NACVA vs. ASA: Valuation Standards Compared

Brandon Chicotsky
Nov 30, 2025
12 min read

Updated: Jan 6

When it comes to business valuation, the choice between NACVA (National Association of Certified Valuators and Analysts) and ASA (American Society of Appraisers) standards matters. Both organizations provide frameworks to ensure accurate, defensible valuations, but their approaches and focus areas differ.

Key Takeaways:

NACVA Standards: Tailored for small to mid-sized businesses, with a focus on business valuation. Credentials include CVA® and MAFF®, accredited by the National Commission for Certifying Agencies®. Ideal for valuations involving ownership interests, intangible assets, or business succession planning.
ASA Standards: Built around USPAP (Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice), covering multiple disciplines beyond business valuation. Best suited for legal, regulatory, or complex multi-asset scenarios.

Quick Overview:

NACVA emphasizes flexibility in valuation methods and detailed reporting for business-specific needs.
ASA prioritizes compliance with USPAP, making it a strong choice for litigation, regulatory, and federally related transactions.

Choosing the right standard depends on your valuation goals and the context of the engagement. Below, we’ll explore how these standards guide valuation practices and when each is the better fit.

NACVA Valuation Standards

The valuation standards set by NACVA offer a structured framework for conducting business valuations. These principles-based guidelines establish core rules while leaving room for professional judgment tailored to specific cases. Initially implemented for engagements accepted on or after August 1, 2015, the standards have been regularly updated, with annual revisions since 2017. Notably, the June 2022 update introduced comparison charts aligning NACVA's standards with those of other organizations, including the International Valuation Standards Council, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, and the CBV Institute. These standards cover a broad range of valuation needs, extending to businesses, ownership interests, securities, and intangible assets. Let's dive into the key components: ethical principles, valuation development, and reporting practices.

Ethics and Professional Requirements

At the heart of NACVA’s valuation standards are its General and Ethical standards, which every credentialed member must follow. These ethical principles are non-negotiable and apply across all valuation engagements. Maintaining confidentiality is a cornerstone of this framework, ensuring sensitive client information is protected to prevent competitive risks.

NACVA’s prestigious designations - CVA® (Certified Valuation Analyst) and MAFF® (Master Analyst in Financial Forensics) - are accredited by the National Commission for Certifying Agencies® and reflect the organization's high ethical and professional expectations. Members must also provide clear disclosures about the scope of the engagement, the client’s identity, and any limitations that could affect the valuation process. With this ethical foundation in place, NACVA sets the stage for a structured approach to valuation development and reporting.

How NACVA Develops and Reports Valuations

NACVA’s valuation process is divided into two key areas: Development Standards and Reporting Standards.

Development Standards focus on the analytical work required to determine either a Conclusion of Value or a Calculated Value. This involves evaluating factors like dividend-paying capacity, the presence of goodwill or intangible assets, and historical sales of ownership interests. While the standards provide a clear framework, they prioritize professional judgment over rigid calculations.
Reporting Standards outline how valuation findings should be communicated. Reports must detail the scope of work, identify the client and intended users, and disclose any limitations or significant factors considered during the analysis. This level of documentation is critical for stakeholders - such as banks, courts, buyers, and sellers - who rely on these reports to assess the valuation’s credibility and reliability.

Together, these standards ensure a thorough and transparent valuation process, meeting the needs of all parties involved.

What NACVA Standards Cover

NACVA’s standards address a variety of valuation scenarios. For full business valuations, they require an in-depth analysis of the company’s ability to generate dividends or distributions, the presence of goodwill or intangible assets, and historical trends in ownership interest sales. When valuing ownership interests, the standards recognize that minority stakes often differ significantly from controlling interests, requiring nuanced analysis.

For intangible assets, NACVA provides guidance on evaluating elements like customer relationships, proprietary technology, and brand recognition - factors that contribute to a company’s overall worth.

Additionally, NACVA has established specific standards for Business Valuation Review engagements. These reviews involve assessing the credibility of another valuation analyst’s work. As defined by NACVA, this process includes “developing and communicating a member's opinion regarding the credibility of the work product of another valuation analyst.” Members conducting such reviews adhere to both the Development and Reporting Standards, as well as the broader General and Ethical standards. This framework proves especially useful in litigation cases or when business owners seek a second opinion before making significant decisions.

