Fair Value Measurements

Recurring Fair Value Measurements

 

When developing fair value estimates, we maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. When available, we use quoted market prices to measure fair value. The valuation technique used to measure fair value for our Level 1 and Level 2 assets is a market approach, using prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets. If market prices are not available, the fair value measurement is based on models that use primarily market based parameters including yield curves, volatilities, credit ratings and currency rates. In certain cases where market rate assumptions are not available, we are required to make judgments about assumptions market participants would use to estimate the fair value of a financial instrument.

The valuation technique used to measure fair value for our Level 3 assets, which consists of ARS, is primarily an income approach, where the expected weighted average future cash flows are discounted back to present value for each asset. The significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of our ARS are the probability of earning the maximum rate until maturity, the probability of principal return prior to maturity, the probability of default, the liquidity risk premium and the recovery rate in default. Generally, interrelationships are such that a change in the assumptions used for the probability of principal return prior to maturity is accompanied by a directionally opposite change in one or more the following assumptions: the probability of earning the maximum rate until maturity, the probability of default and the liquidity risk premium. The recovery rate in default is somewhat independent and based upon the ARS' specific underlying assets and published recovery rate studies.

Significant increases or decreases in the underlying assumptions used to value the ARS could significantly increase or decrease the fair value estimates recorded in the consolidated balance sheets.

The following table reflects the activity for our financial assets measured at fair value using Level 3 inputs for each period presented (in thousands):

 

We have also classified contingent consideration related to the Rollbase, Inc. (Rollbase) and Modulus LLC (Modulus) acquisitions, which occurred in the second quarter of fiscal years 2013 and 2014, respectively, within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy because the fair values are derived using significant unobservable inputs, which include discount rates and probability-weighted cash flows. We determined the fair value of our contingent consideration obligations based on a probability-weighted income approach derived from probability assessments of the attainment of certain milestones. We establish discount rates to be utilized in our valuation models based on the cost to borrow that would be required by a market participant for similar instruments. In determining the probability of attaining certain milestones, we utilize data regarding similar milestone events from our own experience. On a quarterly basis, we reassess the probability factors associated with the milestones for our contingent consideration obligations. Significant judgment is employed in determining the appropriateness of these key assumptions as of the acquisition date and for each subsequent period.

The following table reflects the activity for our liabilities measured at fair value using Level 3 inputs for each period presented (in thousands):