Know which source governs, and why.
The same metric can mean different things across documents. Resolve the entity, definition, and period in context, while preserving conflicting inputs and the reasoning behind the conclusion.
Entity · Atlas Group
Start with the question.
Why this source governs
Covenant EBITDA
The agreement governs this definition. The calculation still needs to be reconciled to the specified period and permitted adjustments.
Review the source
§8.1 · financial covenant
Read source excerpt
The test uses EBITDA as defined in this agreement, with the permitted adjustments and exclusions, for the specified test period.
Change the question. Compare the sources. Keep the conflict visible.
Source authority
Establish authority before forming the answer.
The right answer depends on the right context: the company or security, the measure, the reporting window, and the source that governs this question.
- 01
Establish the investment context.
Attach the evidence to the right entity and decision. Match the definition and period before comparing the values.
- 02
Compare source authority.
See why the credit agreement governs a covenant question while a company report may answer a different one.
- 03
Preserve the conflict record.
Keep competing inputs visible, alongside what was used, what was set aside, and why the conclusion follows.
Review stays with your team
Inspect the reasoning, not just the result.
Source traceability makes the conclusion reviewable; it does not make it infallible. Your team can examine the conflict and judge whether the governing evidence applies.
A session around your work
Start with two sources that disagree.
Describe a recurring conflict in your work. We’ll trace the entity, definition, period, and authority needed to resolve the question.
Request a demo