Who is this article for?

Users wanting to learn more about WRDS Corporate + Legal.

No special access or permissions are required.

This article answers the most commonly asked questions for WRDS Corporate + Legal.

General

What datasets are included with the Corporate + Legal subscription?

The following datasets are available with a Corporate + Legal subscription:

Bankruptcies

Why do some firms appear in the Bankruptcy Notifications dataset but not in the Revised Audit Opinions dataset?

This is expected. The two datasets cover different populations and do not overlap completely.

The Revised Audit Opinions dataset includes only audit opinions that meet all of the following criteria:

• Issued on the registrant’s own financial statements
• Filed by SEC registrants
• Collected across approximately 80 SEC form types, primarily annual reports

The following are excluded: subsidiaries, pre-merger entities, accounting predecessors, and opinions not issued directly for the registrant.

The Bankruptcy Notifications dataset, by contrast, includes companies that filed bankruptcy notices and may encompass firms that do not file audit opinions under the Ideagen Audit Analytics collection methodology, are subsidiaries or predecessor entities, have no audit opinion on record, filed opinions before the collection scope was expanded, or ceased SEC reporting prior to filing for bankruptcy (referred to as “going dark”).

Due to these population differences, many bankruptcy filers will not have a corresponding record in the Revised Audit Opinions dataset. For questions about whether a specific COMPANY_FKEY should have an associated opinion record, the Support team can review individual cases.

Comment Letters

Is Comment Letter text available for download in WRDS?

Yes, but it must be accessed through SAS — the field COMMENT_LETTER_TEXT is too large for a standard WRDS query. Note that comment letter text should be used rather than comment thread text, as comment threads were designed to illustrate examples of disclosure rather than capture all comments and are not comprehensive.

Does the Ideagen Audit Analytics Comment Letter database include CORRESP files attached as Form S-1/A exhibits?

Yes. Ideagen Audit Analytics has a process for collecting CORRESP files attached to other filings as exhibits. Response letters are often attached to S-1/A registration forms well after the original S-1 filing, but the SEC does not issue notices upon receipt of these letters. When information on an S-1/A is available, the filing is reviewed for a CORRESP exhibit.

How do I link Feed 25 to the comment_letter_issue_taxonomy supporting table?

Refer to the entity relationship diagram (ERD) for guidance on linking the main feed to the supporting table. The ISSUES_LIST_TEXT_XXXXX fields can also be used to match taxonomies.

The FILE_DATE field corresponds to the date of the comment letter itself – what field corresponds to the date of the filing the comment letter references?

This information is available in the comment_letter_to_daily_edgar_filings.txt supporting table. The relevant variable is file_date. Note that this variable differs from the FILE_DATE field in the main feed.

Does TERMINATE_FILE_DATE relate to SEC comment letter reviews or closing letters?

No. TERMINATE_FILE_DATE is a company-level field that indicates when a deregistration form, such as Form 15, was filed. It is unrelated to comment letter conversations, review progress, or SEC closing letters.

Does the Comment Letters database include all SEC comment letters, including those for funds and registration statements?

No. The database prioritizes filings such as 10-K, 10-Q, 8-K, 20-F, 40-F, 6-K, and related amendments. Proxy letters for Russell and S&P companies are also maintained. Fund, registration, and proxy filings are not fully maintained, so coverage for those areas is narrower than EDGAR.

Is there a backlog of Comment Letters data?

Yes. There is an ongoing backlog of more than 40,000 letters, primarily affecting non-priority filing types dating back to 2009. Full resolution is not expected in the near term.

Why does a comment letter appear on the Ideagen Audit Analytics platform but not yet in WRDS?

The Ideagen Audit Analytics platform updates daily, while WRDS updates quarterly. Comment letters also become public only after a confidentiality period, and processing time adds further delay. Recently disseminated letters will appear in the next quarterly WRDS update.

Should every CL_CON_ID contain a closing (review completion) letter?

No. Many SEC review conversations do not end with a formal closing letter filed on EDGAR. Closing letters can be identified when LIST_CL_ISSUE_PHRASE contains the value "Closing SEC letter associated with SEC commentary." CL_CON_ID groups letters that reference the same filing or set of filings; a new ID is assigned when a different filing or set of filings is referenced.

How do Comment Letter issue taxonomies work, and how do I link them to supporting tables?

