Back to results for “Analytical Procedures”
Auditing & Assurance › Analytical Procedures

When are analytical procedures more effective than tests of details, and vice versa?

Intermediate

Answer

Analytics are more effective and efficient for large volumes of predictable transactions with stable relationships (payroll, interest, rent) and for gaining overall assurance. Tests of details are better for low-volume, high-value, or unpredictable items, significant risks, and where precise expectations can't be formed. Often the two are combined for adequate assurance.
Real-world example The auditor uses analytics for routine payroll but tests of details for a handful of large, unusual contracts.

Common follow-ups: What item characteristics favor analytics? | Why combine both approaches?