets are commanding remarkable valuations as institutional and private capital moves into franchises, leagues and media rights. Yet these are unusual assets, where scarcity, brand and fan engagement can matter as much as conventional cash flows. This session unpacks what is driving the rapid rise in the prices paid for sports franchises, and how valuers keep their conclusions grounded in fundamentals and observed market transactions rather than speculation. Panellists will consider established revenue streams such as media rights and sponsorship, newer sources such as fan data monetisation and betting markets, and the approaches best suited to capturing them within recognised valuation methodologies.
Speakers
Topics the panel could explore
- What really drives value in sports assets, and why do they command the premiums they do?
- How should scarcity and “trophy asset” appeal be reflected within recognised valuation approaches?
- Media and streaming rights have become a central value driver. How should their long-term, recurring nature be captured and stress-tested?
- How do different league structures, centralised and equally shared versus locally driven, change the valuation calculus?
- What does the entry of private equity and institutional capital mean for valuation discipline in the sector?
- How should emerging sources of revenue, such as fan data monetisation or betting markets, be assessed?
- As the prices paid for sports franchises rise rapidly, how do valuers keep valuations rooted in fundamentals and observed market transactions?
- What are the biggest risks, whether regulatory, reputational, concentration or media-cycle, that a sports valuation should account for?
Confidence in fair value rests on more than sound methodology. It depends on effective oversight. As scrutiny intensifies around private markets and other hard-to-value assets, where market values are not always readily observable and valuation outcomes can significantly influence decision-making, regulators and standard setters are asking whether existing safeguards are sufficient to promote transparency, consistency and confidence. Yet what effective oversight looks like differs from one market to the next, shaped by how far each has developed the regulation, professional bodies and means of enforcement that give standards effect. Bringing together perspectives from markets at different stages of development, this session explores how oversight can be strengthened without diminishing the professional judgement that underpins good practice, and how independence, transparency and consistent standards can reinforce trust.
Speakers
Topics the panel could explore
- What does genuinely effective valuation oversight look like in practice, and how does it differ across jurisdictions?
- Where are the most significant gaps in the current framework, particularly in private markets?
- How should the profession handle the conflict where managers value the very assets they hold?
- What is the right balance between self-regulation by the profession and external supervision by regulators?
- How can oversight be strengthened without eroding the professional judgement that credible valuation requires?
- What roles do independence, independent challenge and third-party review play in reinforcing confidence?
- How can valuers better evidence and communicate the assumptions behind their conclusions to boards, investors and regulators?
- If the panel could make one concrete recommendation to strengthen oversight globally, what would it be?
AI’s efficiency gains in valuation are now well understood, with automation already embedded in data gathering, benchmarking, modelling and reporting. This session looks past that to a harder question: what AI means for the methodologies themselves. As AI makes private market data and observable inputs far more available, giving valuers a direct view of the assets they are pricing rather than relying on proxies, the panel asks whether approaches designed decades ago for illiquid assets still hold, how far private and public market valuation may converge, and what professional judgement, and the role of third-party valuation, look like in a faster and more data-rich environment.
Speakers
Topics the panel could explore
- The efficiency case for AI in valuation is now largely settled. The harder question is what it means for the methodologies themselves: are approaches designed decades ago for illiquid private assets still the right ones?
- AI is making private market data and observable inputs far more available, giving valuers a direct view of the assets they are pricing rather than relying on comparable proxies. How should methodologies respond?
- As observable inputs emerge in private markets, how far might private and public market valuation approaches converge, and where should they remain distinct?
- It is often said that valuation will always require judgement. What does the judgement of the future look like relative to today’s?
- If valuations become more frequent and more data-driven, does the traditional third-party valuation model still hold, and who should commission and pay for them?
- How do we keep AI-assisted, data-rich conclusions explainable, auditable and defensible, and what does that ask of standards and governance?
- What new skills and capabilities will valuers, investors and managers need as each gains new ways to view the same assets?
- Looking three to five years ahead, is the concept of third-party valuation being reshaped, and what might a modernised approach look like?
Among the many international forces reshaping how value is measured and advised upon, this session focuses on three: the growing demand for more frequent valuation, enabled by AI; the continuing influence of climate on risk and value; and the rising share of enterprise value held in intangible assets. It examines what each means for valuation quality, governance and oversight, and for the valuer’s shift towards a more strategic role advising boards on value creation. All three are global in reach and run through every part of the valuation process and the profession.
Speakers
Topics the panel could explore
- What is driving the demand for more frequent valuation, and how realistically can AI and richer data meet it without overstating precision?
- As valuation becomes faster and more automated, what must evolve in governance, quality control and oversight, and where should the balance be struck between timeliness and defensibility?
- Although climate sits lower on some agendas than it once did, its influence on risk and long-term value has not faded, and investor interest remains strong. How is that shaping the evidence and assumptions valuers are expected to bring?
- Physical climate risk is increasingly material in many regions, affecting whole economies rather than individual assets. How should valuation approaches reflect this, and what does credible practice look like in the most exposed markets?
- Intangibles such as IP, brands and data now drive much of enterprise value yet remain hard to measure and largely outside the balance sheet. What frameworks, data and skills does the profession need to value them credibly, and how should disclosure evolve?
- As intangibles move to the centre of the value story, the valuer’s role is shifting from reporting value towards advising boards on how value is created and protected. What does that shift demand of skills, independence and standing?
- Looking five years ahead, and across all three themes, what single change would most improve how the profession measures, governs and communicates value?
As private markets open up to a broader base of investors through evergreen and semi-liquid structures, valuers face a defining challenge: producing credible, consistent values for inherently illiquid assets on a daily, or near-daily, basis. More frequent NAVs support access and transparency, but they raise the stakes around governance, timeliness and fairness between investors, and they expose a hard practical question, namely how a daily value can rest on underlying holdings that themselves report only monthly or quarterly, and often in arrears. Practice today spans a wide spectrum, from the rigorous yet pragmatic to the minimum needed to get by, and it is unlikely to converge until investors and regulators set clearer expectations. This session addresses the realities of valuing at pace: where more frequent valuation is genuinely needed, whether and how it can be done with discipline, and the controls, thresholds and independent review needed to make the resulting numbers defensible.
Speakers
Topics the panel could explore
- Why is the market moving towards more frequent valuation of private assets, and which structures and investor channels are driving the shift?
- As these assets reach a broader, less specialist investor base, are daily or near-daily values a realistic expectation for inherently illiquid holdings, and what does that place on the valuation process?
- How can inherently illiquid assets be valued credibly and consistently at daily or near-daily frequency?
- How should a daily value be struck when the underlying holdings themselves report only monthly or quarterly, and often in arrears?
- Practice today ranges from the rigorous yet pragmatic to the minimum needed to get by; where should the line sit, and are threshold rules that hold a value until a set move is exceeded a sound discipline or an arbitrary one?
- What governance, controls and independent third-party challenge are essential when marks are struck this frequently?
- In semi-liquid structures, the value set determines who gets what on subscription and redemption; how is fairness between investors protected?
- What are the main risks of more frequent NAVs, such as stale pricing, liquidity mismatch and smoothing, and what do recent liquidity and redemption events tell us about managing them?
- What do regulators and standard setters expect here, and how can valuers communicate the assumptions and limitations behind frequent marks clearly to investors, boards and regulators?