ASA Valuation Standards

The American Society of Appraisers (ASA) builds its standards around the widely respected USPAP framework, ensuring its valuations are both legally sound and compliant with regulatory requirements. This alignment guarantees that ASA appraisers meet stringent professional and legal expectations. For business owners relying on certified valuations - such as those offered by firms like God Bless Retirement - this connection to USPAP provides an extra layer of assurance.

ASA's Connection to USPAP

ASA members are required to adhere to USPAP as the foundation for their valuation practices [2][3]. USPAP establishes principle-based standards that guide appraisers in exercising professional judgment when estimating value [2]. This reliance on USPAP sets ASA valuations apart, especially when subjected to legal or regulatory scrutiny.

How ASA Develops and Reports Valuations

ASA, like NACVA, separates the valuation process into two main stages: development and reporting. However, ASA incorporates unique USPAP-based elements into its approach. The process applies to a variety of valuation scenarios, including businesses, ownership interests, securities, and intangible assets [2][3].

Under Development Standards, ASA appraisers carefully weigh the quality and quantity of data to arrive at either a Conclusion of Value or a Calculated Value [7]. This ensures the chosen valuation methodology aligns with the specific circumstances of the engagement. For instance, appraisers consider factors like a company’s dividend-paying ability and intangible assets such as goodwill, all while adhering to USPAP’s ethical guidelines [2].

On the reporting side, ASA’s Reporting Standards emphasize the importance of clear and thorough documentation. Reports must identify the subject of the valuation, explain its purpose and intended use, and describe the ownership interest being assessed [3]. Common valuation methods under ASA standards include the asset-based, market, and income approaches - or a combination of these - with professional judgment determining the most fitting method [3].

What ASA Standards Cover

ASA’s standards are broad in scope, covering businesses, ownership interests, securities, intangible assets, and even review engagements where appraisers evaluate valuation reports prepared by others [2][3]. General and Ethical Standards ensure that every aspect of the valuation process reflects ethical practices. ASA also offers accreditations in six distinct appraisal disciplines, highlighting both compliance with USPAP and a commitment to continuous professional growth [6][2].

When conducting reviews or delivering a Conclusion of Value or Calculated Value, ASA members must meet specific requirements to maintain consistency and quality [3]. The emphasis on professional judgment, combined with USPAP’s ethical guidelines, ensures ASA valuations remain credible in legal, financial, and business settings.

ASA’s dedication to USPAP principles underscores its commitment to delivering ethical, defensible valuations, complementing the standards upheld by NACVA.

NACVA vs. ASA: Side-by-Side Comparison

When deciding between NACVA and ASA standards, understanding their structural differences is key for business owners and valuation professionals. Both organizations uphold rigorous standards, but their approaches are shaped by distinct philosophies and professional requirements.

Standards Comparison Table

Here’s a breakdown of the main differences between NACVA and ASA:

Aspect	NACVA	ASA
Standards Framework	Independent, principles-based standards specifically for business valuation [2][3]	Adheres to USPAP (Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice) [2][3]
Primary Focus	Exclusively for business valuation professionals	Broader framework covering six disciplines, including business valuation [6]
Organizational Structure	Includes General, Ethical, Development, Reporting, and Review Standards [3]	USPAP-based structure applied across multiple appraisal disciplines [6][4]
Ethical Requirements	Ethical Standards tailored to business valuation engagements [3]	USPAP's ethical provisions for all appraisal types [6][4]
Scope of Application	Business, ownership interest, security, or intangible asset valuation [2][3]	Business, ownership interest, security, or intangible asset valuation [2][3]
Valuation Approaches	Asset-based, market, income, or combination approaches [3]	Asset-based, market, income, or combination approaches [3]
Review Standards	Business-valuation-specific review standards [6]	USPAP's broader appraisal review framework [6]
Certification Recognition	CVA® and MAFF® designations accredited by the National Commission for Certifying Agencies® [5]	Designations across six appraisal disciplines with USPAP compliance [6]

Both organizations require adherence to Development Standards for expressing a Conclusion of Value and Reporting Standards to maintain quality and consistency [2][3]. While the formats and structures may differ, appraisals under ASA and USPAP are generally comparable to valuations conducted under NACVA [2].

Professional Judgment and Flexibility

Both NACVA and ASA place a strong emphasis on professional judgment, but their frameworks apply this principle differently. NACVA’s standards encourage valuators to select methods based on the specifics of each case [3]. This principles-based approach offers flexibility tailored to business valuation scenarios.

