WO2006094224A2

WO2006094224A2 - Computer-based rating system having multivariate, hierarchical data-management interface

Info

Publication number: WO2006094224A2
Application number: PCT/US2006/007720
Authority: WO
Inventors: Peter Ohnemus; Henrik Steffensen; David Leason
Original assignee: Asset4
Priority date: 2005-03-03
Filing date: 2006-03-03
Publication date: 2006-09-08
Also published as: EP1872328A2; EP1872328A4; WO2006094224A3

Abstract

A computer-based rating system configured to manage multivariate, hierarchical data through an interface (Figure 1). The interface presents transformations of the hierarchical data that can be made at a host machine into entirely new information and presentation forms that can enable users at client machines to perform any one or more of a variety different interrogations including inspection of the computational basis for the transformations, exposing hierarchical information underlying a particular rating value, interaction with one or more of such parameters to influence the computed rating value presented to a given user (100). In more particular aspects, the rating system can include controls to limit which users can influence the computation of rating values. The rating system interface can be configures to provide users with multivariate geometric renderings, optionally with statistical or benchmark information rendered as well, using the hierarchical data and data-transformations described herein.

Description

COMPUTER-BASED RATING SYSTEM HAVING MULTIVARIATE, HIERARCHICAL DATA-MANAGEMENT INTERFACE

This application claims the benefit of U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 11/071,978, filed on March 3, 2005, titled "SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR GRAPHICAL DISPLAY OF MULTIVARIATE DATA," and claims the benefit of U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 11/071,981, filed March 3, 2005, titled "TIERED ACCESS TO INTEGRATED RATING SYSTEM₃" and claims the benefit of. U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 11/071,980, filed March 3, 2005, titled "ZOOM INTERFACE COMPONENT FOR INTEGRATED RATING SYSTEM₅" each of which is hereby incorporated by reference is its respective entirety.

Field of the Invention

The present invention relates to a computer-based rating system, and, more particularly, to a hosted rating system that is configured to manage transformations and presentations of multivariate, hierarchical data to users at client machines through an interface.

Background of the Invention

As increasing quantities of data are gathered, correlated, and derived regarding almost anything on which data can be gathered, displaying this data in a form which can be easily and visually comprehended also increases in difficulty. A system for presenting this data so as to allow for the rapid absorption and processing of multiple categories of inter-related data is needed.

Practitioners have generally succumbed to the use of multivariable tables and discretized charts to represent multiple data points. These systems fail to adequately represent multivariate data in a single rendering. It is difficult to correlate the data presented in a multi-column table without studying each column. Frequently, the data presented in such charts and tables is comprised of meta-data or intermediate transformations of underlying data. The number of tables or columns in a table rapidly multiplies as more and more underlying data, meta-data, and intermediary calculations are incorporated into such charts and tables. Likewise, the ability of a user to reference multiple tables or columns in order to explore data underlying a calculation is complicated when hierarchical calculations of data and meta-data are involved.

Similarly, a discretized chart, such as a bar chart, does not truly provide a single integrated visual representation, but rather requires each bar in the chart to be individually examined. Cartesian graphs are severely limited because only three dimensions can be meaningfully rendered in two dimensions, and even a three-dimensional rendering in two dimensions creates distortions in the user's perception of the data being displayed on a monitor attached to a computer. Other coordinate systems, such as spherical or cylindrical coordinates, are inadequate because the average person is not familiar enough with the them to quickly and meaningfully extract the data being presented, particularly when more than three variables are being plotted.

One example of the voluminous data being gathered, correlated, and generated can be illustrated by examining business entities. This data has expanded beyond mere financials to include regulatory, environmental, social, and financial influences. One instance of this that the business world more than ever is demanding a higher level of transparency in its statements and reports to the investing public, their executive management and board members and to the asset management industry. In part, this is due to the debacles caused by corporate scandals of major enterprises such as Enron, Worldcom, Parmalat and others in which investors and pension funds participants lost billions of dollars. Legislation has been passed in many countries to mandate guidelines for corporate governance and accounting. A notable example in the United States is the passage of the Sarbanes Oxley Act.

The world has become an instant global village where everybody knows everything — and nothing. According to Morgan Stanley (January 2005), there are now more than 850 million people participating twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week in the Internet economy. Also, the number of mobile phones in use has increased to more than 1.6 billion users worldwide. Of these mobile phones, more than 20% are said to be real-time instant Internet devices. Microsoft and its competitors report that they have more than 350 million instant message users signed up to their Instant Message platforms. Due to the rate of information transfer, companies are pressed to provide a more detailed level of transparency and "good behavior." Value takes years to generate in the corporate world but can be destroyed within hours.

Many companies make use of their corporate websites to provide information to investors, analysts and the press. Based on the information provided, the performance of a company can be "benchmarked" relative to their peers. However, benchmarking in this manner is subjective, subject to human bias and is therefore cannot be applied across many companies in a precise manner. Neither are tools available for ready, objective benchmarking using prescribed or user-established criteria. Over the past eight years or so, the Swedish company Hallvarsson & Hallvarsson has measured the public performance of the Internet appearance for Europe's top 150 listed companies and the clear indication from their data is that above-average share performance is directly linked to good corporate behavior and true information sharing.

It would be an improvement in the field to provide board members and executive management teams with an integrated view of companies of interest. Both from a legal perspective and from a public point of view, companies are under pressure to provide trust, transparency and right decision making. The classic reliance on short term and mostly static economic (financial) data is insufficient.

What is needed is more than a company centric view. Within the asset management industry it is acknowledged that about 30% of a company's value is based on financial data and 70% is based on soft data. The present invention addresses these and other needs.

Summary of the Invention

In accordance with one aspect of the invention, a computer-based system provides tiered-access to rating data for users at respective client machines who are connected to a distributed computer network. The system includes a host machine in communication with a database configured to store data that is utilized by software on the host machine to transform the data into a rating. Such a computer-based system can comprise a rating system for rating companies or companies in relation to a sector, industry or other benchmark(s), and can be publicly accessible by plural client machines through a distributed computer network. A host machine having a processor communicates with a database that is configured to store plural indicators, a first portion of which relate to financial data and a second portion of which relate to non-financial data. The processor of the host machine executes software configured to transform prescribed ones of each of the first and second portions of the indicators from the database into a respective integrated rating of a single value for each of the companies. A first interface component that is accessible to all users at respective client machines through the network and is configured to present at least one company name in association with a respective integrated rating at each respective client machine. A second interface component is also accessible to a subset of users at respective client machines and is configured to enable any one of the subset of users to impart an influence to the software that causes the first interface component at only the client machine of such user to present a modified value for the integrated value of the integrated rating.

When implementing such a system, an integrated rating for a company is computed by applying a formula to plural discrete indicators concerning a particular company. The indicators can be retrieved from a database and among them there is a first portion which relate to financial data and a second portion which relate to non-financial data. Users at their respective client machines are presented with a name of the particular company in association with the computed integrated rating through a first interface component that is accessible through the distributed computer network. A subset of the users is selectively permitted to interact with prescribed indicators from which the integrated rating is derived.

In a related yet further aspect of the invention, a system for rating an entity is publicly accessible by users at respective client machines through respective connections to a distributed computer network. At least part of the rating system executes on a host machine with reference to indicators in a database. The system includes a first interface component, such as a query-result component, which is accessible through the distributed computer network. The first interface component is configured to present to the client machine at least one company name in association with a respective integrated rating. A processor is configured by software to compute each respective integrated rating as a single rating value which is derived by application of a first formula to prescribed ones of plural discrete indicators contained in the database. As noted above, a first portion of the discrete indicators relates to financial data whereas a second portion of the discrete indicators relates to non- financial data. A second interface component (such as an authentication-interface component) is configured to permit only selected users to interact with the prescribed indicators from which the single rating value is derived.

In more particular aspects, the computer-based rating system can include a software module at the host machine as the second interface component which is configured to test any cookie passed from the client machine upon connection to the host machine. As well, the inventive rating system can include a software module at the host machine configured to process user identification information received from the client machine and to include among the selected users any user whose received identification information satisfies at least one prescribed criterion.

In further more particular aspects, the rating system can include a third interface component accessible through the distributed computer network at respective client machines that enables users to query the system for specific information.. In particular ,the third interface component can be configured to provide to the host machine a user-input query and to cause the first interface component to present at least one company name in association with the respective integrated rating as search results in an organized arrangement. In yet another aspect of this invention software executing on a computer system is configured to construct and output a multivariate geometrical rendering of a plurality of variables. An axis is defined for each of the variables being displayed, and a point is defined on each axis corresponding to the value of the respective variable for that axis. Preferably, the axis are generally equidistant. Interpolated segments are generated between the defined points of each pair of adjacent axes such that each segment is spaced from the origin. Collectively, the segments circumscribe the origin, and do not necessarily form a closed path around the origin.

In more particular aspects of this system, each axis extends from the origin in the same plane. Optionally, the software is configured to connect the interpolated segments with the plotted points to form a closed path around the origin. The interpolated segments may further comprise segments of a polygon. In yet a further aspect of this computer system, benchmark data may be superimposed on the display for at least one of the variables defined on each axis.

One application of this computer system provides a method for multivariate presentation of variables concerning a company's performance includes defining on a display screen an origin having a first value, extending from the origin at least three axes on the display screen, the axes being generally equidistant from each other and representing a respective variable, plotting on the display screen a value of each variable concerning the company as a point on a respective axis, and using the plotted points to interpolate first segments between the axes on the display screen.

In more particular aspects of this method for visually presenting a company's performance the first segments can extend to the axes and connect to one another to define polygonal or curved shapes. Also, benchmark information which is extrinsic to the company can be obtained and plotted on the display screen together with the company's performance for ready visual comparison of the company's performance to the obtained benchmark.

In a related aspect, a mulitvariate graph of variables concerning a company's performance comprises an origin having a first value, at least three axes extending from the origin, the axes being generally equidistant from each other and representing a respective variable concerning the company, a point plotted on each axis corresponding to a value of the respective variables, and a first segment extending between each axis so as to interpolate the plotted points, wherein the origin, axes, plotted points and the first segments are displayed on a display screen. As noted above, benchmark information which is extrinsic to the company can be plotted together with the company in way that the benchmark information is distinguishable from the first segments of the company's performance graph.

In still a further aspect of the invention, software executing on a computer system is configured to expose the parameters and data that are transformed by a hierarchical ratings system into one or more ratings and to output the rating and exposed hierarchical levels through an interface. The interface thus permits a user to zoom in and out to different levels of detail of the underlying hierarchy. Specifically, the software is configured to present an interface having a button, and, in response to user interaction with the button, expose a next hierarchical level of parameters included in the integrated rating.

As applied to the example of the financial sector, this aspect of the invention comprises a computer-based navigation interface to a hierarchical rating system for rating companies or companies in relation to sector, industry, or other benchmark(s). The navigation interface comprises a database of parameters having a hierarchy and data within the database which is associated with at least one of the parameters, and software, executing on the processor of the computer, configured to control the interface. The software is configured to transform the data within the parameter hierarchy into a rating value at a first hierarchical level by applying at least a portion of the parameters to a predetermined formula, output the rating value on the display, respond to user interaction with a first virtual button rendered on the display, in response to interaction between the input device and the first virtual button, expose a second hierarchical level comprising each parameter in the portion of parameters included in the rating value, and output at least one parameter in the portion of parameters included in the rating value on the display.

The navigation interface thus allows the user to explore the prescribed indicators from which a rating is derived, present at differing depths in a hierarchy of indicators the multivariate relationships among the variables, and permit interaction with the prescribed indicators as noted above. In yet still further aspects of the invention, users can be alerted of any changes in the integrated rating value that is computed using the hierarchical data system or in the value of any underlying parameters and data in the hierarchical data system. Each alert can comprise electronic message sent to a user address, and can be conditioned upon satisfying a threshold- change in value. These and other features, aspects and advantages of the invention can be appreciated from the following Description of Certain Embodiments of the Invention and the accompanying Drawing Figures.

As used herein, "button" refers to a control that can be actuated by a user through the interface such as by a single click of a mouse button, hovering over an active region on the display (which is a "virtual button"), or by pressing a particular key or combination of keys on a keyboard.

Within the meaning of plotting a point "on the axis" is the visual presentation of indicia "adjacent to" the axis so long as the user perceives the value of the variable in relation to the axis.

Brief Description of the Drawing Figures

Fig. 1 illustrates an exemplary home or start page in a user interface constructed in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. Fig. 2 illustrates an exemplary search results page in a user interface constructed in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.

Fig. 3 illustrates an exemplary rated-company page in a user interface constructed in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.

Fig. 4 illustrates further information that can be included on the page of Fig. 3. Fig. 5 illustrates an exemplary page in a user interface constructed in accordance with an embodiment of the invention showing certain parameters and their respective values that govern a rating that has been calculated for a component of the integrated rating in Fig. 3.

Fig. 6 illustrates an exemplary further page in a user interface which shows data further down in a hierarchy that underlies the integrated rating in Fig. 3. Fig. 7 illustrates a page providing a different perspective on a rated-company than that of

Fig. 3 which may be provided in an interface constructed in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.

Fig. 8 illustrates an exemplary further page in a user interface which shows data further down in a hierarchy that underlies the rating in Fig. 7. Fig. 9 illustrates a personalized page which may be provided in an interface constructed in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.

Fig. 10 illustrates a portion of a My Ratings page that permits users to select among existing personalized rating criteria or to create new rating criteria.

Fig. 11 illustrates details for editing a particular, existing My Rating. Fig. 12 illustrates a selection of My Alerts presentable in an interface constructed in accordance with an embodiment of the invention to permit users to alter personal alerts.

Fig. 13 illustrates details for editing a particular, existing My Alert.

Fig. 14 illustrates a raw data underlying a particular integrated rating. Fig. 15 illustrates a hierarchy of variables and their organization in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the invention.

Fig. 16 illustrates a hardware and software arrangement that is useful in implementing an embodiment of the invention.

Description of Certain Embodiments of the Invention

By way of overview and introduction, the present invention provides a configurable computer based user interface to a ratings system which presents integrated ratings of multiple sources of data regarding entities of interest. The integrated ratings are calculated using data and formulae that the user can inspect. The methodology, framework and interface presents an advance in the art by enabling users to explore complex, multivariate data, optionally in relation to the specific categories or in relation to other benchmark(s). In addition, the user can alter or filter the underlying data and formulae to arrive at ratings that take into account the user's preferences, perceptions, or hypotheticals.

The illustrated embodiment is described in connection with a ratings system that is hosted by a host machine (e.g., a web server) and publicly accessible to users at respective client machines through a connection to a distributed computer network; however, the invention is not so limited in application. The executables that comprise the rating system can run on a stand-alone system and can be provided in a transportable format for local installation by a user, e.g., as a CD-ROM or in some other high-density storage medium. Likewise, the database can be maintained locally, and the local copy can include information on any companies, sectors or industries that are of interest to a particular user codified as "indicators" and arranged in a hierarchical structure within the database. At least one processor is configured by software to access the database and compute ratings by applying prescribed ones of plural, discrete indicator values to at least a first ratings formula. This results in at least an integrated rating having a single value. This arrangement is particularly amenable to a pay-as-you go model in which users are charged for each company that they wish to inspect, though that same model can be used in a remote, hosted embodiment. The ratings system, regardless of where it resides, preferably is in communication with an update software module that provides or can obtain electronically current information on the companies being watched, and current, pertinent benchmark information, and news alerts, if desired.

Figures 1-16 represent one possible application of this invention applied to the financial sector. The example embodiments include the consideration of financial and non- financial data concerning a company, business sector, or industry. Specifically, as applied to the financial sector, a company's economic, environmental, social, and corporate governance performance, as well as statistics relating to one or more of these four "pillars," can be objectively analyzed.

Referring now to Fig. 1, users of an interface constructed in accordance with an embodiment of the invention can be presented with an authentication-interface component on a page 100 which permits the visitor to login can comprise suitable boxes for entering an account identifier 102 and a password 104 and then pressing a submit button 106. Alternatively or in addition (that is, for subsequent connections from a particular registered- user's client machine), the authentication-interface component can include a software module that tests a cookie passed from the client machine upon connection to the host. Cookie technology is well understood in the art and is not described herein. This interface component sets or establishes users as "registered" users once they or their machines have satisfied at least one prescribed criterion. The "registered" status of a user enables the software of the rating system to control access through the interface by permitting only selected users to interact with indicators in the manner described hereinbelow in connection with Figs. 3-14. For visitors that do not have accounts, further buttons can be provided on the page 100 to initiate a new-user registration. A query-interface component can comprise a search-query text box 108 for entering a search query and a search submit button 110. This interface component can be provided on the page 100 that permits visitors to enter searches and receive limited information in response. Preferably, registered users have access to more information and reports than do visitors because their identification information has been processed by the authentication-interface component software. The page 100 preferably is a home page served from a host server that manages the rating systems to multiple, geographically distributed, compliant client machines used by respective users. More preferably, page 100 is a web page constructed using HTML and/or DHTML, and optionally includes active elements such as ActiveX controls or Applets to provide a rich and dynamic presentation of ratings and relevant information and to include at least a portion of the executable code of the rating system as code resident for execution at the client machine . The page 100 preferably includes links 120 to direct users to further web pages that convey information to the user such as: the analytics and variables utilized in rating companies; information about the host provider (herein, referred to as the "Independent Rating Company" or "IRC"); investor relations information; and pertinent news articles. The remainder of the page can include text and graphics 130 that inform the user of the capabilities or features of the ratings system.

