The Axiom Framework
A systematic approach to financial analysis combining professional standards with documented evaluation processes.
Return HomeFoundational Principles
Our analytical approach is built on evidence-based principles and professional standards that guide consistent evaluation work.
Systematic Over Subjective
Our methodology emphasizes defined criteria and documented procedures rather than judgment calls. This systematic approach reduces variability across analysts and time periods. Clients receive analysis following established standards regardless of who performs the evaluation work. The framework provides consistency supporting decision-making processes.
Documentation Standards
We believe transparent methodology facilitates internal review and validation. All deliverables include clear sourcing, calculation documentation, and assumption explanations. This transparency allows clients to understand how conclusions were reached and verify work quality. Documentation standards align with professional practice requirements for investment analysis.
Depth Beyond Surface Metrics
Financial statement analysis requires examining what drives the numbers, not just calculating ratios. Our approach considers accounting choices, adjustments, and quality indicators affecting reported results. This depth provides context for more informed assessment than ratio calculations alone. Understanding financial position requires investigating the underlying business economics.
Client-Centered Application
While our framework provides consistency, we recognize that evaluation criteria must align with client objectives. Screening parameters, analytical focus areas, and deliverable formats are customized to specific requirements. This balance between systematic methodology and client adaptation ensures relevant output supporting your particular decision context.
Framework Components
Our analytical process follows structured phases ensuring thorough evaluation and documented findings.
Scope Definition
Initial consultation establishes analytical objectives, timeline requirements, and deliverable expectations. We document evaluation criteria, data sources to be used, and output format preferences. Clear scope definition ensures alignment before work begins.
Data Collection
Systematic gathering of financial statements, regulatory filings, and relevant third-party data. Source documentation is maintained for verification purposes. Data quality checks ensure accuracy before analysis begins.
Systematic Evaluation
Application of defined criteria through documented procedures. For screening work, candidates are scored against parameters. For statement analysis, accounting choices and quality indicators are assessed. For benchmarking, comparative metrics are calculated consistently.
Findings Development
Analysis results are structured into clear conclusions supported by underlying work. Areas warranting further investigation are identified. Findings focus on factors relevant to your decision-making process.
Quality Review
Internal verification process checks calculations, confirms source accuracy, and assesses presentation quality. This review step reduces errors and maintains professional standards before client delivery.
Deliverable Preparation
Findings are formatted according to agreed specifications with supporting documentation. Methodology explanations and source citations are included. Deliverable structure facilitates client review and internal validation processes.
Each phase builds on the previous, ensuring thoroughness while maintaining efficiency. The documented approach allows clients to understand how conclusions were reached and verify work quality according to their own standards.
Professional Standards Foundation
Our methodology aligns with established financial analysis standards and professional practice requirements.
CFA Institute Standards
Our analysts maintain CFA charter designations, ensuring adherence to the CFA Institute Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct. These standards emphasize integrity, diligence, and competence in investment analysis work. Continuing education requirements keep knowledge current with evolving analytical techniques and industry developments.
Accounting and Reporting Standards
Financial statement analysis incorporates understanding of IFRS and US GAAP accounting standards. We consider how different reporting choices affect comparability and what adjustments may be appropriate. Knowledge of regulatory filing requirements across jurisdictions supports cross-border analysis work.
Quality Assurance Protocols
Internal quality review procedures verify calculation accuracy, source documentation, and presentation standards. Work is reviewed by senior analysts before client delivery. This quality control process reduces errors and ensures deliverables meet professional standards. Documentation allows clients to validate methodology application.
Data Source Standards
We prioritize original source materials including company filings, regulatory disclosures, and audited financial statements. Third-party data providers are selected based on reputation and data quality. Source documentation is maintained for verification purposes. Clients receive clear indication of information sources used in analysis.
Addressing Common Limitations
Understanding where conventional approaches may not provide sufficient depth for your decision needs.
Surface-Level Ratio Analysis
Conventional LimitationStandard financial analysis often stops at ratio calculations without examining underlying drivers. This approach may miss accounting choices affecting reported metrics or business model changes influencing future performance.
We examine what drives the numbers, considering accounting policies, adjustments, and business economics. This depth provides context supporting more informed assessment.
Inconsistent Evaluation Criteria
Conventional LimitationWithout documented methodology, evaluation standards may vary across analysts or time periods. This inconsistency makes comparison difficult and reduces confidence in findings.
Systematic framework with documented criteria ensures consistency. Clients receive analysis following established standards regardless of engagement timing.
Limited Comparative Context
Conventional LimitationIndividual company analysis provides absolute metrics but may not indicate relative positioning. Understanding whether performance is strong requires comparison against relevant peers.