LIST_CL_ISSUE_PHRASE lists the specific taxonomy topics mentioned in a letter (e.g., Revenue Recognition), while LIST_CL_ISSUE_TAXGRP provides the broader group each topic belongs to (e.g., Accounting Rule and Disclosure Type Issues). To join these taxonomies, match the ISSUES_LIST_KEYS fields in the main Comment Letters feed to comment_letter_issue_taxonomy.txt, which contains detailed taxonomy definitions. An ERD is available to guide the join logic.

How do I determine the filing date of the 10-K or 10-Q referenced in a comment letter?

Use the comment_letter_to_daily_edgar_filings.txt supporting table, which includes a file_date field. Legacy fields LIST_FORM_FKEY_ED and LIST_FILE_DATE_ED are no longer maintained.

How can I find the Ideagen Audit Analytics topic and classification numbers referenced in academic papers?

In WRDS, include the Comment Letter Main Feed plus Financial Block in your download — numeric Issue Keys will appear in the output. On the Ideagen Audit Analytics platform, numeric keys can be mapped to topic descriptions using the Data Dictionary → Comment Letter Issues tab.

Can issue tags be tied to specific individual comments within a letter?

No. Issue tags apply at the letter level, not the individual comment level. Only citations are tagged at the comment level within the Comment Threads dataset. Comment-level issue tagging is internal and not available as a data product.

Initial Public Offerings

Where does Ideagen Audit Analytics source its IPO data, and why not use SEC filings like Form 424B4?

IPO data is sourced from third-party providers including Nasdaq, IPOScoop, Renaissance Capital, and IPO Database. These sources reliably confirm IPO completion and reflect final pricing, which may not appear in Form 424 filings. Ideagen Audit Analytics further confirms each IPO by reviewing the corresponding 424, EFFECT, or CERT filing. Form 424B4 covers a broad range of offering documents and cannot reliably confirm IPO completion on its own

What does the IPO database include? Does it contain withdrawn or incomplete IPOs?

It includes only completed IPOs with an EFFECT, 424, or CERT filing. Companies that withdrew, paused, or did not complete the IPO process are not included. Fields such as TERMINATION_STATUS and COMPANY_IS_TERMINATED_OR_DEREGISTERED are sourced from the Company Block (Feed 12) and reflect SEC registration status, not IPO outcome.

How are SPACs handled in the IPO database?

SPAC IPOs are included and tagged accordingly. Count differences relative to other sources such as Pitchbook occur because Ideagen Audit Analytics includes only IPOs that have received an EFFECT filing, while external sources may include deals at earlier or non-completed stages.

Why might SPAC or IPO counts differ from other sources?

Differences stem from methodology. Ideagen Audit Analytics includes only completed IPOs with an EFFECT, 424, or CERT filing, while other sources may list planned offerings, withdrawn deals, or incomplete transactions. Counts may also differ due to third-party posting delays of one to two days.

Litigation

Should I use pre-2000 litigation data in WRDS?

No. The database officially begins in 2000, and earlier records are incomplete.

What sources are used for legal case data?

Legal case data is sourced from SEC filings required under Regulation S-K Item 103 and supplemented with PACER. DOJ and SEC websites may also be referenced, with details confirmed through PACER.

How do I link Legal Case data to Company Legal Party, auditor data, or other Ideagen Audit Analytics modules?

COMPANY_FKEY and AUDITOR_KEY (where applicable) are found only in Feed 14 Company Legal Party. Feed 13 Legal Case contains case-level data but no company identifiers. Join the two datasets using LEGAL_CASE_KEY to connect parties to their cases. Linking to other modules depends on the specific analysis, as these databases were not originally designed for extensive cross-module merging.

Where can I find categories such as class actions, malpractice, securities issues, mergers, bankruptcies, AAERs, and IPOs?

These categories are available in the Feed 13 Legal Case database and are identified using the IS_CATEGORY_TYPE fields, where 1 = Yes and 0 = No.

What does it mean when a party is marked as “Lead”?

Lead parties are the primary representatives within their group. When the docket does not specify a lead, Ideagen Audit Analytics assigns the designation to the first listed plaintiff or defendant.

What is the Party Terminated Date? Is it the same as the Case End Date?

No. The Party Terminated Date reflects when a specific party was dismissed from the case. The overall case may continue after that point.

What is a Consolidated Party?

A Consolidated Party appears when multiple related cases are combined into one. This is distinct from a Non-Party Parent, which identifies a corporate parent of a named party.

What is a Related Non-Party, and how does it differ from a Non-Party Parent?

A Related Non-Party is an entity mentioned in a disclosure but not listed on the official docket. A Non-Party Parent identifies the corporate parent of a named party. Neither type includes an indicator showing alignment with plaintiffs or defendants.