In the event that a user enters a search query in text box 108, search results are provided at the client machine by a Q-results interface component in a search results page 200 as shown in Fig. 2. For all users, whether registered with the host provider or not, searches can be permitted that present integrated ratings for companies that satisfy the search criteria. For example, the search query "office" may result in one-hundred matching companies including, among others, "3M" and "ABB." The search query is presented in title line 202 and the results including the integrated rating for each company in association with the company name are displayed in an organized arrangement, such as shown in table 204. For example, the company names and ratings can be associated in the same row of the table 204. A preview pane 206 can be provided to provide an abbreviated story or headline on a recent news item. The preview pane can be configured as a pop-up alert or dialog box which the user can select or close, and which can close automatically if not selected within a period of time. Visitors, and more preferably registered users, can be permitted to select (e.g., click) the preview pane and be directed to the complete story. Preferably, only registered users are able to explore the search results in table 204 beyond what is presented in page 200, e.g., to review the four pillars that comprise the integrated rating or the indicators that underlie the pillars. Thus, visitors can be presented with an integrated rating expressed as a single rating value in an alphabetic format. Also, preferably, only registered are permitted to establish their own ratings (MyRatingl 208, MyRating2 210, etc.) and enter and record notes 212. A detailed discussion of customized ratings that are displayable through the present interface is provided in U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 10/708,441, filed March 3, 2004, entitled "Sustainability Ratings For Legal Entities," and in particular in connection with Figures 13A through 13F, which application is hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth in its entirety herein. Briefly, registered users can alter coefficient values and/or weightings ascribed to the indicators that are utilized in arriving at the single value rating, and these altered values/weightings are then used by a now different ratings formula to compute customized ratings, including integrated ratings, component ratings in each of the four pillars of economic, environmental, social, and corporate governance, as well as with regard to categories that concern those pillars. The customized ratings result from a formula that differs from the rating system formula in the value or weighting (collectively referred to as "value") of at least one coefficient and this "different" formula can be applied in lieu of the rating system formula that is utilized in computing single rating values for non-registered visitors. Each user can compute a personalized score that expresses his or her own ideology or institutional preference/perspective, and these customizations can be saved under one or more "MyRatings" tabs.

For those selected users who are permitted to inspect the data behind the integrated rating, a rated-company page 300 can be served to the client machine in a number of ways, including by selecting an entry in the table 204 or by selecting an entry in a My Companies list 910, as described below in connection with Figure 9. A variety of features are available to the registered users that enable various interactions between the user and the indicators from which the single rating value is derived. In the following discussion, the interface component software permits interaction based on the status of the user as "registered," and as such the features described in connection with Figs. 3-14 are responsive to permissions established by the authentication component.

The rated-company page 300 provides certain basic information 302 about the company being rated including its name, sector, industry, and base country in which it has its headquarters of operation. (The sector and industry that a particular company belongs to can be determined from the Global Industry Classification Standard ("GICS") code for that company.) This basic information 302 is provided in the first four columns of table 204 to all visitors. There are also links to a corporate web site 304 and to stock information 306 concerning the company. The rating for a company displayed on page 300 (in this case, "3M") is for a specific period, and as can be appreciated, a company's rating can vary depending on the window of time under analysis. A user can select a period for analysis using pull-down list 308, and the ratings for the company are refreshed to coincide with the selected time period. The user has other options available for selection, such as to send the present page to a printer (button 310), to add the company to the My Companies list (button 312), and to set alerts for this company (button 314). The rated-company page also includes a general description 316 of the company and its industry.

The rated-company page 300 includes an integrated rating of the company's extra- financial performance, which is expressed and displayed both as a letter grade 320 and also as a numeric grade or scale 322. The integrated rating is computed by the rating system on the basis of inspectable coefficients and weightings that are applied to the underlying data. Integrated ratings based on other settings established by registered users can be presented under the My Ratings tab 324, such as in the My Ratings table 326 which shows a higher performance rating ("A") as compared to that computed by the rating system ("C"), as shown at 320. The integrated rating 320 is preferably computed from individual ratings in four principal areas of corporate endeavor, namely, economic (which includes conventional financial data such as earnings per share, revenue, profit/loss, as well as more long term oriented qualitative information such as brands, consumer complaints, accounting practices, etc.), environmental (which includes emission levels, regulatory compliance, etc.), social (which includes workforce issues such as labor, gender and non-discriminatory corporate practices, etc.), and corporate governance (which includes board composition, written policies, management , etc.). These so-called "pillars" are preferably computed as component ratings and are thereafter combined in a prescribed manner (as described in the aforementioned co-pending application which has been incorporated by reference) to define the integrated rating. In the rated-company page 300, the pillars each have a letter grade 330, and any change 332 upward or downward in that component's rating and the date 334 of such change are preferably shown.

The significance of each pillar can be explained on the rated-company page 300 or on a separate page. Fig. 4 illustrates further, optional information that can be displayed to the user to explain the pillars. Briefly, the Economic Performance rating concerns a company's capacity to generate high returns on investments. The rating system utilizes indicators that focus on long term revenue growth and margin improvements through tangible and intangible elements that do not systematically appear in financial statements. This pillar includes financial data and no non-financial data whereas the remaining pillars concern non-financial data, optionally in combination with financial data. The Environmental Performance rating concerns a company's impact on living and non-living natural systems, including ecosystems, land, air and water. Certain environmental aspects are associated with a company's competitiveness and financial performance (e.g., level of CO₂ emission) and the rating system utilizes indicators that are relevant to these factors. The Social Performance rating concerns a company's impact on the social systems within which it operates. Social performance can be gauged through an analysis of the company's impact on stakeholders. The main stakeholders addressed in the social pillar are the workforce, the society as a whole and of course the customers, as reflected by the selected indicators used by the rating system. In some cases, social indicators influence the company's intangible assets, such as its human capital and reputation. The Corporate Governance Performance rating examines indicators relating to the systems and processes that a company has in place to ensure that a company's directors and manager act in the interests of a company, its shareholders, and other stakeholders, and to ensure the mechanisms are in place so as to hold managers accountable to investors for the use of assets. Each of the pillars is a variable composed of one or more categories of indicators that can be manipulated through weightings, coefficients or mathematics to influence their impact on the numerical grade 322 of the integrated rating. Likewise, each of the pillars and most of the variables used in the rating system comprises a calculation that is based upon values or settings of two or more underlying indicators whose values/settings can be inspected by the user.

In accordance with another aspect of the invention, the underlying parameters that are transformed into the rating can be displayed in the computer interface by selecting a button (e.g., a virtual button) associated with the rating. In response to user interaction with the button, the second hierarchical level of parameters used in computing the rating can be displayed.

The software can further be configured to present a second virtual button associated with one of the parameters of the second hierarchical level exposed by interacting with the first virtual button. Navigation of the hierarchy in this manner can also expose the underlying data associated with each parameter. Repeated interaction with the interface permits a user to view the integrated rating and meaningfully navigate the hierarchy of parameters and data that is utilized in computing the rating down to the most fundamental data elements that comprise the rating.

As applied to the previously discussed example of the financial sector, the components that lead to the calculation of each pillar can be displayed by selecting a pillar from the page 300. This causes the hierarchy of parameters that comprise the value of each pillar to be displayed with each successive selection until the basic source of data for a given parameter has been displayed. In this way, a user can "drill down" and inspect the data underlying a rating, and can alter the value or weighted importance of a given indicator for display as a My Rating. For example, the user can select the Environmental Performance pillar 360 by clicking on that portion of the display and be presented with further details on the data underlying that rating, as discussed in connection with Fig. 5 below.

From the foregoing, it should be appreciated that the interface can permit dynamic interaction with a hierarchical data set. The interface preferably allows a user to expand the data corresponding to meta-data or parameters (e.g., a company's environmental pillar rating) utilized in computing the integrated rating. Traditional systems have required massive spreadsheets or multiple charts to navigate through underlying information concerning a rating create substantial difficulties in their logistical representation and dilute a user's contextual understanding of how the current level of hierarchical data fits into the overall computation of a rating. An interface in accordance with this aspect of the invention can preserve this context by presenting an easily navigable interface for "drilling down" into the underlying data, through which the user will know the level of the hierarchy being presented and how the user arrived at this level. Simultaneously, the user can be provided with the formula used to arrive at the rating and optionally with the ability to change the formula so as to influence the transformation of data and metadata into a rating.

