Is IPEV the same as IFRS 13?

No, but they are designed to be compatible. IPEV is the global practitioner standard providing five investment-level techniques for VC and PE fair-value measurement. IFRS 13 is the UK and global accounting standard providing the definition, hierarchy, and disclosure framework for fair value. Funds apply IPEV's techniques to derive fair-value conclusions, then disclose those conclusions in IFRS financial statements under IFRS 13. IPEV explicitly references IFRS 13 in its guidance to ensure consistency.

How many investment-level techniques does IPEV provide?

Five: Multiples, Industry Benchmarks, Available Market Prices, DCF, and Net Assets. Practitioners sometimes refer to "the four IPEV methods" — this is incorrect. There are five investment-level techniques. Asset-level methods (RFR, MPEEM, W&W, Replacement Cost) sit within the portfolio company's own PPA or impairment work and feed into the IPEV investment-level valuation as supporting evidence, not as the primary IPEV technique.

Where does ASC 820 diverge from IFRS 13?

Materially the two standards are aligned. Specific divergences include: (a) historical day-1 gain or loss recognition rules, (b) disclosure format conventions — particularly tabular roll-forwards, (c) slight differences in highest-and-best-use application for non-financial assets, (d) bid-ask spread treatment, and (e) practical expedients (NAV as practical expedient available under ASC 820 for fund-of-fund investments; not directly available under IFRS 13). For VC / PE portfolio valuations the divergences are usually not material — IPEV-derived conclusions support both frameworks.

Are private investments always Level 3?

Almost always under both IFRS 13 (UK and global) and ASC 820 (US). Level 1 requires quoted prices in active markets for the identical asset — by definition, private investments do not have this. Level 2 requires observable inputs (similar assets in active markets, identical assets in inactive markets) — occasionally available for private investments with recent comparable transactions but rare. The dominant classification is Level 3 (unobservable inputs), which carries the most extensive disclosure requirements.

What does "calibration to original transaction" mean in IPEV?

It is the practice of testing the chosen valuation technique against the original investment price. If the technique applied at the investment date would have produced the actual investment price (the round price at which the fund invested), the technique is considered well-calibrated. Subsequent fair-value applications should produce results consistent with the calibrated technique unless circumstances have demonstrably changed. IPEV is explicit about calibration; IFRS 13 / ASC 820 imply it through the market-participant test but are less prescriptive.

Can I use ASC 820's NAV practical expedient under IFRS 13?

No. ASC 820 permits the use of NAV as a practical expedient for measuring fair value of certain fund-of-fund investments (where the underlying fund reports NAV consistently with ASC 820). IFRS 13 does not provide this expedient — the holder of a fund-of-fund investment must apply IFRS 13's measurement principles directly. For fund managers reporting under both frameworks, the NAV-shortcut available for US GAAP is not available for IFRS reporting, which can produce small reporting differences in fund-of-fund structures.

How do IPEV techniques map to IFRS 13's three approaches?

IPEV's five techniques sit within IFRS 13's three valuation approaches: (a) **Multiples** and **Industry Benchmarks** sit in the market approach, (b) **Available Market Prices** sits in the market approach, (c) **DCF** sits in the income approach, and (d) **Net Assets** sits in the cost approach or asset-based measurement depending on application. The IPEV framework provides finer-grained practical guidance within the broader IFRS 13 / ASC 820 categories.

Voluntary but de facto industry standard. IPEV is endorsed by major practitioner bodies globally and used by virtually all institutional VC / PE funds for portfolio fair-value reporting. Funds that depart from IPEV face scrutiny from LPs, auditors, and regulators — the practical expectation is IPEV-aligned methodology. Where a fund applies a non-IPEV approach, the deviation must be documented, justified, and disclosed; auditors and LPs ask why. The most common reason for deviation is partial — a fund applies IPEV consistently across most holdings and uses a non-IPEV technique for a specific atypical holding (e.g. a structured-credit position).

