Independent verification guide
Before an acquisition decision depends on an assumption, test what the evidence actually supports.
Before an acquisition decision depends on an assumption, test what the evidence actually supports.A transaction can be well advised and still depend on one factual proposition that has not been independently tested.
Share this guide
Signals that may justify a defined review
When this question becomes worth testing
The proposition originates mainly with the seller, management or deal materials.
Different sources appear to repeat the same underlying information rather than independently corroborate it.
A narrow factual answer is needed before broader diligence or specialist work is expanded.
Public approach
What an Aperture review is trying to establish
1. Define the exact proposition the decision depends on.
2. Locate and test the most relevant available public and supplied records.
3. Separate support, contradiction, uncertainty and material gaps.
4. State what the evidence can responsibly support and what should happen next.
Professional boundary
Where Aperture fits
Aperture does not replace legal, financial, tax, quality-of-earnings or specialist transaction diligence. It can provide an independent evidence-review layer around a defined factual question before or alongside those workstreams.
The public guide explains the client-facing logic only. Aperture's detailed non-public methodology, templates and controls remain proprietary.
Advising a client on this issue?
You do not need to absorb this work into your own mandate.
If the factual question sits outside your normal role, you can retain the client relationship and introduce Aperture for the defined evidence-review scope. Aperture performs the agreed work; you remain the adviser where appropriate.
Continue from this point
Related evidence routes
Relevant case
See how a transaction narrative and material assumptions can be tested in the Twitter / Musk case.
Open the case →Free tool
Check whether the factual issue shows enough public signals to justify independent review.
Run the check →Professional route
See how M&A advisers can use Aperture without replacing their transaction role.
For M&A advisers →The decision output
You should be able to see three things clearly.
What is supported
The material evidence that can responsibly support the proposition or finding.
What remains uncertain
Contradictions, missing records, assumptions and dependencies that should not disappear during drafting.
What should happen next
Whether the answer is sufficient for the decision, needs further verification or requires specialist escalation.