In accordance with another aspect of this invention software executing on a computer system is configured to construct and output a multivariate geometrical rendering of a plurality of variables. An axis is defined for each of the variables being displayed, and a point is defined on each axis corresponding to the value of the respective variable for that axis. One or more additional axes can be used to represent a transformation of the underlying data into a statistical parameter or another calculated value. Preferably, the axis are generally equidistant. Interpolated segments are generated between the defined points of each pair of adjacent axes such that each segment is spaced from the origin. Collectively, the segments circumscribe the origin, and do not necessarily form a closed path around the origin. Figure 3 illustrates this aspect of the invention as applied to the financial sector. The integrated rating 320 and the four pillars 330 are displayed together in a multi-axis graph 350. The graph 350 has one axis for each of the four variables that comprise the pillars, and, preferably (as shown), an additional axis for the integrated rating which comprises a statistical parameter. In this example the statistical parameter is derived from each of the pillar-variables. The axes are preferably equidistantly spaced and extend from a common origin having a first value, which value can be defined to be zero if the rating values are on a scale that starts at zero. The numeric grade 322 of the integrated rating is plotted on the axis labeled "Overall," and the numeric grades that correspond to each of the pillars is plotted on a respective axis of the graph. Preferably, segments are plotted that interpolate between the plotted points on each of the axes. In one arrangement, linear segments connect the plotted points, as shown, to present the multiple variables being plotted as a polygon 352 representative of the company's EESG performance. In other arrangements, arcuate segments can extend between the plotted points or segments can be plotted on the graph and remain unconnected to the plotted points. With regard to the illustrative example of 3M, an "A" rating under corporate governance results in a point plotted far from the origin and causes an expansion and stretching of the visual polygon image 352. Within the meaning of plotting a point "on the axis" is the visual presentation of indicia "adjacent to" the axis so long as the user perceives the value of the variable in relation to the axis. It can be seen from Figure 3 that the axis of the multivariate display are rendered in the same plane, so that the information contained therein can be comprehensibly displayed on a two-dimensional computer display. A three-dimensional projection onto the two- dimensional computer screen may be used as well. However, in this scenario, the axis of the graph which would project out of the plane of the computer display, and the data represented on that axis, would be distorted, thereby detracting from the ease with which the invention conveys multivariate data to the user. Additionally, if the values of more than three variables are rendered by the multivariate graph the difficulty of meaningfully representing more than three axis in a two dimensional plane is compounded. A three-or-more-dimensional display would only increase the distortions of the data. It should be noted that the geometrical rendering of the polygon is somewhat arbitrary. Specifically, because the axes can be defined in any order, clockwise or otherwise, about the origin, the precise shape of the polygon for a particular set of values will depend on the order of the axes. To manage the somewhat arbitrary nature of the polygon shape, the software can further be configured to order the axes based rules or user preferences. For example, as illustrated in Figure 3, the axes can be arranged in view of the magnitude of the value of each variable to form a generally convex polygon, minimizing the occurrence of segment intersections that have an interior angle greater than 180°. Alternatively, if the variables represented by the axes are related in some way, such as by category, time, or user emphasis, the software can arrange the axes to group categories together or order by time or importance.

In accordance with a salient aspect of the invention, the software is configured to overlay multiple data on the multivariate graph thereby aiding in the comparison of multiple data sets. The overlaid data may include benchmark data. As applied to the financial sector, benchmark information is coordinated with the company rating to provide the user with insight as to the relative performance of the company. The benchmark information can concern a competitive company, a sector or an industry, but in any case the benchmark information is extrinsic to the company meaning that it is information that is not the same in many if not all respects to that which is used to rate the company. The rating system obtains the benchmark information from a database, for the relevant time period set in box 308, and preferably superimposes on the graph 350 the benchmark performance for each of the variables that is plotted for the company. Preferably, points are plotted for each of the variables (e.g., the overall and E, E, S, and G variables) in the graph 350, and the space between the axes is interpolated or interconnected to form a polygon (or closed-curved object) 354 in a manner that permits the company's performance to be readily distinguished and compared to that of the benchmark data by the user.

A legend 356 informs the user which color, tick-mark, lines, or shapes are associated with the company under analysis and which is associated with the benchmark. The benchmark can be compared with the company's performance in other ways, such as by way of bell curves; however, the graph 350 provides a two-dimensional visual representation of the comparative performance in each of the variables that are presently under inspection. Thus, at the integrated rating or top-level, the graph 350 shows comparative performance with respect to each of the four pillars and the overall rating, whereas at a lower-level, such as discussed in connection with Fig. 5 below, the comparative performance can visually represent particular variables that underlie the integrated rating.

A great number of benchmarking possibilities can be presented to the user for comparing the performance of a company against extrinsic information. A non-limiting set of possibilities includes a comparison to the universe of all or selected companies in the database, to all or select companies from a chosen country, to all companies from a chosen industry (even an industry different than the company's GICS classification), to a specific company or companies, to the best in the class of the company being inspected, to personal benchmark criteria, to other companies being tracked by the user in the user's My Companies list 910 (discussed below), in relation to one or more of the user's personalized My Ratings, and to combinations of these possibilities. Figure 5 illustrates a page 500 which includes further details concerning one of the pillars, including the variables that resulted in the Environmental rating "E." The page 500 can include other information such as the basic company information 302, etc., but has been abbreviated in order to focus on the additional features added by this page. In Fig. 5, details of the Environmental Performance are shown, for example, as a result of click-selecting pillar 360 from page 300. Preferably, the variables being inspected in the hierarchical list 510 are distinguished from higher-level variables, for example, by indenting the variables being displayed on the remainder of the page. The integrated rating 320 is at the top of the hierarchy, followed by the pillars, and then categories and downward to the basic indicators. Thus, Environmental Performance 562 is indented in the hierarchical list 510. The Environmental performance of the company is shown as a letter grade 520 in the title line and also as a numeric grade 522. The performance is also illustrated in a table 570 which shows the company's score in each of eight categories of information that is used in the grades 520, 522 (and hence integrated rating grades 320, 322). The table 570 further shows comparative performance of the company to the grades received in its industry and sector. The numerical grades set forth in the table are used as values in a graph 550 which plots the company's performance 552 in correlation with the industry average 554, as described above in connection with graph 350. In the graph 550, there are nine axes, one for each category being plotted as a variable, and another for an overall rating which is a statistic derived from the other variables. As noted above, a registered user can inspect and optionally alter the numerical values for any one or more of the categories/indicators or change their respective influence on the overall Environmental Performance calculation. For instance, if energy, water and transport parameters are not perceived as pertinent to a particular user, then the resulting rating for the company would compare substantially more favorably to the relevant industry in the illustrated example.

The user can be permitted to experiment with alterations to the quantified data for a given company to see how such changes affect the ratings, without disrupting the real data in the database used by all users. The user can get a "sandbox" version of a company, e.g. by clicking an icon on a report page. This action causes a copy all the quantified data from the company to the "sandbox," which the user can then play with by changing the data values. A sandbox company is user-specific and can only be seen and modified by the user who created it.

Figure 6 illustrates a page 600 showing a lower level in the hierarchy which provides the user with data on certain indicators within the category of biodiversity 662, namely the "EN24" family of indicators 664. The EN24 indicators are a subset of indicators derived from the Global Reporting Initiative ("GRI") framework; thus, reference can be had to the GRI framework of indicators; however, a preferred embodiment utilizes a different set of fewer indicators, as described herein. Which particular indicators are included in a category is decided by the rating system provider, but can be edited by the user through My Ratings. Exemplary categories and indicators are listed in the table below. The page 600 provides a letter grade 620, a numerical grade 622, a table 670 comparable to grades 520, 522 and table 570, except of course now relating specifically to the EN24 indicator in this illustrated page. Optionally, the data in the table 670 can be charted. For example, the EN24.1 and EN24.2 values can be charted, as previously described, on separate axes and the overall composite of those parameters can be charted on an additional axis, if desired. However, a visual presentation of multivariate data is perceived as being more helpful to users when the number of parameters is greater, as in Figs. 3 and 5.

With reference now to Fig. 7, the performance of a company is expressed from the point of view of what is perceived to drive its value. Three principal value drivers that are believed to be influenced by the information that underlies the integrated rating 320 that a company receives through the rating system are its risks, opportunities and intangibles. In Fig. 7, a page 700 provides one additional or alternative perspective to the integrated rating page 300 discussed above, and can serve as a home page for a given user who prefers this perspective (e.g., the page presented upon selecting the home key from page 100 or upon selecting a search result from table 204). The value drivers are those aspects of EESG information that are material to the performance of companies which are included in the database. Financial analysts, asset managers, issuers, CFOs and others can use the value driver tools which permit selection of parameters as a complementary overlay to existing financial services that they receive. The EESG information of the company relating to risks, opportunities/EPS (earnings per share) and intangibles can reside in several categories, including: reputation risk, product risk, regulation risk, crisis management systems, non- compliance, stakeholder defection, and resource dependency. There are also sector-specific risk categories, sub-groups and user-defined categories that can be utilized to define the parameters that govern the contents of a value-driver report that the user can extract from the rating system. The value drivers can be benchmarked to industry, sector, etc., as described above.

Referring again to Fig. 7, a hierarchical list 710 of the value drivers of risk, opportunity and intangibles permits a user to select a list member and inspect the parameters that result in that member's rating. The Value Driver Performance rating is expressed, as before, both as a letter grade 720 and as a numerical grade 722. The time period under analysis, 308 and a general description 316 of the company and its industry are preferably provided on this page, as is a multivariate chart 750 of the three principal variables and their overall rating of the company 752 in coordination with, but distinguished from, the industry average 754 (with a suitable legend 756 identifying what has been charted).

In Fig. 8, the parameters that underlie the Risk variable are provided in a page 800. In this page, the Risk variable 860 has been selected (from page 700) and is shown expanded to reveal the Crisis Management Risk category 862 which is computed from nine variables to have a Crisis Management Risk Performance letter grade 820 and a Crisis Management Risk Performance numerical grade 822. A chart 850 has each of these variables as an axis extending from a common origin; however, in contrast to previously described charts, the chart 850 does not include a plot of any statistics apart from the eight variables. A table 870 includes the numeric and letter grades of the company, its industry, and its sector, and the numeric grades provide values for coordinating industry or sector performance with that of the company.

