Digitise routine consistently.
Data capture, figure checks, scenarios, evidence index and status tracking should work without unnecessary manual intermediate steps.
Quality through evidence
Trust must be verifiable.
Our goal: understandable, reproducible and evidenced decision bases, for smaller companies too. No unproven superiority, no simulated audit opinion.
Every key statement needs a source.
Original data, definitions, sources, valuation dates and responsible reviewers remain visible. Missing evidence is not replaced by AI text.
Open questions stop the approval.
A second AI model is not an independent statutory auditor. Legal responsibility, a real review and a signature are not generated automatically.
Eight control layers
Identity & authority
Register, ownership, beneficial owners, representation and conflicts of interest.
Current status: Engagement assignment and sign-in active; official register checks not yet automated.
Originals & file security
Check origin of originals, malware scan, signature validation, document version and professional acceptance separately.
Current status: File type, image limits, SHA-256, folder and version history active. Scanner adapter prepared; professional scanner and cryptographic signature verification not yet set up.
Data & reconciliation
Last three years, normalisations, balance sheet equality, figure bridges, timeliness and contradictions.
Current status: Local PDF/spreadsheet extraction and OCR active; suggested figures require confirmation against the original. The three-year calculation checks current document versions and financial year-end.
Models & assumptions
Deterministic calculation, limits, sources, valuation date, sensitivity and no double counting of value.
Current status: Six simplified calculation models, DCF sensitivity and integrated income statement/balance sheet/cash flow planning with valuation dates active; independent model acceptance and a complete standard valuation report are missing.
Risks & scenarios
Keep negative findings visible, stress tests, 13-week liquidity and financing needs.
Current status: 24 review areas requiring evidence, debt service and 13-week liquidity with stress and financing gaps active. Real-time reconciliation with banks and accounting is not yet set up.
AI & claims
Trace every statement to a source; leave unknown facts open; do not execute instructions from documents.
Current status: VALO uses public website excerpts; no confidential AI document analysis and no automatic reviewer signature.
Approval & responsibility
No self-review; independent review engagement, licence, original reports and reliable evidence.
Current status: Four-eyes locks active. Final production release remains locked until operational and security evidence has been documented.
Recipients & life cycle
Named recipients, NDA, purpose, expiry, revocation, country check, event updates and logs.
Current status: Second factor, time-limited internal roles, document-based external access path and revocation controls implemented. External access remains blocked; independent acceptance and a tamper-protected long-term archive are missing.
Research · 18.10.2026
Eight firms. Specific requirements.
Selection of the international audit, advisory and M&A firms named by the client. No claim of a current ranking. The following FIRMWERT requirements are our own derivations from publicly available service descriptions; no adoption of internal methods, no licensing or partnership.
Audit & advisory
Deloitte
Public focus: Distinguish a fact book from independent vendor due diligence; control information disclosure and the bidding process.
Our takeaway: FIRMWERT separates calculated indication, data preparation, expert report and recipient approval.
Official source: Vendor Due Diligence ↗Audit & advisory
PwC
Public focus: Quality of earnings and cash flow and consistency of facts in the information memorandum; address risks early, prepare the transition.
Our takeaway: Normalisation bridge, document versions, a robust investment story and handover plan as separate work steps.
Official source: Sell-side due diligence and vendor assistance ↗Audit & advisory
EY
Public focus: The owner's goal, timing, management and complexity determine an individually prepared exit.
Our takeaway: Target profile, desired role after the sale and a staged action roadmap instead of immediate pressure to sell.
Official source: Exit Readiness ↗Audit & advisory
KPMG
Public focus: Assess financial, tax, operational, personnel, technological and other relevant risks together.
Our takeaway: 24 review areas with assigned evidence, open risks and responsible specialists.
Official source: Due diligence ↗M&A & financing
Goldman Sachs
Public focus: Consider strategic alternatives, regional and sector-specific perspectives and cross-border transactions.
Our takeaway: Compare sale, investment and other alternatives; document buyer benefits and synergies separately from the stand-alone value.
Official source: Mergers & Acquisitions ↗M&A & financing
J.P. Morgan
Public focus: Consider M&A and capital raising together, also for mid-sized companies; distinguish sell-side and buy-side.
Our takeaway: Separate the investment pack and the financing pack; present capital requirements, financeability and transaction objective together. Official service information researched; retrieval of the main page and further detail pages was partly restricted. An official second version is also available via cws-main-ndc.jpmorgan.com.
Official source: Mid-Cap Investment Banking ↗M&A & financing
Morgan Stanley
Public focus: Besides sale and acquisition, also consider joint ventures, recapitalisation and other structures, as well as equity and debt.
Our takeaway: Compare structural alternatives and payment terms; separate cash purchase price, earn-out and retained stake transparently.
Official source: Investment Banking & Capital Markets ↗M&A & financing
Bank of America
Public focus: Connect advisory, credit process, risk, and equity and debt capital; also take mid-sized businesses into account.
Our takeaway: Review debt service, liquidity and transaction structure together; leave actual credit decisions with the recipient.
Official source: Bank of America in Switzerland ↗What is still missing before a final production approval
The final production approval of dossiers is locked server-side. This prevents a pilot status from being issued as a finished review seal. Internal analyses and work on evidence remain possible.
- Second factor and internal engagement roles are implemented; independent security acceptance including external recipient roles has not yet been demonstrated.
- Malware scanning and validation of signatures and origin of originals are not yet connected.
- Independent professional model validation, security review and recovery test are not yet evidenced.
- Legal entity, engagement terms, professional responsibility and production retention concept are not yet finally confirmed.
Further open points: actual statutory auditor engagements, complete expert reports and recipient agreements; confidential document AI; buyer research and bidder management; full English version. Tests are technical evidence for the cases tested, not a guarantee against all errors or manipulation.
Standards: distinguish publication from effective date
The current reference check takes into account IDW S 1 as amended in 2026 and the IVS structure including data, models and documentation. The IAASB Handbook 2026 has been published; according to the IAASB, some of the new standards it contains will only take effect in December 2026. Every application therefore requires a check of version, valuation date and country. A website summary does not replace a full standards review.
Additional mid-market comparison
No fixed M&A “Big Four” group is claimed. Rankings differ by period, region, value, number of deals and inclusion of advisers or brokers.
Houlihan Lokey ↗ · Supplementary comparison for M&A and valuations; published 2025 table by deal count with LSEG source and our own scope note. No evidence of a fixed M&A Big Four group.
Rothschild & Co ↗ · Supplementary mid-market comparison: sector-specific and local expertise, individual transaction structure and dedicated mid-market teams. Do not combine rankings from different providers without an identical methodology.
How we would measure superiority in future
An independent study must use identical, representative cases not known in advance. It should measure evidenced hits and missed material errors, false alarms, reproducibility, source completeness, time and total cost for a comparable review scope. Manipulated documents, contradictory evidence, prompt injection attempts and system outages also belong in this test. There is as yet no evidenced comparison of FIRMWERT with the Big Four.
References: IVSC: data, models and documentation · EBA: creditworthiness assessment · NIST: risks of generative AI. Guidance for our control concept, not a certification.
Find my right starting point ↗