Valuation Method

IPEV vs IFRS 13 vs ASC 820 — Three Fair-Value Frameworks Compared

IPEV is the global practitioner standard for VC and PE fair value with five investment-level techniques. IFRS 13 and ASC 820 are the UK / global and US accounting standards that define fair value, the three-level hierarchy, and disclosure. IPEV is how fund managers measure; IFRS 13 and ASC 820 are what the accounting standards require for the resulting numbers.

VC and PE fund managers navigate three fair-value frameworks at once: IPEV (the global practitioner standard with five investment-level techniques), IFRS 13 (the UK and global accounting standard for fair value measurement), and ASC 820 (the US equivalent). They are designed to be compatible. IPEV is how fund managers measure; IFRS 13 and ASC 820 are the regulatory frameworks within which the resulting fair values are disclosed. The defensible position is one consistent IPEV-derived conclusion per investment reported under the applicable accounting framework.

Criteria	IPEV (Practitioner Guidelines)	IFRS 13 and ASC 820 (Accounting Standards)
Issued by	IPEV Board (industry practitioner bodies, global)	IASB (IFRS 13, UK and global); FASB (ASC 820, US)
Type	Practitioner guidelines	Accounting standards (mandatory in respective jurisdictions)
Geographic scope	Global	IFRS 13: UK and global IFRS reporters; ASC 820: US GAAP reporters
Definition of fair value	Aligned with IFRS 13 / ASC 820	Exit price in an orderly transaction between market participants
Number of techniques	5 investment-level (Multiples · Industry Benchmarks · Available Market Prices · DCF · Net Assets)	3 valuation approaches (market, income, cost) — IPEV's 5 map within these
Fair-value hierarchy	Implicitly Level 3 for private investments	Three-level hierarchy (1: active market; 2: observable inputs; 3: unobservable)
Calibration to original transaction	Explicit guidance	Implicit in market-participant test; less prescribed
Disclosure requirements	LP-focused; aligned to fund-reporting conventions	Quantitative and qualitative; Level 3 disclosures detailed; IFRS 13 and ASC 820 differ in format
Mandatory or voluntary	Voluntary (but de facto industry standard)	Mandatory in respective jurisdictions
Practical-expedient provisions	Limited (NAV-based shortcuts not endorsed for portfolio holdings)	ASC 820 permits NAV as practical expedient for fund-of-fund; IFRS 13 does not
Industry coverage	VC and PE specific	All asset classes

When to Use Each Approach

IPEV (Practitioner Guidelines)

VC fund investment-portfolio reporting (quarterly NAV / fair value to LPs)
PE fund investment-portfolio reporting
Family-office and direct-investor private equity holdings
Round-Ready portfolio companies where IPEV-aligned methodology is required

IFRS 13 and ASC 820 (Accounting Standards)

Financial-statement disclosure of fair-value measurements (IFRS 13 UK and global)
Financial-statement disclosure under US GAAP (ASC 820)
Level 3 unobservable-input disclosures and sensitivity analysis
Cross-framework reporting for funds with both UK / global and US LPs

Our Verdict

IPEV is the practitioner standard; IFRS 13 and ASC 820 are the regulatory standards. Apply IPEV's five techniques to derive fair-value conclusions; report those conclusions under IFRS 13 (UK and global IFRS) or ASC 820 (US GAAP) with the appropriate hierarchy classification and disclosure. The three frameworks are compatible — the defensible position uses one IPEV-derived conclusion per investment across both regulatory frameworks.

Related Glossary Terms

Learn More

View lesson →

Ready to Value Your Intangible Assets?

Use Opagio's valuation tools to apply these methods to your own business.

Try the Valuator Browse All Comparisons

IPEV vs IFRS 13 vs ASC 820 — Three Fair-Value Frameworks Compared

When to Use Each Approach

IPEV (Practitioner Guidelines)

IFRS 13 and ASC 820 (Accounting Standards)

Our Verdict

Related Glossary Terms

Learn More

Related Comparisons

Relief from Royalty vs MPEEM: Which Method to Use

Relief from Royalty vs Cost Approach

DCF vs Market Approach for Intangibles

Ready to Value Your Intangible Assets?