Referring now to Fig. 9, a personalized page which may be provided in an interface constructed in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. The personalized page 900 includes navigation keys 120, search box 108, and further includes three principal features: a My Companies list 910, a My Alerts list 920 and a My Ratings button 930. The My Companies list provides a summary of the integrated ratings for a selected list of companies. A full view button 912 provides further details on the selected companies, for example, in a format similar to that shown in table 204 (Fig. 2). The My Alerts list 920 provides a summary of the user-alerts that have been established for particular companies by the user, and a full view button 922 provides a more detailed view of the general settings of each alert, and can be in the format shown in Fig. 12, for example.

The My Ratings button 930 presents a page or frame to the user, as shown in Fig. 10, which allows the user to select from existing personalized ratings criteria or to create new criteria. As described in the aforementioned pending application which has been incorporated by reference, users may wish to define their own ratings criteria to apply to particular companies, industries, or sectors to suit their preferences, beliefs and perspectives. By selecting a report from the report list 1010 in Fig. 10, the user can revise a particular one of his or her My Ratings, and such changes are then available to the user simply by selecting the desired My Rating from table 326 (which appears on a number of pages in the user interface). If one of the My Ratings is selected from the report list 1010, then a web page or frame is presented to the user which is populated with the existing My Rating information for the selected My Rating. The user can then edit that data by changing the existing data in the fields 1110, 1120, 1130 of the data record, or change the formula that governs the rating calculation (see, again, the co-pending application for discussion on formula editing) by clicking on the proceed to formula editor button 1140. Alternatively, the user can delete the data record using the remove button 1150, or cancel the operation using the cancel button 1160.

With reference again to Fig. 9, if a full view of the My Alerts list 920 is selected or if another appropriate button is actuated, the user can be provided with an alert report page or frame with information such as shown in Fig. 12. The alert report page itemizes by alert name the companies that have user-established alerts associated with them, the basis upon which to generate an alert message (e.g., based on ratings change activity in environmental performance, EN24.2, or any other parameter in the ratings system), and the trigger for the alert (any change, only when there has been an upgrade, only when there has been a downgrade). There is also a status 1210 for each company that is in the alert report watch list which can be an animation advising the user whether he or she has an unread alert, and a notes section 1220. Preferably the alert name, company name, report item, alert type, status, and notes are combined into data records that are managed by the ratings system and stored in a database, and, more preferably, a central database.

Fig. 13 shows a checklist that can be completed in order to set parameters for a user- established alert, including how and to where the alerts are to be sent. As show, check boxes permit entry of the trigger type and threshold values that must be satisfied, whether as a grade change (namely, a numerical amount, say, a change from 0.0 to 0.1 or from 0.1 to 0.3) or a rating change (namely, an alphabetical grade change, say, from A downgraded to B or from E upgraded to D), and check and text boxes for selecting the format for the alert and providing a destination address (e.g., an email or phone number).

Fig. 14 shows raw data underlying the integrated rating of a company, which in the illustrated case is "3M." The raw data page identifies for a selected period of time a particular indicator 1410 and an explanation of what it represents, a source 1420 for the value or setting used by the rating system (e.g., a corporate web site), textual data 1430 explaining significance (e.g., whether this indicator bears on one of the value drivers), comments, files, data status and the quality of the information. To the extent that this information can be gathered and reported, it is included in the rating system database and is publicly inspectable at this fundamental level through the raw data page or by exporting to a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet or the like.

Raw data for a company can be established in the rating system database using a raw data tool which provides a structure for the data and content of the information of concern. For example, the information structure can be a data record organized as shown follows: Number: LA91

Field: Social Performance

Category: Labor practices/decent work

Aspect: Training/Education

Indicator type: Core Indie, desc: Average hours of training per year per employee by category of employee

Indie. Name: Average hours of training per year per employee

The raw data concerning a particular company (Roche) that comprises the content for such a record might read as follows:

Raw Data: "In 2003, Roche employees spent an average 23 hours on training, which represents more than three days of training ..."

Source: Sustainability Report 2003

Page: 37 Publisher: Company

Author: not relevant

Date: 2004

Scope of Relevance: Worldwide

Quality of info: Reliable As can be appreciated from the table below, on the order of about 250 to about 300 indicators are preferably used in the determination of an integrated rating using the four pillars EESG. The indicator data consists of raw and quantified data. Raw data consists of textual information about the indicators such as shown in the above excerpted statement in the example of a Roche accounting report. Quantified data comprise numeric or yes/no values, which can be manually derived from the raw data or from its status if the data is incomplete. In the case of yes/no indicators, a rating can have a predefined value or a calculated value from related indicators. For example, one indicator question might be "Does the company publish information about CO2 emission?," and if the answer to this is "yes" some other indicators about CO2 will count in the rating; otherwise, the rating is accorded the predefined value .

Fig. 15 shows a hierarchical relationship among the parameters that are combined into an integrated rating. At the top of the hierarchy is the integrated rating 320, 322. The integrated rating is calculated using a formula provided by the rating system, as may be optionally modified by the user. The four pillars provide the principal variable values which are combined by the formula into the integrated rating. For simplicity, Fig. 15 shows one of the pillars. Each pillar receives parameters from one or more categories, though only one category is shown, again for simplicity. In the preferred embodiment, there are four pillars and eighteen categories, under each of which are prescribed indicators, as shown in the table below. The categories, in turn, are an amalgam of variables, some of which are "outcome" parameters which have values associated with them, and others are "driver" parameters which have a yes/no state setting associated with them. Outcome and driver parameters receive their values from indicators. Driver indicators (always yes/no) are about the policies, management systems and tools employed by the company's management with the intent to improve an issue (which is codified in the rating system as a "category"). Driver indicators measure the company's real intentions and commitments. Outcome indicators (Value or yes/no) measure if the company has successfully achieved an improvement on a particular issue. Outcome indicators measure observable results which provide indications on the company's standing in respect to a specific issue (again, which is included as a "category" in the rating system). The rating system uses a set of indicators to arrive at the integrated ratings described herein. The type of indicators that have been selected for use in a preferred embodiment of the present rating system are described within their respective categories as follows:

significant air emissions, waste, hazardous waste, water discharges or spills); impact on biodiversity; Partnering with NGO's, Industry organizations or Supra-governmental organizations for environmental improvement or community goodwill.

Product Indicators show: general commitment towards Innovation environmental products/services innovation; environmental efficient products (eco-design, life cycle assessment-LCA, dematerialization, extended durability, emission reduction by product use, etc).

Social Workforce/ Indicators show: general commitment towards employment

Employment and job conditions: employment benefits (salary, profit

Conditions sharing, pension plan, health care, other insurances and other benefits); commitment to long term employment security (Net employment creation, avoidance of lay-offs, turnover limitation, promotion from within, maintenance of general relations with trade unions, etc.)

Workforce/ Indicators show: general commitment towards job health & Health & safety: Health & Safety in the broad sense, encompassing

Safety physical and mental health, stress and well being of all employees; Compliance to the ILO Code of Practice on Recording and Notification of Occupational Accidents and Diseases or the ILO Guidelines for Occupational Health Management Systems; Quality management systems like OHSAS 18001 (Occupational Health & Safety Management System)

Workforce/ Indicators show: general commitment towards training and Training and development (education); developing skills and Development competencies (occupational, human or social relations and communication), encompassing programs to support the career development and continued employability of employees and to manage career endings.

Workforce/ Indicators show: general commitment towards diversity and Diversity and opportunity: promoting an effective balance between Opportunity personal (family-friendly policies, vacations, part-time, flex- time, career breaks, maternity leave, sabbatical etc.) and professional development (career planning); promotion of diversity and opportunity (equal treatment between women and men) and tackling other forms of discrimination or harassment as in the case of unfair treatment of people with disabilities, or because of age, ethnicity, 'race', nationality, religion, or sexual orientation.

Society/ Indicators show: general commitment towards the Human Rights Fundamental Human Rights convention of the ILO relevant to operations (workforce, suppliers, supply chain management and contractors) or SA8000 (standard and verification system for humane workplaces); Freedom of association universally applied independent of local laws; Exclusion of child, forced or compulsory labor.

Society/ Indicators show: general commitment towards maintaining

The indicators noted above, once a set has been selected for a given rating system, can be accorded a naming convention for access, updates and other manipulation by the software of the rating system. For example:

, in which pp is the pillar short abbreviation (So=Social, En=Environmental, Ec=Economic, CG=Corporate Governance), next is the top -category name (2 letters) followed by the category (again 2 letters) and finally a "D" for driver or "O" for outcome followed by a number. For example, the category can be characterized as Workforce/Health & Safety (xx="W0", yy="HS"). This can be the default tree structure for the data records from which all indicators can be accessed. Each category starts off with the same 4 driver-indicators: Policy, Implementation, Monitoring, Improvements). The rest of the indicators in a category are outcome indicators and can be yes/no questions or double questions or amounts, ratios, etc. An outcome indicator's value can be Not Available ("NA") or Not Relevant ("NR"). NA means that there is no answer to the value for the question. NR means there is a value but it is not relevant (e.g. CO2 emission by a banking entity which is not particularly relevant since this is not a manufacturing entity, but still is reported by some banking entities). In the case of outcomes, the rating system calculates the performance, the transparency, the changes over time ("delta"), and the exposure due to particularly lagging performances ("relative standing") of the data in the indicator.

