Dados B3 › Transparency
Transparency
Transparency — how you check the numbers yourself
Data version 2026-11-09-ancora-do-fre · page generated 2026-11-12 08:09 UTC. If these do not match /saude, you are reading a cached copy.
What is checked, before every publication — 1298 automated tests, collected live
13 are DATA invariants (does the number tie out?) and 131 are product tests — access gate, navigation, language, AI connector. Calling all 1298 'invariants' would be inflating it: the split is checkable in the list itself. Not a hand-picked highlight reel: every test below was found by introspecting the actual test files just now, the same way pytest --collect-only would. Grouped by what it protects against, not by which file it lives in.
Level 1 — Integrity: does the data tie out? (10)
FO01— The recorded Olinda response for IPCA expectations becomes one snapshot per week and reference year, the last survey of the week; the ISO week that crosses New Year is split at the calendar year so the last December survey (31 December 2024) survives next to the first January one, since it is the base of the accuracy block.FO02— In the recorded response of 12 to 23 October 2026 the four indicators (IPCA, Selic, Cambio with its accent, PIB Total) are each read by their own source name, with reference years 2026 to 2030 and the newest snapshot of 23 October 2026, and the values of the day match the source.FO03— A row without a median, with a reference year that is not four digits, with a malformed date, of another indicator or of calculation base 1 (the short one) is dropped; only base 0, the one the Focus Report uses, is read.FO04— Storing a Friday survey replaces the Thursday snapshot of the same week without touching the previous week or another reference year, and storing the same day twice does not duplicate it.FO05— The collection stores each indicator on its own: a failed window leaves that indicator with its error and its previous history intact, the others are stored, the outcome is recorded in meta focus_coleta, and a source outage never raises.FO06— A median outside the plausible range (for example IPCA 500) refuses the whole batch of that indicator, stores nothing and keeps the previous history, while the other indicators carry on.FO07— The request to the source filters by the source name, calculation base 0 and a window of days, encodes spaces as %20 and the accent of Cambio in UTF-8; the full collection asks in 3-year windows from 2000 and the nightly one asks a single 21-day window.FO10— The JSON catalogue and the per-indicator series carry the source with the ODbL licence, a citation line with date and data version, the accuracy table with its rule and the coverage; the series is open, filterable by date and reference year, with CSV equal to the JSON, 404 for an unknown indicator and 400 for malformed parameters.FO12— Before the first collection (database without the Focus table) the JSON routes answer 503 with Retry-After, the page answers 200 with a series-being-collected notice, noindex, no number and no link to the JSON, the health endpoint does not fail and the sitemap does not announce the page.FO13— The Focus page is linked from the Macro hub, announced in the sitemap only when the database has the survey (lastmod never in the future), cited in llms.txt with the licence, linked from the API hub, reported in the health endpoint with its age, and its table is part of the build inheritance and the shrink guard.
Level 2 — Semantics: does the account mean what the calculation assumes? (3)
FO08— The latest survey gives, per indicator and reference year, the newest median and the one from up to seven days earlier with their difference (IPCA 2026 from 5.219 to 5.1891 is minus 0.0299); a year without a previous week has no difference instead of zero.FO09— How accurate the market was: for a closed year the expectation is the last survey of the previous December (not January, not an earlier December day) against the realised IPCA of December and the Selic target on 31 December from the macro series; the error is realised minus expectation, years without data are left out and nothing is estimated.FO11— The Focus page in Portuguese and English shows the headline sentence, the table of medians with the difference from the previous week, evolution and accuracy charts as server-side SVG with titles and no script, the accuracy table flagged as our subtraction, the ODbL source, JSON and CSV links, the citation line, JSON-LD with the source licence and the not-investment-advice note.
Level 3 — Economic: is the result possible in the real world? (0)
Other product tests (0)
Access gate, navigation and the MCP connector — they test whether the product works, not whether a number is right, so they don't fit the 3 levels above by design. Still counted, still listed:
Reconstruct it yourself — net margin across 5 companies, 4 sectors
We don't ask you to trust the numbers. Here's the net margin of five companies in four different sectors, each rebuilt straight from its annual report (DFP) at the CVM — net income ÷ revenue, matching the published figure exactly. For ANY indicator, of any company, the whole chain down to the line in CVM's file is at /linhagem:
| Company · sector | Net income (CVM acct) | Revenue (CVM acct) | Margin =÷ |
|---|---|---|---|
| WEGE3 · industrial | R$ 6.78 bn DRE:3.11 | R$ 40.80 bn DRE:3.01 | 16.6% |
| VALE3 · mining | R$ 11.81 bn DRE:3.11 | R$ 213.59 bn DRE:3.01 | 5.5% |
| PETR4 · oil & gas | R$ 110.61 bn DRE:3.11 | R$ 497.55 bn DRE:3.01 | 22.2% |
| ITUB4 · bank | R$ 45.85 bn DRE:3.09 | R$ 387.12 bn DRE:3.01 | 11.8% |
| BBAS3 · bank | R$ 16.78 bn DRE:3.11 | R$ 319.46 bn DRE:3.01 | 5.3% |
Download any of these DFPs from the CVM, take the income and revenue accounts, divide — you get the same number. Banks use interest income as revenue (what makes sense for a bank), so the reconciliation is sector-aware; the others use sales revenue. Figures are the latest fiscal year.
