# Sufficiency of Audit Evidence
## Two Dimensions of Audit Evidence
Audit evidence must be both sufficient and appropriate:
- Sufficiency = the quantity of audit evidence.
- Appropriateness = the quality (relevance and reliability) of audit evidence.
These two dimensions are interrelated — high-quality evidence from a reliable source may require less quantity; low-quality evidence may require more to compensate.
---
## What Determines How Much Evidence is Enough?
### Factor 1: Materiality
- Definition: The significance of a class of transactions, account balance, or disclosure to users of the financial statements.
- Rule: The more material the item, the more evidence is required. Less material items need less evidence.
### Factor 2: Risk of Material Misstatement (RoMM)
- Definition: The risk that the financial statements are materially misstated prior to the audit.
- Components: Inherent Risk (IR) × Control Risk (CR), assessed at the assertion level.
- Rule: Higher RoMM → more evidence required. Lower RoMM → less evidence required.
### Factor 3: Size and Homogeneity of the Population
- Definition: The number and nature of items in the population being tested.
- Rule:
- Smaller, more homogeneous populations → less evidence needed.
- Larger, more heterogeneous populations → more evidence needed.
---
## Summary Reference Table
| Factor | Less Evidence Needed | More Evidence Needed |
|---|---|---|
| Materiality | Low materiality | High materiality |
| Risk of Material Misstatement | Low RoMM (strong controls) | High RoMM (weak controls, complex estimates) |
| Population | Small and homogeneous | Large and heterogeneous |