There are numerous causes of speculative mineral resource and reserve inflation. Traditionally, these are linked to issues of data accuracy or misinterpretation, the use of overly optimistic estimation parameters or assumptions, an absence of independent expert verification, or the simple pressure to increase company value, covert or otherwise.
Owing to its subjective nature, classification of resources and reserves remains an opaque process. Of necessity, Competent Persons rely on personal heuristic interpretations, ideally underpinned by appropriate estimation and classification experience across commodity and deposit types.
Whereas independent verification of individual resource and reserve statements remains impractical, publicly available data can be interrogated for potential category inflation, particularly when viewed with exploration expenditure statistics included in annual company reports.
Abrupt changes in category tonnages and market capitalisation without concomitant expenditure can aid in outlier detection. Consequently, a comparison of common exploration and resource reporting parameters offers a basis for risk assessing classification robustness, over time.
In this introductory study, an analysis of globally listed companies was undertaken over a multi-year period, examining base and precious metal projects in both preproduction and operational asset classes. From these, a series of exploratory decision tree trigger points were generated against which target companies were anonymously identified and risk-ranked.