The underlying data that is sought from a company to populate a given indicator will either be relevant or not relevant. If relevant, the question remains whether there is information or not to populate that indicator. If there is relevant information, then the performance value will go up or down depending on the data itself, and the transparency value will go up because there is public reporting of a relevant datum. If the relevant information is not available, there is no change to the performance value as there is no data upon which to base a change, but the transparency value will go down because there is no public reporting of a relevant datum. On the other hand, even if the information is not relevant, the content of the data itself can impact the performance value, and the transparency value goes up because the data, though not relevant to this company or sector or industry, is reported. If the information is not relevant and not available, there is no impact on the values of performance or transparency. The outcome calculation can include the delta and relative standing parameters or these can be calculated separately. "Delta" is the measurement of changes (improvements or deterioration) of the performance of that indicator over time. If a company has increased its performance over the past year then it gets a bonus in terms of an improved score for doing so. Conversely the company is penalized if its performance has deteriorated. Finally, the "relative standing" component of the algorithm preferably operates to penalize companies that show particularly bad performance in individual indicators as compared to a benchmark. Therefore, the high exposure that a company can face due to having the worst performance in individual indicators is also taken in account in the outcome grade of a category because if a company is in, say, the lowest 1-5% quartile for a certain indicator, that is indicative of potentially higher risk exposure.

Fig. 16 shows a hardware and software arrangement that can be used to implement a hosted rating system as described herein. One or more users can access the rating system through a portal 1610 which preferably includes the interface pages described above and is therefore web-browser compliant, and, more preferably, compatible with Microsoft's Internet Explorer 6.0, and the Firefox LINUX Web browser. Communications proceed through a secure socket connection from remotely distributed client machines at the portal through a firewall 1620 to a Web server 1630. The web server communicates with an application server 1640 (e.g., a Tomcat server that supports JSP/Services) through standard protocols, and preferably exchanging rich text using XML structures. In turn, the server 1640 communicates with a central database 1650, e.g., a Sequel database, through JDBC.

In operation, users access the portal 1610 through a standard client machine such as a personal computer, personal digital assistant, or other device compliant with the web server 1630. User authentication and validation services can take place after which the user is permitted to inspect data underlying ratings for one or more companies, create use and store alerts and rating criteria and export data to their local machine.

Ratings can be presented numerically, alphabetically, or alpha-numerically. The system can be configured so that visiting, non-registered users, are presented only top-level integrated ratings , if even that. The system can also be configured to allow such a subset of users or a different subset of users to impart an influence to the software that results in a modified value for the single value of the integrated rating to be presented to that user. For example, a user that is a member of the prescribed subset can be permitted to impart a change to one of the indicators (or to a coefficient value in a formula that operates upon such indicator in computing the rating), and only that user will be presented with the resulting integrated rating. Moreover, for a subset of users, the system can accept and utilize a user- selected formula to transform the indicators into the single value integrated rating. Selected users can further provide the system with or simply select/establish at least one benchmark criterion. In response, the system can be configured so as to present, for at least one of the companies presented to the client machine, a respective integrated rating in coordination with the benchmark criterion.

At the back end, requests received through the portal are transferred over to the server 1640 at which calculations of ratings are performed for the requested/prevailing time period, for the company or companies that are in the scope of the user's request (e.g., the companies in any search results or the companies in a My Companies list). In the event that the user has selected My Ratings criteria, the server 1640 retrieves stored criteria from the database 1650 and applies that criteria to stored data for the company or companies that are in the scope of the user's request. The server 1640 also manages any other personalization (including any alerts) that the user may have set, so that messages can be sent (or be attempted to be sent) to the user regardless of whether the user is presently logged onto the rating system. In certain implementations, the charts and rating calculations can be performed at the client machine through an Applet, ActiveX component, or by executing a stand-alone application or XML within the client's local machine environment. Such distributed computation will reduce the load on the host machine, thus allowing the system to service a greater number of users and larger quantities of data. In other implementations, these activities are performed by the server 1640 and forwarded through the web server 1630 to the client machine for presentation through the user interface.

Optionally, a "My Key Numbers" button or selection list can be included on one or more pages of the interface. For example, "My key numbers" can be a pull-down list provided on the home rating page of each company accessed by the user. The user can define certain indicators, categories, or ratings for inclusion in this list or for that particular company. Thus, the user could select CO2 emissions, the Social pillar, and the category "human rights" for GM Corporation while the same or different selections can be stored as the key numbers for other companies.

Preferably, all textual data is stored in Unicode, a text format that provides a unique number for every character across platforms, programs and languages. Preferably, all time data is stored in the UTC time format, all pixel-based graphical data is stored in PNG, and all image (photographic) data is stored in JPEG. Preferably, all data creation, modification and deletion in the system is logged with timestamp, user, original data, etc. to enable tracking of any activity in the rating system. This information can also be used for user-access control and billing.

The rating system can provide reports to the user which concern a single company or a group of companies - e.g., within an industry, country, etc. The time frame for a given report can be for a current year or other time windows of longer scope depending on values entered into the period box 306. Reports and charts can be exported for use in other applications such as Microsoft Excel or Adobe Acrobat (i.e., in pdf format). Depending on the permission level accorded to a given user, the report can include either detailed or summary information, archival data including historical ratings, and possibly also some or all of the raw data. From the foregoing, it should be understood that all or part of the database

1650 can be exported, including raw and quantified data and calculated values.

While the invention has been described in connection with a certain embodiment thereof, the invention is not limited to the described embodiments but rather is more broadly defined by the recitations in the claims below and equivalents thereof.

Claims

What is claimed:

1. A computer-based rating system for rating companies or companies in relation to a sector, industry or other benchmark(s), the rating system being publicly accessible through plural client machines over a connection through a distributed computer network, comprising: a host machine having a processor; a database in communication with the host machine and configured to store plural indicators, a first portion of the indicators relating to financial data and a second portion of the indicators relating to non-financial data; software executing in the processor of the host machine and configured to transform prescribed ones of each of the first and second portions of the indicators from the database into a respective integrated rating of a single value for each of the companies; a first interface component accessible to all users at respective client machines through the distributed computer network, the first interface component configured to present at each respective client machine at least one company name in association with a respective integrated rating; and a second interface component accessible to a subset of users at respective client machines and configured to enable any one of the subset of users to impart an influence to the software that causes the first interface component at only the client machine of such user to present a modified value for the single value of the integrated rating.

2. The computer-based rating system of claim 1, wherein the second interface component is configured to impart a change to the prescribed ones of the indicators.

3. The computer-based rating system of any of claims 1 through 2, wherein the software includes a formula which operates upon the prescribed ones of the indicators so as to transform the indicators into the single value integrated rating.

4. The computer-based rating system of any of claims 1 through 3, wherein the financial data is economic data and wherein the non-financial data is at least one of social data, environmental data and corporate governance data.

5. The computer-based rating system of any of claims 1 through 4, further comprising: a third interface component accessible through the distributed computer network at respective client machines, the third interface component being configured to provide to the host machine a user-input query and to cause the first interface component to present said at least one company name in association with the respective integrated rating as search results in an organized arrangement.

6. The computer-based rating system of claim 5, wherein each of the first and third interface components are components presented in at least one Web page.

7. The computer-based rating system of any of claims 1 through 6, wherein the single rating value is expressed both numerically and alphabetically.

8. The computer-based rating system of any of claims 1 through 7, wherein the second interface component further comprises a software module executing on the host machine which is configured to test any cookie passed from a respective client machine upon connection to the host machine and to identify whether a particular user is in the subset of users.

9. The computer-based rating system of any of claims 1 through 8, wherein the second interface component further comprises a software module executing on the host machine and configured to process user-identification information received from respective client machines and to include among the subset of users any user whose received identification information satisfies at least one prescribed criterion.

10. The computer-based rating system of any of claims 1 through 9, further comprising a software component enabling each respective user in the subset of users to receive an alert concerning a change in a value of one or more of the prescribed indicators from which the single rating value is derived.

11. The computer-based rating system of any of claims 1 through 10, further comprising a third interface component responsive to a permission established by the second interface component, the third interface component receiving from any user in the subset of users at least one benchmark criterion, wherein at least one of the companies presented to the client machine in association with a respective integrated rating is presented in coordination with said at least one benchmark criterion.

12. The computer-based rating system of any of claims 1 through 11 , further comprising a third interface component responsive to a permission established by the second interface component, the third interface component receiving from any user in the subset of users a user-selected formula, wherein the software uses the user-selected formula to transform the indicators into the single value.

13. A method for providing tiered access to rating data to users at respective client machines connected through a distributed computer network, the rating data concerning one or more aspects of a company, comprising the steps of: retrieving plural indicators concerning a particular company from a database, the indicators having a first portion relating to financial data and a second portion relation to non- fmancial data; computing at a host machine an integrated rating for a company by applying a first formula to the indicators in each of the first and second portions; presenting to all users at respective client machines through a first interface component accessible through the distributed computer network a name of the particular company in association with the computed integrated rating; and selectively enabling a subset of the users to interact with prescribed ones of the indicators from which the integrated rating is derived.