Benchmarking places performance in industry context with defensible peer selection. Comparative analysis identifies relative strengths and areas of concern.
Insufficient Documentation
Conventional LimitationAnalysis conclusions without supporting work documentation make internal validation difficult. Understanding how findings were reached requires clear methodology explanation and calculation detail.
Deliverables include source citations, calculation documentation, and methodology explanations. This transparency facilitates client review and verification.
What Sets Our Approach Apart
Distinguishing characteristics that provide added value for clients requiring thorough financial analysis.
Documented Methodology Application
While many analysts rely on experience and judgment, our systematic framework provides consistent evaluation across engagements. Documentation allows clients to understand exactly how conclusions were reached and verify work quality. This transparency distinguishes our deliverables from opinion-based assessments lacking supporting detail.
Customized Yet Consistent
We balance systematic methodology with client-specific adaptation. Evaluation criteria align with your objectives while maintaining consistent analytical procedures. This combination delivers relevant findings through reliable processes. The framework adapts to different decision contexts without sacrificing quality standards.
Depth Beyond Database Queries
Data provider tools offer convenient metric calculations but limited analytical interpretation. Our work examines accounting choices, business model considerations, and contextual factors affecting reported numbers. This depth supports understanding rather than just information retrieval. Analysis adds perspective beyond what databases provide.
Professional Standards Adherence
CFA charter holder involvement ensures work meets professional practice standards. This commitment extends beyond credential maintenance to practical application of ethical guidelines and analytical rigor. Clients benefit from analysis performed according to established investment professional standards rather than unregulated analytical work.
Capacity Augmentation Focus
Our services are designed to complement internal capabilities during high-volume periods or when specialized expertise is needed. We function as analytical capacity extension rather than attempting to replace internal teams. This positioning ensures our work integrates effectively with your existing processes and supports rather than conflicts with internal analysis.
How We Track Effectiveness
Understanding what success looks like and how we measure our analytical work quality.
Client Repeat Engagement
Our 92% repeat engagement rate reflects client satisfaction with deliverable quality and analytical value. Organizations returning for additional work indicates that our methodology provides utility supporting their ongoing evaluation needs. This pattern demonstrates consistent delivery meeting expectations.
Timeline Adherence
Our 14-day average turnaround for standard scope assignments demonstrates efficient execution while maintaining quality. Timely delivery allows clients to use analysis findings within their decision timeframes. We track delivery performance against agreed schedules to ensure reliability.
Quality Control Metrics
Internal review process tracks calculation accuracy, source documentation completeness, and presentation standards. Quality issues identified during review are corrected before client delivery. We maintain records of review findings to identify areas for methodology refinement.
Client Feedback Integration
Post-engagement discussions provide insight into deliverable utility and areas for improvement. We incorporate client feedback into methodology refinements and process adjustments. This continuous improvement approach ensures our framework evolves to meet changing client needs.
Systematic Analysis Supporting Informed Decisions
The Axiom Framework represents our systematic approach to financial analysis, combining professional standards with documented evaluation procedures. Developed through 18 years of combined experience in investment research, credit analysis, and corporate development roles, our methodology provides consistent analytical delivery across engagements while adapting to client-specific requirements.
Our framework emphasizes documentation and transparency, distinguishing our deliverables from opinion-based assessments. Clients receive not just conclusions but the underlying work supporting those conclusions, including source citations, calculation detail, and methodology explanations. This transparency facilitates internal review and validation processes, ensuring confidence in analytical findings.
CFA charter holder involvement ensures adherence to professional practice standards established by the CFA Institute. These standards emphasize integrity, diligence, and competence in investment analysis work. Continuing education requirements maintain current knowledge of analytical techniques, accounting standards, and industry developments affecting evaluation work quality.
The systematic approach applies consistently across our three core services. Investment screening analysis uses defined criteria to evaluate opportunities systematically. Financial statement analysis examines depth beyond ratio calculations, considering accounting choices and quality indicators. Industry benchmarking provides comparative context through defensible peer selection and consistent metric comparison.
Quality assurance protocols maintain analytical standards through internal review processes verifying calculations, confirming sources, and assessing presentation quality. This quality control step reduces errors and ensures deliverables meet professional standards before client delivery. Documentation allows clients to validate methodology application according to their own requirements.
Our 92% repeat engagement rate reflects client satisfaction with analytical quality and deliverable utility. Organizations return for additional work as new evaluation needs arise, indicating sustained value delivery. Based in München, Germany, we serve clients globally across asset management, private equity, corporate development, and lending sectors, applying our systematic methodology regardless of geographic focus or industry sector being evaluated.
Experience Our Analytical Framework
Discuss your evaluation requirements and learn how our systematic methodology can support your decision-making process. Initial consultation involves no obligation.
Request Consultation