Auf den Seiten der Kommentarübersicht werden alle öffentlichen Kommentare zur aktuellen Version der IBCS®-Standards in chronologischer Reihenfolge aufgeführt (englisch).

Jürgen Faisst

Hi Viola,

I would like to answer as follows:

>What is the behaviour for tables showing values in % only? Shall the subtitle say “in %”?

Yes, IBCS suggest that you should mention the unit % in the second line of the title.

>What if % is the majority and some values are raw (unformatted)?

I would absolutely agree to your suggestion and always show the % behind the numbers in the table as long as there is no generally accepted semantic notation for percentages (e.g. showing them always in italics and not using italics any more for other purposes than showing percentages).


Hi. I have a question regarding the number formatting in tables. For example if a table contains only values in Million USD the „in Million USD“ is written in the subheader to simplify the table and to avoid clutter. Values in percentage are still displayed in the table (e.g. 3%). What is the behaviour for tables showing values in % only? Shall the subtitle say „in %“? What if % is the majority and some values are raw (unformatted)? I suggest to always show the % in the table no matter if percentage is the majority or not. What do you suggest? Many Thanks, Viola


We could argue about benchmarks not being fictitious.

An Index for example is a arbitrary calculated number (there are various formulas to determine a Index), same for market benchmarks/ averages which is an calculated number and therefore fictitious.

If we ignore the current explanation why the PL is outlined (see. Warsaw), then Plan is just a special case of an Benchmark. A future target which i Planed to reach.

If we do want to follow the Warsaw definition of the outlined bars, we have to create a new visual rule for this use case.

In my first drafts I used a blue as color for representing benchmarks.

I tried to mark benchmarks as a kind of virtual/ artificial KPI.

If we do not want to use colors we could try a dotted line.

Here a small example the blue line represents the benchmark line


In Switzerland within our current projects our clients are all talking about „YTG“ key figures, e.g. „Revenue-to-go“. Rolf also knows one of our clients personally using this scenario description (we joined/met hin together in March 2016 in Basel).

For me all mentioned abbreviations are clear and comprehensible. For sure I am not a native speaker.

Jürgen Faisst

Any comments from native speaking financial analysts on that topic?

Jürgen Faisst

Hi Michael,

Thank you for this valuable input. We definitely should improve the criteria for the selection between charts and tables in the next version of the Standards (most probably 1.2).

Jürgen Faisst

I would agree that ‘Benchmark’ is of the same nature as other scenarios serving as a reference. However, I would not link it to Plan, because it its not fictitious. Therefore I would leave the definition of Plan and Budget untouched and suggest to discuss a new type of scenarios for IBCS Version 1.2 covering scenarios such as “average outlet”, “competitor”, and “industry benchmark”. Any idea for a good name for this type? And what about the visualization? It has to be solid, because it already happened, but how to distinguish it from Actual?


I prefer the right aligned version in your example. I think it reduces the jumps of the eyes between the values and the labels of the categories.
Furthermore, you can right align the labels in tables as well in order to reduce eye movements.


I think here we’re missing a few more time series analyses terms. It looks like UN 4.2 is focused on montly periods, but in practice we also have sub-monthly time series analyses.

Most importantly in operational reporting (daily, weekly reports):

MTD (Month-to-Date) = beginning of month to present date

RoM (Rest-of Month) = present date to the end of current month (the equivalent of RoY or YTG as you call it)

rolling 7 days … no idea what a nice abbreviation for that would be

Also moving beyond the period of 1 year we frequently have the CAGR (Compound annual growth rate).

There’s more, but at least the above mentioned time-series analysis should be added here.


Regarding „YTG“ (Year-to-Go): in my experience the most standard term for that is RoY (Rest-of-Year). So YTD+ROY = FY (Full Year).