flux-analysislisted

# Flux analysis Flux analysis answers **why a number moved**, with evidence. It is not a restatement of the difference. The distinction that matters: > ❌ "Professional fees increased $42K (31%) versus prior month." > That is the arithmetic. The reader already had it. > > ✅ "Professional fees rose $42K to $178K, driven by $38K of one-time diligence work from Hartman > LLP (invoices #4471, #4488) related to the Series B, plus $4K of recurring drift as the new > employment-counsel retainer started 07-01. The $38K does not recur; run-rate professional fees > going forward are ~$140K/month." > That is analysis: named driver, named evidence, recurring versus one-time, forward implication. Load `tie-out` first — you cannot explain a movement in a number that has not been proven. --- ## Every flux comment has four parts Enforce all four. A comment missing any of them is incomplete: 1. **Magnitude** — absolute and percentage, and which one governs the materiality judgment 2. **Driver** — the *specific* cause, decomposed if there are several, with each quantified 3. **Evidence** — the transactions, contracts, headcount changes, or rate changes behind it, named 4. **Forward implication** — recurring or one-time, and what the go-forward run rate is Part 4 is the one most often skipped and the one management actually reads. A variance that changes the forecast matters more than a variance that does not, regardless of size. --- ## Materiality gates — declare before you run ```