ASA standards, rooted in USPAP, also require professional judgment, but this is applied within USPAP’s broader framework [6][4]. While both organizations acknowledge that valuation involves interpretation and that different situations may call for different methods, NACVA’s guidance is more narrowly focused on business valuation, providing targeted advice for such cases. ASA, on the other hand, integrates these principles into USPAP’s multi-discipline structure.

Both frameworks emphasize the need for a thorough evaluation of data, ensuring that the chosen approaches and methods are carefully reconciled to arrive at a value conclusion [7]. For instance, when assessing factors like dividend-paying capacity or intangible value such as goodwill, valuators must apply sound judgment [2][3]. The main distinction lies in the scope: NACVA’s guidance is tailored exclusively for business valuations, while ASA’s approach spans multiple appraisal disciplines.

Documentation and Reporting Requirements

Documentation and reporting requirements further highlight the differences between the two standards. NACVA’s Reporting Standards ensure that valuations expressing a Conclusion of Value or Calculated Value are consistent and high-quality [3]. Reports must clearly define the subject, purpose, and interest of the valuation [3].

ASA’s reporting requirements, derived from USPAP, follow a specific format and documentation process [6][4]. While both organizations demand comprehensive documentation, NACVA’s standards are specifically designed for business valuation reports, whereas ASA’s requirements are adapted for broader appraisal contexts.

According to God Bless Retirement, "Our NACVA-certified valuations and appraisals are accepted by buyers, sellers, banks, courts, and the IRS" [1].

This demonstrates that NACVA’s documentation standards meet the expectations of various authoritative bodies, instilling confidence in valuation results. God Bless Retirement further highlights the importance of thorough documentation, including non-disclosures, letters of interest, and confidential information memoranda, aligning with NACVA’s detailed standards.

Both organizations also require valuators to document scope limitations and material considerations [2][3]. NACVA’s focused approach makes it more straightforward for business valuation professionals, while ASA’s USPAP-based requirements cater to a wider range of appraisal contexts.

Ultimately, the choice between NACVA and ASA standards often comes down to the valuator’s credentials, state licensing requirements, and the specific type of engagement. For business owners, understanding the standards followed by a valuator ensures that the work meets the necessary professional requirements for their needs.

What This Means for Business Owners and Valuation Professionals

The decision to use NACVA or ASA standards has a direct impact on valuation processes and the confidence of all stakeholders involved. Each standard offers distinct frameworks tailored to different business needs. Let’s take a closer look at when each standard is most effective and how they align with specific scenarios.

When NACVA Standards Are a Better Fit

NACVA standards are particularly well-suited for small to mid-sized businesses with an EBITA of under $25 million. They offer flexible methods that can adapt to unique business characteristics, such as customer concentration, revenue patterns, and complex ownership structures.

For example, these standards are highly effective in business succession planning. Family-owned companies preparing for generational transitions or internal buyouts benefit from NACVA’s ability to focus on their specific value drivers. Similarly, in the lower-middle market, NACVA's approach is ideal for mergers and acquisitions. It allows valuators to quickly evaluate key factors like market positioning, profitability trends, and intangible assets - streamlining negotiations and deal structuring.

NACVA standards also excel when intangible assets play a significant role in the business's value. Think of consulting firms with strong client relationships, software companies with proprietary technologies, or professional practices built on reputation. NACVA’s specialized guidance ensures these less tangible elements are accurately assessed.

When ASA Standards Are the Better Choice

On the other hand, ASA standards are the go-to for situations that demand regulatory and legal precision. These standards are critical for federally related transactions, such as bank loans, SBA financing, or meeting compliance requirements. Their standardized and defensible approach ensures valuations hold up under scrutiny.

ASA standards are also invaluable in litigation settings, such as divorce settlements, tax disputes, or insurance claims. The detailed documentation and rigorous reporting they require make valuations credible and robust - qualities that are essential in legal contexts.

Additionally, ASA’s framework is highly effective in complex scenarios involving multiple asset classes. When external validation is key - such as securing financing from institutional lenders or meeting regulatory expectations - ASA’s standardized valuation format aligns perfectly with stakeholder requirements.

The Importance of Certified Business Valuations

Professional certification adds another layer of trust and credibility to business valuations. NACVA’s designations, such as the CVA® (Certified Valuation Analyst) and MAFF® (Master Analyst in Financial Forensics), are accredited by the National Commission for Certifying Agencies® and signify that valuators have met stringent education, experience, and ethical standards [5].

