UMFRVerification infrastructure for private credit
Request access

Eight questions, 31 worked cases, anchored to real public records — including synthetic controls built to test the checks themselves. Each case shows what the engine recomputed and which checks fired; where a figure is clickable, it opens the source it came from.

UMFR VERIFY

Off-balance-sheet leverage (cold intake — analysis of a document as-received) — First Brands Group (Moore Declaration)

Curated demo — real public recordsSource document committed; quotes are byte-exact slices.

You're looking at First Brands, reconstructed from its public Chapter 11 filings alone. On the left, the recomputed leverage rail: on-balance 5.38x to a certified floor of 7.46x, to a 9.49x ceiling — in dollars, a certified floor of $8.4B against a $10.7B ceiling, +27.2% floor to ceiling, the gap driven by factoring disclosed only in prose. On the right, which checks fired and why. The four figures below open the filing they came from. The other 30 cases are in the rail.

We do not claim to have predicted the fraud. We claim something more useful: the verification that would have surfaced it was mechanically possible, on documents lenders already had — and no one was positioned to run it.

Does the issuer's own math hold?

Trust ladderReaches Level 3 of 5 — Cross-Referenced
  1. 1Document Present
  2. 2Data Extracted
  3. 3Cross-Referenced
  4. 4Anomaly-Cleared
  5. 5UMFR Verified

level not reached — something surfaced for review this lens does not screen here

levels 1-2 are baseline for any document; the differentiation is 3-5

What UMFR claims and does not claim at each level
L1

Document Present

Claims: The document has been received and stored in the system.

Does not claim: Does not claim the document is authentic or complete.

Liability: None beyond storage.

(baseline for any ingested document (precomputed demo fixture))

L2

Data Extracted

Claims: These values were extracted from the document text by the pipeline, each carrying a source page and quote.

Does not claim: Does not claim the values are correct or the document truthful.

Liability: Extraction quality only.

(baseline — extracted / committed data present)

L3

Cross-Referenced

Claims: The extracted data is consistent across the documents provided and passes the internal recompute / reconciliation checks that ran.

Does not claim: Does not claim the underlying business reality matches the documents.

Liability: Cross-reference accuracy.

L4

Anomaly-Cleared

Claims: No statistical anomalies, fabrication signals, or duplicate-pledge patterns were detected in the data.

Does not claim: Does not claim the absence of sophisticated fabrication that the data patterns may not surface.

Liability: Methodology, not outcomes.

(anomaly surfaced — not cleared)

L5

UMFR Verified

Claims: The full pipeline ran and every check passed or its warnings were acknowledged; the documents meet UMFR's verification standards under the stated methodology.

Does not claim: Does not claim investment suitability and does not constitute advice.

Liability: Per the disclaimer model.

not assessed(stops earlier — warnings surfaced for review, not acknowledged)

First Brands Group (Moore Declaration)

Chapter 11 Declaration — Decl. of Charles M. Moore (A&M CRO)

Source document

Loading the source document…

Off-balance-sheet leverage (cold intake)

First Brands Group (Moore Declaration) — Decl. of Charles M. Moore (A&M CRO) (Case 25-90399)

Off-balance-sheet leverage, reconciled from a cold document into a certified floor (leverage confirmed by the documents) and a flagged ceiling. The VERIFY Score reflects the CERTIFIED floor only — on-balance debt plus structurally-tagged off-balance obligations (7.46x). The uncertified ceiling (leverage if every unresolved item counts) is surfaced for review at 9.49x, never scored.

Traced to the Moore Declaration

Certified economic leverage7.46x

On-balance debt + structurally-tagged off-balance obligations only.

On-balance-sheet5.38x
+ Off-balance-sheet obligations+2.07x7.46x

(funded debt $6,100.0mm + Off-balance-sheet obligations $2,346.8mm) / EBITDA $1,133.0mm = 7.46x

Certified floor $8,446.8mm (7.46x) → reconstructed ceiling $10,746.8mm (9.49x) — +27.2% floor to ceiling

Review tiersurfaced for review, not scored

Identity / sale-accounting unresolved; not certified, not summed into the score.

Third-party factoring obligations$2,300.0mm

narrative-disclosed; off-balance treatment unresolved (ASC-860 sale vs secured borrowing is a case-by-case judgment) and identity vs the structural sources is not established — shown for review, not added to certified leverage

If the review obligations are distinct true off-balance sales, leverage rises toward 9.49x(uncertified ceiling) — shown for review, never scored.

VERIFY Score — certified floor only

consx-doccovoff-bal

cons = internal consistency · x-doc = cross-document · cov = covenant · off-bal = off-balance-sheet · ● check fired · ○ clean

Result1 exception surfaced

VERIFY Score

The VERIFY Score reflects the certified economic leverage (7.46x)— on-balance debt plus structurally-tagged off-balance obligations. The uncertified ceiling (9.49x) is surfaced for review and never scored.

This score reflects the one dimension run on this filing. It measures verification cleanliness — the consistency between reported and independently verifiable figures — not overall credit quality. Uncalibrated; a triage signal, not a verdict, and not a credit rating. It counts how many independent checks surfaced an exception on this filing, grouped by the nature of each check — not a single grade rolled up from them. It is not a probability of default and not a fraud finding. A surfaced exception is an item flagged for a human to resolve, not a conclusion we have reached. Two issuers can surface exceptions in the same checks for entirely different reasons. Equal fingerprints do not imply equal risk, equal cause, or equal severity — open each to see which checks fired and why.

Off-balance-sheet leverageexception surfaced

This is the off-balance-sheet leverage disclosure class implicated in First Brands — not a First-Brands detector (First Brands was private, never in SEC XBRL); it is the cold-intake reconciliation of the court-filed Moore Declaration. The certified floor is scored; the uncertified ceiling is surfaced for review, not scored (it may double-count, or be on-balance secured borrowing). Every review item is attributed to the automated extraction match, never to a named issuer. A verification signal, not a verdict.

What we don’t claim

  • Within a pool, not across lenders — borrower identifiers are stripped from public data under SEC Release 33-9638, so cross-lender matching isn’t possible here, and we don’t pretend otherwise.
  • The $68.1B map covers public filers and shows the disclosure category implicated in the First Brands collapse — it is not a ‘First Brands detector’; First Brands was private and never filed with the SEC.
  • Findings are exceptions for review, never accusations.
  • The VERIFY Score is a triage signal, not a credit rating.
  • UMFR checks whether reported figures reconcile to the source documents. It does not rate credit, predict default, or recommend investment.
  • Deterministic in the output. The figures in a UMFR report are recomputed by deterministic logic and traced to source. No language model decides the numbers a reviewer sees.

See it on your filings — as a design partner

UMFR is pre-seed, building with a small number of design partners. If you lend in private credit or invest in the infrastructure, talk to the founder.

Talk to the founderRun it live on any public issuer — request access