kaal:claim:2470008-039

Matching the identified Form PF defects against the FSOC's specific uses of that data suggests possible inaccuracies in the FSOC's systemic risk assessment process, although the author disclaims scientific or empirical precision for the analysis.

A later claim in the corpus revises this one. Prefer quoting kaal:claim:2998097-021.

Source quote, verbatim

The matching of identified Form PF issues with FSOC's respective use of such suboptimal Form PF data suggests that possible inaccuracies may exist in FSOC's systemic risk assessment process. The author does not claim scientific and/or empirical precision in the analysis.

From

Wulf A. Kaal, The Systemic Risk of Private Funds after the Dodd-Frank Act (2014), VI. Conclusion
https://ssrn.com/abstract=2470008 · source PDF

Cite as

Wulf A. Kaal, The Systemic Risk of Private Funds after the Dodd-Frank Act (2014). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2470008

Holds when

method of matching known data defects to documented FSOC uses
no claim of empirical precision

Classification

failuresupport: arguedfailure: Defect to use matching reveals assessment riskfamily: data-quality-and-comparabilityresearch-methodsprivate-fundssystemic-riskrisk-and-incentives

Related claims

extends kaal:claim:2348463-022 Form PF disclosures have not been standardized, and anecdotal evidence indicates that the SEC and the FSOC may...
supported_by kaal:claim:2998097-014 Because advisers and third party service providers can flatten out and sanitize the information disclosed in F...
extended_by kaal:claim:2998097-024 Several core Form PF questions that feed the FSOC's stage one threshold assessment are defective, most importa...
extends kaal:claim:2337268-021 Form PF was created to improve SEC and CFTC investigations and examinations and to enable the Financial Stabil...
supported_by kaal:claim:2998097-022 The FSOC relied most heavily on some of the most problematic disclosure items the SEC collects, even though SE...

Verify

The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is 5f68a401c935527d89658171e9b48a4d186710459aaf2bdbead755507394e8c9. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer.
Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/42695bcb0960f123...json
Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2470008-039.md | sha256sum