Certified valuations inspire confidence among all parties involved. Buyers can feel assured that the price reflects the business's true value, sellers gain an advantage in negotiations, and lenders receive well-documented reports to guide financing decisions. Beyond transactions like mergers and acquisitions, certified valuations are equally valuable for non-transactional purposes such as estate planning, buy-sell agreements, or tax reporting.

Ultimately, the choice between NACVA and ASA standards depends on the specific context of the valuation and the needs of the stakeholders. Business owners should ensure that their valuation professional’s credentials and chosen standard align with the intended purpose - whether it’s for an M&A transaction, regulatory compliance, litigation support, or internal planning.

Conclusion

Main Points to Remember

NACVA and ASA standards serve as principles-based frameworks designed to help valuation professionals produce reliable and well-documented business valuations. A closer look shows that while both share foundational principles, professional judgment plays a critical role in determining value, and both require thorough reporting to maintain quality and consistency.

The main difference lies in their organizational structures and credentialing. NACVA offers the CVA® and MAFF® designations, the only valuation and financial forensic credentials accredited by the National Commission for Certifying Agencies® [5]. On the other hand, ASA members adhere to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), which creates distinct professional pathways but still ensures valuations are defensible.

Both standards emphasize using the appropriate valuation approach - whether asset-based, market, income, or a mix - based on the specifics of the situation. Knowing which standard works best for a given scenario is key. NACVA standards are particularly suited for business succession planning, lower-middle market mergers and acquisitions, and cases involving intangible assets. ASA standards shine in federally related transactions, litigation contexts, and situations requiring regulatory compliance or external validation.

These points can help you determine which framework aligns with your business needs.

Advice for Business Owners

When selecting a valuation professional and framework, keep these insights in mind. Confirm that your valuator holds recognized certifications and has experience working with businesses like yours, especially if your business has an EBITA under $25 million.

Choose the framework that fits your specific requirements. Whether you're planning a family succession, pursuing a merger or acquisition, or preparing for litigation, understanding which standard aligns with your goals and stakeholders' expectations is crucial.

Avoid relying on informal estimates that lack certified documentation. Such shortcuts can lead to costly consequences, including failed deals, denied financing, or valuations that don’t hold up under legal scrutiny. Certified professionals adhering to NACVA or ASA standards provide detailed, defensible valuations you can trust.

FAQs

What are the main differences between NACVA and ASA valuation standards and their areas of focus?

The National Association of Certified Valuators and Analysts (NACVA) and the American Society of Appraisers (ASA) take different paths when it comes to valuation standards and certification processes. NACVA focuses on equipping financial professionals with practical tools and resources, particularly for valuing small to mid-sized businesses. In contrast, ASA is recognized for its rigorous training programs and high standards, often suited for handling more intricate or high-value appraisals.

While both organizations follow established principles of professional valuation, their methodologies and areas of focus can vary. Deciding which organization aligns best often depends on the specific requirements of the valuation, the complexity involved, and the professional's preferred approach to their work.

How do NACVA and ASA standards enhance the credibility of business valuations?

Both the National Association of Certified Valuators and Analysts (NACVA) and the American Society of Appraisers (ASA) maintain high standards to ensure business valuations are reliable and trustworthy. These organizations require their members to adhere to strict ethical codes, follow detailed methodologies, and apply widely accepted industry practices.

NACVA places a strong emphasis on providing structured frameworks for valuation professionals, prioritizing precision and thorough documentation. Meanwhile, ASA is recognized for its focus on advanced training and a rigorous peer-reviewed certification process. By following these guidelines, valuation experts produce results that can stand up to scrutiny - whether for transactions, legal disputes, or strategic decision-making.

When might a business owner choose NACVA standards instead of ASA standards for a business valuation?

Choosing between NACVA (National Association of Certified Valuators and Analysts) and ASA (American Society of Appraisers) standards largely depends on a business owner's specific goals and the context of the valuation.

NACVA standards are commonly favored by small to mid-sized businesses, especially when valuations are tied to litigation, tax planning, or internal decision-making. Certifications like the CVA (Certified Valuation Analyst) are well-regarded for their practical focus and are particularly accessible to CPAs and financial professionals.

Meanwhile, ASA standards are often the go-to choice for more intricate valuations, especially in industries that demand specialized expertise or adherence to international appraisal standards. When deciding between the two, business owners should weigh the purpose of the valuation, the complexity of their operations, and the credentials of the valuation expert.