Why we may differ from another site (and it's not an error)
A difference between two sites usually isn't one being wrong — it's a method choice. We disclose ours:
- Average vs ending capital: ROE and ROIC use average equity/capital (this year + last ÷ 2), not the ending balance — so they're not a naive single-year division.
- Controlling vs consolidated: we state which one each item uses.
- TTM vs annual: quarterly multiples use trailing-twelve-months earnings.
- IFRS 16, goodwill, cash, exceptional tax: each handled explicitly and flagged when it distorts.
Do the tests bite? Yes — real cases the suite has caught
A test that never fails could mean perfect data — or a weak test. These were born from real errors that slipped through, and now fail — only shown for tests that actually exist in the collected suite above:
- I-B16 · banks' P/E = 0: the CVM reports share count sometimes in units, sometimes in thousands (varying by company and year); market cap came out 1000× too small and P/E was zero. I-B16 (price × shares recomputed) caught it — we fixed 661 annual and 2,027 quarterly multiples.
- I-B24 · the vanishing profit: the profit/equity account varies by bank (Itaú 3.09, BB 3.11); if the label search fails, the number vanishes silently and ROE is born wrong. I-B24 makes that hole fail.
- H-B23 · the 800% dividend yield: old B3 dividends carry a price not adjusted for splits; without H-B23 the yield would look absurdly real. The flag keeps the record and warns.
- I-B20 · the missing COTAHIST 2023: on the first deploy one year of prices failed to download silently; the API shipped with ~50k fewer prices and the suite passed, because nothing checked coverage. We added I-B20 — a year without prices now fails the build loudly.
- I-B33 · Oil & Gas at −89.6% in one week: COTAHIST isn't split-adjusted; a 10:1 split read as a −90% weekly return and stayed in the cumulative return forever, with nothing failing (a blind amplitude filter didn't fix it either — it just flipped which direction was wrong). I-B33 (no sector week beyond ±35%, the ruler is the exchange itself) stops the build.
- I-B31 · 364 of 865 sector-index weeks frozen: extending the series back to 2010, a sector with no company carrying a market cap that week turned into a factor of 1.0 — a flat line that the cumulative return read as 'market stood still', and the 'since 2010' return came out fictional (+527%). I-B31 fails on any week repeated to the cent.
- I-E05 · EMBRAER's 2010 P/E priced with 2025 data: the point-in-time price lookup fell forward with no ceiling whenever the current ticker had no price at balance-sheet time (ticker change, share-class migration); the multiple came out priced 15 years into the future, in 22% of annual and quarterly rows, silently. The 45-day window (and I-E05) blocks it: no session inside the deadline, no multiple computed.
- I-E04 · AZUL at R$ 1.67 quadrillion market cap: the balance sheet carried 54.7 trillion shares from the judicial recovery issuance, but the price used was already on the post-reverse-split (1:150,000) basis — two ends measured on different bases, market cap wrong by orders of magnitude. I-E04 (market cap never above Brazil's GDP) fails the build on that absurdity.
How far back each block of data goes
No asterisks here: this is coverage year by year, counted right now. Indicators (ROE, ROIC, margins, growth) come from the filings alone and cover the whole series. Multiples (P/E, P/BV, EV/EBITDA) need a price and a share count — and the share count comes from CVM's reference form, which the further back you go the fewer companies filed in a usable format. The gap between the two columns is a source limit, not an ingestion hole. If you look for an old P/E and do not find it, it is because nobody has it — not because we hid it. The same numbers as JSON: /cobertura.
| Year | Companies with indicators | Companies with multiples |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 441 | 290 |
| 2024 | 443 | 296 |
| 2023 | 441 | 298 |
| 2022 | 428 | 295 |
| 2021 | 422 | 296 |
| 2020 | 410 | 274 |
| 2019 | 371 | 166 |
| 2018 | 326 | 167 |
| 2017 | 317 | 165 |
| 2016 | 311 | 154 |
| 2015 | 303 | 144 |
| 2014 | 301 | 140 |
| 2013 | 292 | 131 |
| 2012 | 291 | 112 |
| 2011 | 284 | 98 |
| 2010 | 277 | 34 |
Live coverage
457 companies · 884,647 price points · 8,650 recorded restatements · last refresh 2026-11-12 01:38:24. Full live counts at /saude.
Sources: CVM (open data, ODbL) and B3 (COTAHIST). Not affiliated with B3 or the CVM. Not investment advice.
Numbers on this page are live. Data version 2026-11-09-ancora-do-fre · page generated 2026-11-12 08:09 UTC. If this does not match /saude, you are reading a cached copy.