• Take 13
• How reports are rated
• How do reports rank? The global top 300
• Who ranks where?
• How reports were selected, scored, rated
• Who judged the annuals?
• Notable (or not)
• What's so special about some?
• Picks of the bunch
• What's in a name?
• Making reports pay off?

The ReportWatch monitoring process consists of selecting a sample of listed companies around the globe. We do not claim to have all companies from everywhere selected. Far from that, as the final report ranking represents about one percent of all listed companies worldwide! But it is fair to say that our list of companies -and reports- is a representative cross section which reflects the company, industrial and geographical diversity.

Although the selection and the evaluation criteria remain primarily based on stock-listed companies we leave the doors open to any company which wants to submit its annuals for rating. And the number of spontaneous applications has sharply increased these last years.
That explains why the readers find an increasing number of privately or government-owned companies (small or larger) in our ranking -some of them producing annuals that rival with listed firms, except naturally on share and investor areas.
We pay heed to past report performance: except for comparison purpose, a report that has not delivered up to our evaluation criteria for a couple of years has less chance to be reconsidered for rating.
A ranking is competitive in nature, but we have made competition tougher by going for a direct comparative approach. Every report scanned in print or online is immediately compared with a peer. Practically, it implies that our lower-ranked reports are there for comparison but that there are certainly hundreds of ones performing much better than them. The result of this option is that some industries, companies and reports are left out.
This brings up back to our starting point: considering all reports from all countries and all industries would be mission impossible. Our survey would never stop, or would require as many analysts as the ones employed at ...! e.com's ReportWatch is both more modest and more ambitious. Modest, because we focus on a selection. Ambitious, because we aim to build a benchmark against which report standards and reporting practices can be measured.

Were not considered for selection:

• Financial sector companies (banks, insurance, investment funds, financial holdings);
• Privately owned companies (except those electing to compete);
• Purely government-owned companies (except those electing to compete or those compared to);
• Wholly-owned subsidiaries (except those electing to compete);
• Investment, income, mutual or real estate funds and trusts;
• Listed stock exchanges;
• Central banks;
• Development or reconstruction banks and similar financial institutions;
• Public agencies;
• Non-profit organizations;
• Reports for a fiscal year before or after 2008 or interim/quarterly reports.

The report evaluation criteria are:

• Packaging
• Highlights
• Strategy
• Business
• Financials
• Investors
• Governance
• Accounting
• Responsibility
• Communication

• Each set of criteria is split into 5 items. The total number of evaluation criteria is 50, with each item scored on a scale of 0 to 2. The maximum score is 100.
• The scoring process is the first stage of the ReportWatch assessment. It is carried out by e.com report analysts (financial analysts, investor relations specialists, corporate communication advisers, accountants, economists, copywriters at senior or junior and intern levels) and it provides a basis for final ratings by the rating panel and results in the report ranking published in the Annual Report on Annual Reports.
• Neither the score nor the breakdown is publicly disclosed. These are only available through an order for a Report Scan (°) placed directly by the company or through an internal representative or external agency. In addition to the marks, the Report Scan gives an overview of pluses and minuses based on e.com's desk research for the Annual Report on Annual Reports.

(°) Scans are among the numerous evaluation services that enable e.com to publish a self-financed survey based on independent research. Go to Making reports pay off? for more information.

• - The top reports were then submitted to an independent rating panel (see: Who judged the annuals?).

The primary role of the rating panel is to cross-check reports scored by e.com and to help move from a very quantitative and "dry" scoring to a more qualitative rating, based both on intrinsic report value and communication towards various investor and stakeholder audiences. As a result, some reports were upgraded while others were marked down, from slightly to significantly. Panel members have to judge independently of their own interests, and their individual votes are not publicly disclosed.
The final results and ranking as published are the sole responsibility of e.com - ReportWatch.

Report ratings are: