Intangible Asset Evidence
Definition
The documented record that establishes an intangible asset exists, where it sits in the Opagio 12 framework, what it is worth, and how that value can be defended at a measurement date. Evidence comes in four forms: identification (the asset is named and classified), provenance (the source documents are attached), measurement (a valuation method has been applied with documented inputs), and persistence (the evidence is reviewed and updated on a defined cadence). Under the IPEV Valuation Guidelines, information that existed at the measurement date and would reasonably be available to the Valuer through routine inquiry or due diligence — whether the founder surfaced it or not — is known or knowable, and in scope at that date. Pre-emptive intangible asset evidence-building flips the asymmetry founders typically face at term sheet: information that's 'Known or Knowable' but unsurfaced is held against the company, not the analyst. The Opagio Hallmark attests to evidence quality, not value, accuracy, or the underlying truth of customer-maintained data.
Complementary Terms
Concepts that frequently appear alongside Intangible Asset Evidence in practice.
The Opagio attestation that an asset, company, or practitioner meets a defined evidence-quality standard. Modelled on the hallmark on silver: the hallmark certifies that the metal has been tested by an independent assay office and meets a defined standard of purity — it does not certify that the silver is valuable, or that any particular price should be paid for it.
The formal, auditable record of the intangible assets a business owns, with each asset individually named, described and classified against the Opagio 12 intangible value drivers. It is the output of Guided Asset Discovery, the first step of The Opagio Method, and it exists because the accounting standards leave most intangible value undocumented: IAS 38 and FRS 102 Section 18 prohibit recognising internally generated intangibles on the balance sheet, so brand, software, customer relationships, data and know-how built in-house appear nowhere in the filed accounts.
The IPEV evidence standard, set out in the commentary under paragraph 2.5 of the Guidelines: information that is known or knowable as of the measurement date is in scope at every quarterly Fair Value remark, whether the founder surfaced it or not. The Guidelines define it as facts, conditions or observable information that exist at the measurement date and are available to the valuer, or would reasonably be available through routine inquiry or due diligence; information that becomes known, or events that occur, after the measurement date are subsequent events and are not known or knowable at that date.
A founder-side preparation discipline that builds the evidence base a Fund's Fair Value process needs at every measurement date — before the term sheet conversation begins. Distinct from valuation negotiation: a Fair Value defence isn't about arguing for a higher number, it's about producing the inputs the Fund's quarterly Fair Value model will consume for the duration of the investment.
The International Private Equity and Venture Capital Valuation Guidelines (IPEV Guidelines) are best-practice recommendations, published by the IPEV Board, for measuring the Fair Value of private equity and venture capital investments consistently with IFRS 13 and ASC 820. They apply at investment level: a fund's Valuer uses them to value the fund's holding in each portfolio company at every measurement date — typically quarterly — with one or more of five techniques (multiples, industry valuation benchmarks, available market prices, discounted cash flows and net assets), calibrated to the price of a recent orderly investment.
The IPEV discipline that gives a Fair Value model its memory. Entry inputs (the most recent funding round price, comparable transactions, noted multiples, identified intangible assets) become reference points; deltas are tracked at every measurement date.
The value derived from a company's capacity to develop new products, services, processes, and business models. Innovation capital encompasses R&D capabilities, creative talent, experimentation culture, and the pipeline of ideas at various stages of development.
A reconciliation document that maps founder-reported EBITDA to a Fund's maintainable EBITDA, identifying each adjustment per IPEV Section 3.4 with documented evidence. The bridge typically traces non-recurring spend, discontinued lines, one-time items, founder compensation normalisation, and pro-forma adjustments — each with source documentation (board minutes, contracts, payroll) and the known-and-knowable evidence flag.
Put this knowledge to work
Use Opagio's free tools to measure and grow the intangible assets that drive your business value.