Dados B3 › Transparency
Transparency
Transparency — how you check the numbers yourself
Data version 2026-09-27-reapresentacao-agreg · page generated 2026-09-27 03:57 UTC. If these do not match /saude, you are reading a cached copy.
What is checked, before every publication — 466 automated tests, collected live
2 are DATA invariants (does the number tie out?) and 120 are product tests — access gate, navigation, language, AI connector. Calling all 466 '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? (2)
MCP10— The tool list published in llms.txt is generated from the connector's own catalogue, not kept as a parallel list by hand. The hand-written one was already wrong: it announced ten tools while the connector exposed fifteen, so a third of the product was invisible to any AI reading the file that exists precisely to introduce it. Two lists far apart age in silence; this one is derived, and a new tool that does not reach the front door fails the build.MCP11— The connector's `screener` tool accepts `as_of`, like the API. The parameter existed in the API and its menu, but an AI using the connector only sees what the tool declares: without `as_of` in the signature, the question 'what could I have picked on that day' was still answered with the statement of the financial year, which nobody had on that date. The connector answer carries the same guarantees: no row uses a statement received after the date, and the survivorship caveat is stated.
Level 2 — Semantics: does the account mean what the calculation assumes? (0)
Level 3 — Economic: is the result possible in the real world? (0)
Other product tests (9)
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:
MCP01— The connector advertises EXACTLY the 14 expected tools — not one fewer (breaks clients) nor one more (drops out of the catalogue).MCP02— Through the connector the taster holds too: WEGE3 answers with ROIC and no key at all.MCP03— A gated ticker does not hand the AI a raw error: it returns an error WITH the way to resolve it, because the reader is an agent that needs to know what to tell the user.MCP04— A key passed as a tool argument opens the gated ticker — this is how an AI client authenticates, without an HTTP header.MCP05— The methodology is free through the connector too: the AI can explain HOW the number is computed without anyone paying for it.MCP06— MXRF11 is the REIT vertical's free taster: it opens with no key, just as WEGE3 does for equities.MCP07— The connector answers clients that send a third-party Origin. A real defect on 22/08/2026: the SDK's anti-DNS-rebinding protection validated Origin against a list holding only our own domains and returned 403 to chatgpt.com, chat.openai.com and claude.ai — the connector we advertise on Glama, mcp.so and X was turning away exactly the clients we invite. An external review hit it; our own probe missed it because curl sends no Origin — tested as a machine, not as a client. So this test sends the header explicitly. The other half matters just as much: opening the shop door is not opening the safe, so it also verifies that a paid ticker without a key is still refused.MCP08— Opening /mcp/ in a browser returns a useful page, not a 406. THREE external reviewers in a row failed to test the connector, and this was why: the MCP endpoint requires `Accept: text/event-stream`, so a plain GET received a 406 carrying a JSON-RPC error. To a human — and to the crawler of whoever is evaluating us — that reads as a BROKEN SERVICE. And it is precisely the URL we advertise on Glama, on mcp.so and in the README. An endpoint that only proves it works to someone who already knows how to use it proves nothing to someone evaluating it.MCP09— The connector's audit tool points at the regulator's archive, not at us. It exists because two of three external auditors had browsing disabled and could not reach a sample by URL at all; the connector is the door that does not need a browser. But it only counts if it sends the auditor to the primary source: an audit tool that points back at the product being audited is the number agreeing with itself. The test also enforces the two rules that keep a result from inflating on its own, that the auditor picks their own seed and that unchecked never becomes passed.
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 | 438 | 290 |
| 2024 | 444 | 296 |
| 2023 | 442 | 298 |
| 2022 | 429 | 295 |
| 2021 | 423 | 296 |
| 2020 | 410 | 274 |
| 2019 | 371 | 164 |
| 2018 | 326 | 164 |
| 2017 | 317 | 162 |
| 2016 | 311 | 152 |
| 2015 | 303 | 143 |
| 2014 | 301 | 139 |
| 2013 | 292 | 130 |
| 2012 | 291 | 111 |
| 2011 | 284 | 97 |
| 2010 | 277 | 34 |
Live coverage
456 companies · 876,076 price points · 8,654 recorded restatements · last refresh 2026-09-27 00:20:28. 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 2026-09-27-reapresentacao-agreg · page generated 2026-09-27 03:57 UTC. If this does not match /saude, you are reading a cached copy.