‘Alternative Performance Measures’ Reporting Benchmarking Insights

What is an APM? For the purpose of this publication and consistent with the ESMA guidelines, "an APM is understood as a financial measure of historical or future financial performance, financial position, or cash flows, other than a financial measure defined or specified in the applicable financial reporting framework".

Deloitte’s data insights report for the 20 Danish non-financial services C25 reporters shows the following key insights for 2025:

Key insights

• For Alternative Performance Measures (APMs), our data analysis of the 20 Danish non-financial services C25 reporters highlights diverse and divergent practices in their disclosures within the latest annual reports. For example, the highest number of APMs is 24 and the lowest is 3 APMs per company varying significantly between industries and sectors. The number and nature of APMs also depend on the size and complexity of the individual companies. The total number of APMs is 232 for all companies of which 121, or 52%, are classified as ‘Other APMs’ being unique and tailored to the company. The use of APMs is common practice.

Number of APMs

• The median and average number of total APMs was 13. The average adjusted APMs was 6 and the average non-adjusted APMs was 7.
• In our data analysis, adjusted APMs consist of financial measures that exclude one-off/non-operational items to reflect core performance or represents a component of a broader financial metric, such as organic revenue growth as opposed to total revenue growth, while non-adjusted APMs (e.g., standard EBITDA) include all items without exclusions. Any key ratio presented as adjusted must be explicitly labelled as such in the annual reports; otherwise, it is considered non-adjusted, with the exception of organic growth measures due to its nature.

Nature of APMs

• Net interest-bearing debt (NIBD) was the single most common APM in our analysis (90%).
• EBITDA was the second most common APM (80%).
• ROIC/ROCE, EBIT, and free cash flow (FCF) were equally the third most common APM (with 75% each).
• 90% of the companies report special items. All companies which report special items, describe or specify them in the annual report, either in the management review or in the notes to the financial statements.
• All companies describe some of their APMs in the management review. None of them refer to the ESMA guidelines.

Guidance on APMs

• Eight companies (40%) provided mid, long-term guidance or assumptions beyond one year. 18 companies or 90% provided guidance on APMs, which is considered common practice.
• The median number of KPIs for which guidance is provided, is 5. Of those, the median number of APMs guided on is 3.

Bridging to MPMs

• Some Danish C25 companies report variations of the same financial measure, such as EBITDA (e.g., adjusted EBITDA, recurring EBITDA, or pro forma EBITDA), which can create information overload for investors and other key stakeholders. To enhance transparency and comparability of financial reporting, we recommend that the Danish C25 companies reconsider the number of APMs disclosed, prioritising standardised and consistent metrics that provide significant, concise, and meaningful insights without making it unnecessary complex and comprehensive for investors and key stakeholders.
• We recommend companies reconsider the number of APMs disclosed and prioritise them to provide clear communication of APMs before implementation of MPMs under IFRS 18. This will make bridging to MPMs easier under IFRS 18.