Disclaimer
UMFR reports are not credit ratings, not investment advice, not audit opinions and not agreed-upon-procedures reports. They recompute figures from the documents supplied or from public filings and state what could not be computed. A finding is an exception for review, not an accusation. Where a demonstration case names a party under indictment or civil complaint, the allegations are not findings and are not adjudicated; such cases are presented as public-record reconstructions. Nothing on this site solicits an investment.
What UMFR is — and isn't
UMFR prints coverage states (verified, disclosed, inferred, declined, absent) and findings with the rule or the limit that produced each one.
UMFR surfaces what does not reconcile, for a human to review. It does not allege wrongdoing by any company.
Where a document or figure cannot be verified, UMFR says so. It never treats silence as clean — a coverage line states what ran and what did not.
Every figure is read from its source or computed deterministically from figures read there.
The cases here run on public filings. Detecting the same asset pledged across different lenders needs a cross-lender network, which public data cannot provide (borrower identifiers are stripped by regulation). The $68.1Bsupplier-finance study maps a disclosure category across public filers — it is not a "First Brands detector" (First Brands was private and never appeared in these filings).