A growth calculation can be arithmetically correct and still support the wrong conclusion. Before comparing earnings releases, match six fields: period, business perimeter, units and currency, accounting basis, measurement method and the status of earlier comparative figures.
This worksheet is a reusable reading aid, illustrated with dated Corning and Marsh releases. It is not a new results announcement, a ranking of the companies or a recommendation to invest.
The six-field comparison worksheet
Write the current and prior value beside each field, then record the exact source note. Mark a field “unresolved” when evidence is missing; do not substitute zero or assume a match.
| Field | What to match | Warning sign |
|---|---|---|
| Period | Same quarter or year-to-date duration, exact end dates and comparison direction. | A quarter is compared with nine months, or year-on-year is confused with sequential growth. |
| Business perimeter | Group or named segment; continuing or discontinued activities; relevant acquisitions or disposals. | A segment percentage is presented as the group result. |
| Units and currency | Currency, millions/billions, percentages, points or per-share amounts. | Unit scales or currencies differ without a disclosed conversion. |
| Accounting basis | Reported GAAP or the precise issuer-defined non-GAAP measure. | Current adjusted results are paired with prior reported results. |
| Measurement method | Currency treatment, adjustment definitions and the issuer reconciliation. | A familiar label is assumed to have an unchanged definition. |
| Comparative recast status | Which specific earlier figures were recast, and which were not. | One recast note is treated as applying to every table. |
The checklist is CapKet’s educational framework, not an issuer classification or an accounting certification. The linked issuer notes establish the examples below.
Copy this record for your next comparison
| Field | Current figure | Comparator figure | Finding and exact source note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Period | [Fill from source] | [Fill from source] | [Matches / differs / unresolved; source] |
| Business perimeter | [Fill from source] | [Fill from source] | [Matches / differs / unresolved; source] |
| Units and currency | [Fill from source] | [Fill from source] | [Matches / differs / unresolved; source] |
| Accounting basis | [Fill from source] | [Fill from source] | [Matches / differs / unresolved; source] |
| Measurement method | [Fill from source] | [Fill from source] | [Matches / differs / unresolved; source] |
| Comparative recast status | [Fill from source] | [Fill from source] | [Matches / differs / unresolved; source] |
Worked example: a reported-dollar comparison
Corning disclosed consolidated GAAP net sales of US$4,855 million for Q3 2026 and US$4,100 million for Q3 2025. Using those disclosed amounts, (4,855 ÷ 4,100 − 1) × 100 gives approximately 18.4%. The issuer displays 18%, rounded to a whole percentage. This is reported-dollar growth, not an organic or constant-currency calculation. Corning results: comparison table and consolidated statement.
Keep the same reported measure and unit in both columns. Pairing current core sales with prior GAAP sales would not produce same-basis growth.
One recast note does not cover every measure
Corning recast earlier segment results for its revised segment presentation. Separately, its core currency adjustment changed prospectively on 1 April 2026, and prior core figures were not recast. Its disclosed 19% core-sales growth can be quoted with that caveat; interpreting it as an unchanged-method comparison is unsupported. Corning: Segment Results and Core Performance Measures.
The distinction is between a valid calculation and the meaning attached to it. “Recast” here describes specific comparative presentation; it is not, by itself, evidence of an accounting error.
Keep reported and underlying growth labelled
Marsh’s Q3 2026 revenue bridge shows 8% reported growth and 5% non-GAAP underlying growth. Underlying growth isolates currency, acquisitions, disposals and other specified effects. Those percentages answer different questions; they are not competing versions of one raw reported-dollar calculation. Marsh: Supplemental Information—Revenue Analysis.
Do not rank these two businesses by placing unlike growth measures side by side. First establish whether the metric definitions and business scope make the intended comparison meaningful.
Write a bounded conclusion
Use this sentence: “For [period], [business scope] changed from [prior amount and unit] to [current amount and unit] on [named basis]. The method was [unchanged/changed/unresolved], and comparative figures were [recast/not recast/unresolved] for this specific measure.”
If an input is missing, state what can be described and what cannot be concluded. With a zero base, this percentage formula cannot be used; a negative base also needs careful interpretation rather than an unqualified growth headline.
Continue with the dated reports
Sources and limits
Primary records: Corning’s release dated 27 October 2026 and Marsh’s release dated 15 October 2026, filed as issuer exhibits in SEC EDGAR. Source ledger last checked 2026-10-28T11:18:32Z. No share price, consensus forecast, return prediction or constant-method replacement series was verified for this guide. This is AI-assisted CapKet educational content, not an independent audit or investment advice.
Release-time primary-source recheck observations: Corning 2026-10-28T11:59:38Z; Marsh 2026-10-28T11:59:51Z. These are source-check times, not new issuer announcements or publication dates.
Recorded source observation: . This is a source-check timestamp, not a market quote or a new article update.