14. A system for rating an entity which is publicly accessible by a user at a client machine through a connection to a distributed computer network, at least part of the rating system executing on a host machine with reference to indicators in a database, comprising: a first interface component accessible through the distributed computer network, the first interface component configured to present to the client machine at least one company name in association with a respective integrated rating; a processor configured to compute each respective integrated rating as a single rating value derived by the processor by application of a first formula to prescribed ones of plural discrete indicators contained in the database, a first portion of the discrete indicators relating to financial data and a second portion of the discrete indicators relating to non-financial data; and a second interface component configured to permit only selected users to interact with the prescribed indicators from which the single rating value is derived.

15. The rating system of claim 14, wherein the financial data is economic data and wherein the non-financial data is at least one of social data, environmental data and corporate governance data.

16. The rating system of claim 15, wherein the non-financial data includes social data, environmental data and corporate governance data.

17. The rating system of claim 14, further comprising: a third interface component accessible through the distributed computer network, the third interface component including a text box suitable for receiving an input query and a control for submitting any contents of the text box, wherein the first interface component presents said at least one company name in association with the respective integrated rating as search results in an organized arrangement.

18. The rating system of claim 17, wherein each of the first and third interface components are components in at least one Web page.

19. The rating system of claim 14, wherein the single rating value is expressed both numerically and alphabetically.

20. The rating system of claim 14, wherein the rating system includes executable code and wherein at least a portion of the executable code is resident in the client machine.

21. The rating system of claim 14, wherein the second interface component comprises a software module at the host machine that tests any cookie passed from the client machine upon connection to the host machine.

22. The rating system of claim 14, wherein the second interface component comprises a software module at the host machine configured to process user identification information received from the client machine and to include among the selected users any user whose received identification information satisifies at least one prescribed criterion.

23. The rating system of claim 22, wherein the user identification information comprises a password.

24. The rating system of claim 14, wherein the set of prescribed indicators excludes an economic variable and further excludes at least one of an environmental variable, a social variable and a corporate governance variable, such that any user can interact with the excluded variables .

25. The rating system of claim 14, further comprising a third interface component responsive to a permission established by the second interface component, the third interface component permitting the selected users to inspect a value of one or more of the prescribed indicators from which the single rating value is derived.

26. The rating system of claim 14, further comprising a third interface component responsive to a permission established by the second interface component, the third interface component permitting the selected users to export a value of one or more of the prescribed indicators from which the single rating value is derived.

27. The rating system of claim 14 further comprising a third interface component responsive to a permission established by the second interface component, the third interface component permitting each respective selected user to receive an alert concerning a change in a value of one or more of the prescribed indicators from which the single rating value is derived.

28. The rating system of claim 14, further comprising a third interface component responsive to a permission established by the second interface component, the third interface component permitting the selected users to alter a value of one or more of the prescribed indicators from which the single rating value is derived.

29. The rating system of claim 14, further comprising a third interface component responsive to a permission established by the second interface component, the third interface component receiving from any selected user at least one benchmark criterion, wherein at least one of the companies presented to the client machine in association with a respective integrated rating is presented in coordination with said at least one benchmark criterion.

30. The rating system of claim 14, further comprising a third interface component responsive to a permission established by the second interface component, the third interface component receiving from any selected user a second formula different from the first formula, wherein the processor uses the second formula in computing the single value in lieu of the first formula.

31. The rating system of claim 30, wherein the first and second formulas include at least one coefficient that operates upon one or more of the plural discrete indicators, and wherein the second formula differs from the first formula in a value of said at least one coefficient.

32. A method for providing tiered access to rating data to users at respective client machines connected to a distributed computer network, comprising the steps of: computing an integrated rating for a company by applying a first formula to plural discrete indicators concerning a particular company, the indicators being contained in a database and having a first portion relating to financial data and a second portion relating to non-financial data; presenting to all users at respective client machines through a first interface component accessible through the distributed computer network a name of the particular company in association with the computed integrated rating; and selectively permitting a subset of the users to interact with prescribed indicators from which the integrated rating is derived.

33. A computer-based navigation interface to a hierarchical rating system for rating companies or companies in relation to a sector, industry, or other benchmark(s), the rating system being of the type having a processor, an input device, a memory and a display, comprising: a database of parameters having a hierarchy and data within the database which is associated with at least one of the parameters; and software, executing in the processor, which is configured to control the interface so as to: transform data within the parameter hierarchy into a rating value at a first hierarchical level by applying at least a portion of the parameters to a predetermined formula; output the rating value on the display; respond to user interaction with a first virtual button rendered on the display; in response to interaction between the input device and the first virtual button, exposing a second hierarchical level comprising each parameter in the portion of parameters included in the rating value; and output at least one parameter in the portion of parameters included in the rating value on the display.

34. The computer-based navigation interface of claim 33, wherein the software is further configured to expose one or more values corresponding, respectively, to each parameter in the portion of parameters included in the rating value and to output at least one of the one or more values of the exposed second hierarchical level on the display.

35. The computer-based navigation interface of any of claims 33 through 34, wherein the rating value is output to a first displayable location on the display and wherein the first virtual button is rendered at a location which overlaps or is at least proximate to the first displayable location.

36. The computer-based navigation interface of any of claims 33 through 35, wherein the first hierarchical level of parameters comprises categories of indicators.

37. The computer-based navigation interface of any of claims 33 through 36, further comprising a second virtual button responsive to interaction with the input device to expose a further hierarchical level associated with one of the parameters in the portion of parameters.

38. The computer-based navigation interface of claim 37, wherein the further hierarchical level is the data in the database associated with one of the parameters.

39. The computer-based navigation interface of claim 37, wherein the at least one output parameter in the second hierarchical level is output to a second displayable location on the display and wherein the second virtual button is rendered at a location which overlaps or is at least proximate to the second displayable location.

40. The computer-based navigation interface of any of claims 33 through 39, wherein the software is further configured to: define an origin on the display; extend at least three axes from the origin on the display, the axes being generally equidistant from each other; define a point on each axis which corresponds to the data associated with a respective parameter in the database; generate a plurality of interpolated segments which extend between the defined points of each pair of adjacent axes such that each generated segment is spaced from the origin, yet the segments collectively circumscribe the origin; and output the generated segments on the display as a multivariate geometrical rendering having a shape defined by the data associated with the plural parameters.

41. The computer-based navigation interface of any of claims 33 through 40, wherein the software is further configured to respond to a user-selectable control to receive user-input alterations to the data through the interface and to alter the rating value at one or more of the hierarchical levels in response to the user-input by transforming the so-altered data using the predetermined formula.

42. The computer-based navigation interface of claim 41, wherein the data associated with at least the portion of the parameters is copied to the memory in response to the selection of the user-selectable control and wherein the alteration is to the copy of the data in the memory whereby the altered data influences the rating value transformation at that particular user's interface.

43. The computer-based navigation interface of any of claims 33 through 42, further comprising a control for displaying through the interface on the display the predetermined formula used in transforming the date into the rating value.

44. The computer-based navigation interface of any of claims 33 through 43, wherein the software is further configured to issue an alert of any change in a particular rating value based on any changes to the data associated with the parameters that yield that particular rating value.

45. The computer-based navigation interface of claim 44, wherein the alert comprises an electronic message sent to a configurable user address.

46. The computer-based navigation interface of claim 44, wherein the memory stores a threshold-change value and wherein the software is further configured to send the electronic message to the user address when the change in the rating value exceeds the threshold-change value.

47. A computer-based navigation interface to a hierarchical rating system for evaluating aspects of companies or companies in relation to a, sector, industry, or other benchmark(s), that provides users with an integrated rating value concerning both an entity's financial and non-financial performance, the rating system being of the type having a processor, an input device, a memory and a display comprising: a database of indicators, the indicators arranged in a hierarchy of levels to include the integrated rating, and below the integrated rating at least four pillars, and below the four pillars plural categories, and below the plural categories raw data; and software, executing in the processor, configured to: transform at least a portion of the indicators into an integrated rating using a predetermined formula; display a first region in the interface region of the computer display including at least one of the integrated rating value, a value computed for at least one of said at least four pillars, a value computed for at least one of said plural categories, and a value of raw data, utilizing a predetermined formula and the computer processor; and display a first virtual button proximate the first displayable region, the software being responsive to a user selection of the first virtual button to expose a successive level within the hierarchy and to present in the first displayable region at least one of any of said values in the successive level of the hierarchy.

48. The computer-based navigation interface of claim 47, wherein said at least four pillars include an economic pillar, an environmental pillar, a social pillar, and a corporate governance pillar.

49. The computer-based navigation interface of claim 47, further comprising a control for displaying within the interface to the user a formula used in calculating the integrated rating value.

50. The computer-based navigation interface of claim 47, further comprising an alert generated by the software notifying the user of a change in one of said values in the hierarchy of indicators.

51. The computer-based navigation interface of claim 50, wherein the alert comprises an electronic message sent to a user configurable address.

52. The computer-based navigation interface of claim 51 , wherein the software is further configured to: store a threshold-change value in the computer memory; and send the electronic message to the user address when the change in the rating value exceeds the stored threshold-change value.

53. An interface to a ratings system, comprising: an interactive presentation of a rating value of a company at a first displayable location in the interface; a first button responsive to interaction with the first displayable location; and a hierarchy of parameters associated with the rating value, at least a first parameter in the hieararchy of parameters being selectively displayable in association with the rating value upon interaction with the first button to present in the interface data underlying the rating value of the company.

