NAV Break
A discrepancy between what a fund's books expect an asset or NAV figure to be and what an independent source confirms it actually is.
Definition
A NAV break (or reconciliation break) is a discrepancy between what a fund's ledger expects a position or NAV figure to be and what an independent source, a live exchange balance, a wallet, a custodian statement, or a fund administrator's figure, actually confirms. It's a flagged mismatch for investigation, not automatically an error in either direction; the point of surfacing it is to figure out which side is wrong, or whether both are technically correct but measuring something slightly different, such as a timing difference.
Breaks are typically graded by severity against a defined materiality threshold, so that genuinely immaterial rounding or timing differences don't drown out the handful that represent a real data error worth correcting before NAV is treated as final.
Why it matters
A NAV break caught before publication is a minor operational task; the same break discovered after NAV has already been used to strike a subscription, a redemption, or a fee is far more disruptive to unwind, potentially requiring a correcting entry against an already-settled transaction. Catching breaks early is one of the main reasons funds run shadow accounting or a defined reconciliation process at all.
For LPs, a fund's break-resolution process, how quickly breaks are identified, how they're graded, and how they're documented, is a meaningful proxy for overall operational discipline, even though the breaks themselves are a completely normal part of running any accounting process against live external data.
Common causes and resolution lifecycle
Common causes include an unsettled trade that hasn't yet posted, a duplicated or missed deposit or withdrawal record, a stale or simply wrong price feed, a lag between when an exchange or wallet balance updates and when the ledger reflects it, or a fee or subscription posted to the wrong accounting date.
A typical lifecycle runs: identified (the discrepancy is flagged, usually automatically) → investigated (someone determines the actual cause) → resolved, either with a documented correcting entry, since ledgers in this space are typically append-only, so corrections are new reversing entries, not silent edits to an old one, or explicitly logged as immaterial and ignored with a reason. A break that recurs after being marked resolved or immaterial is generally reopened rather than logged as a fresh, unrelated break, since repetition is itself a signal something systemic is wrong.
Grading breaks by cause and typical severity
| Cause | Typical severity |
|---|---|
| Unsettled trade not yet posted | Low: usually resolves automatically once settlement completes |
| Stale or wrong price feed | Material: directly misstates NAV until corrected |
| Duplicated or missed deposit/withdrawal | Material: directly misstates a cash or asset balance |
| Sub-cent rounding or timing lag | Immaterial: typically logged and closed without a correcting entry |
Common mistakes
Setting materiality tolerance too tight, so every sub-cent rounding or timing difference registers as a break and buries the small number of genuinely material ones.
Setting materiality tolerance too loose, letting a real data error slip through as 'immaterial' when it would actually misstate a subscription or redemption price.
Resolving a break by silently adjusting a balance rather than posting a documented correcting or reversing entry, which destroys the audit trail of what actually happened.
Treating every break as an error rather than distinguishing a genuine data mistake from a timing difference that simply hasn't settled yet.
In practice
Crypto reconciliation has failure modes traditional fund accounting rarely sees at the same frequency: a wallet balance that lags an on-chain transaction by a block or two, a price feed that's genuinely correct on one venue but stale relative to where the fund actually executed, or an exchange API that reports a balance net of an in-flight withdrawal differently than the ledger expects. A materiality floor calibrated for these near-constant small timing differences, rather than one borrowed unmodified from traditional finance, keeps the break queue focused on what actually needs attention.
Run your own period-end numbers through the free NAV Validator to see whether the roll-forward, fee math, and optional per-LP figures tie out the way a reconciliation process would check them.
Questions, answered
What is a NAV break?
A NAV break is a discrepancy between what a fund's ledger expects a position or NAV figure to be and what an independent source, an exchange, wallet, custodian, or administrator, actually confirms. It's flagged for investigation rather than assumed to be an error on either side.
What typically causes a NAV break?
Common causes include an unsettled trade, a duplicated or missed deposit or withdrawal record, a stale or wrong price feed, a lag between an external balance updating and the ledger reflecting it, or a fee posted to the wrong date.
How are NAV breaks graded?
Breaks are typically graded by severity against a defined materiality threshold, so immaterial rounding or timing differences are distinguished from genuinely material errors that need a correcting entry before NAV is treated as final.
How is a NAV break actually fixed?
Through a documented correcting or reversing entry, not a silent balance adjustment: since fund ledgers are typically append-only, a correction is a new entry that offsets the error, preserving a full audit trail of what happened.
Your next LP report,
on autopilot.
From $2,500/month · Everything included · Book a call