54. The interface of claim 53, wherein the first parameter in the heirarchy of parameters includes categories of indicators.

55. The interface of claim 54, further comprising a second button responsive to interaction with a second displayable location associated with the first parameter, wherein a next parameter in the heirarchy of parameters includes at least one indicator associated with at least one of said categories, the next parameter being displayable in response to interaction with the second button.

56. The interface of claim 53, further comprising a multivariate presentation of variables concerning the company, including: an origin having a first value; at least three axes extending from the origin, the axes being generally equidistant from each other and representing a respective variable; a point plotted on each axis corresponding to a value of the respective variables; and a segment extending between each axis so as to interpolate the plotted points, wherein the origin, axes, plotted points and the segments on a display screen.

57. The interface of claim 56, wherein the value of each variable comprises a calculation based upon two more indicators associated with the company.

58. The interface of claim 53, further comprising a user-selectable control operative to permit a user to provide an alteration to the data underlying the rating value of the company, wherein the interface presents a revised rating value calculated on the basis of the user-provided alteration.

59. The interface of claim 58, wherein the data underlying the rating value of the company is copied in response to the selection of the user-selectable control and wherein the alteration is to the data copy so as to influence the rating value at that particular user's interface.

60. The interface of claim 53, further comprising a control for displaying a source and content of information obtained from third-parties from which the data underlying the rating value of the company is derived.

61. The interface of claim 60, wherein the rating value of the company is calculated using a formula, the interface further comprising a control for displaying to a user the formula used in calculating the rating value.

62. The interface of claim 53, wherein the rating value of the company is calculated using a formula, the interface further comprising a control for displaying to a user the formula used in calculating the rating value.

63. The interface of claim 53, further comprising an alert of a change in the rating value.

64. The interface of claim 63, wherein the alert comprises an electronic message sent to a user address.

65. The interface of claim 64, further comprising a stored threshold-change value and software configured to send the electronic message to the user address when the change in the rating value exceeds the stored threshold-change value.

66. An interface to a rating system that provides users with an integrated rating value concerning both a company's financial and non-financial performance, the rating system utilizing indicators maintained in a database, wherein the indicators are arranged in a hierarchy of levels to include the integrated rating, and below the integrated rating at least four pillars, and below the four pillars plural categories, and below the plural categories raw data, the interface comprising: a first displayable region in the interface region including at least one of the integrated rating value, a value computed for at least one of said at least four pillars, a value computed for at least one of said plural categories, and a value of raw data, a button proximate the displayable region; a software component responsive to a user selection of the button to expose a successive level within the hierarchy and to present in the first displayable region at least one of any of said values in the successive level of the hierarchy.

67. The interface of claim 66, wherein said at least four pillars include an economic pillar, an environmental pillar, a social pillar, and a corporate governance pillar.

68. The interface of claim 66, further comprising a control for displaying within the interface to the user a formula used in calculating the integrated rating value.

69. The interface of claim 66, further comprising an alert of a change in one of said values in the hierarchy of indicators.

70. The interface of claim 69, wherein the alert comprises an electronic message sent to a user address.

71. The interface of claim 70, further comprising a stored threshold-change value and software configured to send the electronic message to the user address when the change in the rating value exceeds the stored threshold-change value.

72. A computer-based system for constructing mulitvariate geometrical renderings on a display of a computer having a processor and a memory containing values for a plurality of variables, comprising software executing in the processor and configured to: define an origin having a location on the display; extend at least three axes from the origin on the display, the axes being generally equidistant from each other; define a point on each axis which corresponds to the value of a respective variable in the memory; generate a plurality of interpolated segments which extend between the defined points of each pair of adjacent axes such that each generated segment is spaced from the origin, yet the segments collectively circumscribe the origin; and output the generated segments on the display as a multivariate geometrical rendering having a shape defined by the values of the plural variables.

73. The computer-based system of claim 72, wherein each of the axes extends in a common plane.

74. The computer-based system of any claims 72 through 73, wherein the software is further configured to plot on the display the defined points for each of the plural variables.

75. The computer-based system of claim 74, wherein the software is further configured to interconnect each segment with the plotted points.

76. The computer-based system of claim 75, wherein the output of the generated, interconnected segments comprises a polygon having points on the axes and located on the display in surrounding relation to the origin.

77. The computer-based system of any of claims 72 through 76, wherein the value at the defined origin is zero.

78. The computer-based system of any of claims 72 through 77, wherein the software is further configured to superimpose on the display benchmark information concerning at least one of the plural variables.

79. The computer-based system of any of claims 72 through 78, wherein the software is further configured to: compute a statistical parameter using at least one of the values contained in the memory; extend a statistical-parameter axis (SPA) for the statistical parameter; define a statistical-parameter point (SPP) on the SPA which corresponds to a value of the computed statistical parameter, generate a pair of interpolated statistical segments (ISS) which extend between the SPP and the axes adjacent to the SPA such that each ISS is spaced from the origin yet the segments and the ISSs collectively circumscribe the origin; and output the generated segments on the display as a multivariate geometrical rendering having a shape defined by a combination of the values of the plural variables and the computed statistical parameter.

80. The computer-based system of any of claims 72 through 79, wherein the software is further configured to transform the values contained in the memory in accordance with a formula, wherein the transformed values are used to define the points on each axis.

81. The computer-based system of any of claims 72 through 80, wherein the values comprise performance metrics of a company and wherein the software executes so as to output on the display of the computer a multivariate geometrical rendering having a size and shape spaced from the origin so as to graphically depict a performance of the company as a planar and generally polygonal shape about the origin.

82. A mulitvariate representation of variables concerning a company for evaluation aspects of a company, comprising: a computer having a display, memory, and processor; an origin having a first value; at least three axes extending from the origin, the axes being generally equidistant from each other, representing a unit scale of a respective variable concerning the company, and scaled by the processor to fit within a boundary of the display; at least one underlying data for each of the variables represented by the at least three axes, transformed by the computer processor into a value of the variable; a point plotted on each axis corresponding to the value of the respective variables; and a plurality of first segments, computed by the processor by interpolation using the plotted points, extending between the axes, wherein the origin, axes, plotted points, and the first segments are displayed on the computer display.

83. The multivariate representation of claim 82, further comprising: benchmark information retrieved from the computer memory, the benchmark information being extrinsic to the company; and a plot of benchmark information for each said variable superimposed on the computer screen, wherein the plot of benchmark information is distinguishable from the first segments.

84. The multivariate graph of claim 82, wherein each first segment interconnects the plotted points between the axes.

85. The multivariate graph of claim 84, wherein the first segments are polygon segments.

86. The multivariate graph of claim 82, wherein the first value of the origin is defined as zero.

87. The multivariate graph of claim 82, further comprising: at least one axis for a statistical parameter of the company computed by the processor using data stored in the computer memory; and a point plotted for each said at least one axis as a value of the respective statistical parameter, wherein the point plotted for each said at least one axis is displayed on the computer screen.

88. The multivariate graph of claim 87, wherein each statistical parameter is derived from at least one of the variables.

89. The multivariate graph of claim 82, wherein the underlying data transformed into the value of each variable comprises at least two indicators associated with the company.

90. A method for a multivariate presentation of variables concerning a company for evaluating aspects of a company, comprising the steps of: defining on a computer display an origin having a first value; extending from the origin at least three axes on the display screen, the axes being generally equidistant from each other, having an independent unit scale, and representing a respective variable; retrieving at least one underlying data for each variable concerning the company from a database; transforming the underlying data into a value of each variable using a predetermined formula; plotting on the computer display the value of each variable concerning the company as a point on a respective axis; interpolating first segments between the axes using a computer processor; and displaying the first segments on the display screen to generate the multivariate presentation.

91. The method of claim 90, including the additional steps of obtaining benchmark information which is extrinsic to the company; storing the benchmark information in the database; plotting on the computer display the benchmark information for each variable as a benchmark point on a respective axis; interpolating benchmark segments between the axes using a computer processor; and displaying the benchmark segments on the computer display in a manner so as to distinguish the first segments from the benchmark segments; and superimposing the first and benchmark segments.

92. The method of claim 91 , wherein the interpolation interconnects the plotted benchmark points between the axes.

93. The method of claim 92, wherein the axes are interconnected by rendering polygon segments between the plotted points on the computer display.

94. The method of claim 90, wherein the first value of the origin is defined as zero.

95. The method of claim 90, wherein the number of axes corresponds to a number of variables being plotted.

96. The method of claim 90, including the additional steps of including at least one axis for a statistical parameter of the company; computing a value for each said statistical parameter utilizing a predetermined formula and the computer processor; plotting on the computer display for each said at least one axis the value of the respective statistical parameter; and using the plotted statistical parameters to interpolate on the display screen segments on either side of said at least one axis.

97. The method of claim 96, wherein statistical parameter is derived from at least one of the variables.

98. The method of claim 96, wherein the interpolation interconnects the plotted benchmark points and the statistical parameters between the respective axes.

99. The method of claim 90, wherein the interpolation interconnects the plotted points between the axes.

100. The method of claim 90, wherein the value of each variable comprises a calculation based upon two more indicators associated with the company.