Advanced Audit and Assurance (International) · Specific assignments

Review Engagements: ISRE 2400 and ISRE 2410 Explained

Updated 11 October 2026 · Fact-checked

A review engagement gives limited assurance on historical financial information. The practitioner mainly uses enquiry and analytical procedures, not full testing. ISRE 2400 covers reviews of financial statements by a practitioner who is not the entity's auditor. ISRE 2410 covers interim information reviewed by the entity's auditor. The report gives negative assurance.

Understand Review Engagements (ISRE 2400 and 2410)

A review engagement is an assurance engagement. The practitioner gives a conclusion on historical financial information, but the level of assurance is limited, not reasonable. An audit gives reasonable assurance, which is high but not absolute. A review gives a lower level, enough to be meaningful.

Limited assurance means less work. In an audit you test controls, inspect documents, confirm balances and attend counts. In a review you mainly make enquiries of management and apply analytical procedures. You do not normally test controls or obtain corroborating evidence unless something looks wrong. The risk of a wrong conclusion is higher than in an audit, and the cost is lower.

Two standards matter. ISRE 2400 (Revised) applies when a practitioner who is not the auditor of the entity reviews its historical financial statements. ISRE 2410 applies when the auditor of the entity reviews its interim financial information, for example half-year results. The auditor already knows the entity, so ISRE 2410 relies on that knowledge.

The conclusion is worded differently. An audit report gives a positive opinion, such as the statements give a true and fair view. A review report gives a negative form of conclusion: nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe the statements are not prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the framework. This wording reflects the limited work done.

Reviews suit small companies exempt from audit, lenders who want some comfort, and listed groups publishing interim results. In the exam, expect to explain the difference from an audit, list the procedures, and say what to do when the review finds problems.

Key rules to remember

Level of assurance: Audit = reasonable assurance (positive opinion); Review = limited assurance (negative-form conclusion); Limited assurance still needs enough work to give a meaningful level of comfort.
Main review procedures: Enquiry + analytical procedures (+ further procedures if matters arise); Limited tests of controls or substantive detail work, only where needed to address concerns.
ISRE 2400 versus ISRE 2410: ISRE 2400 = practitioner who is not the entity's auditor; ISRE 2410 = entity's auditor reviewing interim information; Pick the right standard from who is doing the work.
Review conclusion wording: Nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that the information is not prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the framework; Negative assurance. Do not say true and fair view is confirmed.
Modified conclusions: Qualified, adverse or disclaimer of conclusion; Used when there is material misstatement or a scope limitation. Use the same logic as ISA 705.

How to solve Review Engagements (ISRE 2400 and 2410) questions

Use this method for any review engagement question, whether it asks for procedures, report content or a comparison with audit.

1Identify the engagement. Who is the practitioner, and are they the entity's auditor? That decides between ISRE 2400 and ISRE 2410.
2State the assurance level: limited assurance, with a negative-form conclusion.
3Link the answer to the scenario. Name the entity, its industry and its risks, such as inventory, a new subsidiary or a loan covenant.
4List the procedures you would perform, mainly enquiries and analytical procedures. Say what you would ask or compare, not just the label.
5Say what you do if you find a possible misstatement: perform further procedures, ask management to correct, and consider the effect on the conclusion.
6Consider the report. Give the conclusion in negative form, and state when it would be modified.
7Add professional skills: show scepticism, explain the limits of the review in plain language, and give a clear recommendation.

Quickest way: Level, standard, procedures, report

When to use it: Use when time is short and the question is a mixed requirement worth around 5 to 10 marks.

Write the level: limited assurance, lower than audit.
Name the standard: 2400 for a non-auditor, 2410 for the entity's auditor on interim information.
List 4 to 6 specific procedures as enquiries and analytical comparisons tied to the scenario.
Finish with the report: negative-form conclusion, and what changes it.

Common mistakes in Review Engagements (ISRE 2400 and 2410)

Saying a review gives no assurance.
Students see the lower level and assume it is nothing.
Fix: Say it gives limited assurance. It is a real assurance engagement with a conclusion.
Writing that a review report gives a true and fair opinion.
Students copy the audit report wording.
Fix: Use the negative-form wording: nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe the information is not prepared in accordance with the framework.
Listing audit procedures such as external confirmations and attending the inventory count.
Students default to audit habits.
Fix: Stick to enquiry and analytical procedures. Mention extra work only as a response to a specific concern.
Mixing up ISRE 2400 and ISRE 2410.
Both standards are about reviews and the numbers are close.
Fix: Ask who the practitioner is. The entity's auditor reviewing interim information uses 2410. Anyone else reviewing financial statements uses 2400.
Ignoring the scenario and giving a generic list.
Students memorise the procedures and skip application.
Fix: Tie each procedure to a fact in the question, such as a sharp fall in gross margin or a new loan.
Forgetting that a review can be modified.
Students think a limited report is always clean.
Fix: State that a material misstatement or a scope limitation leads to a qualified, adverse or disclaimed conclusion.

Worked examples

Example 1

A small private company is not required to have an audit. Its bank asks for assurance on the annual financial statements. The company asks you, a practitioner who is not its auditor, to carry out a review engagement. Explain the level of assurance you would give, the procedures you would perform and how your report would differ from an audit report. (8 marks)

Show the solution

Standard: you are not the entity's auditor, so ISRE 2400 applies.
Assurance: the review gives limited assurance. This is lower than the reasonable assurance of an audit, so the bank gets less comfort at lower cost.
Procedures: make enquiries of management about accounting policies, going concern, related parties and significant events. Perform analytical procedures, such as comparing gross margin, receivables days and expenses with the prior year and expectations, and investigate unusual movements.
Further work: if a matter suggests the statements may be materially misstated, perform extra procedures, for example look at a supporting document for the item.
Not performed: no routine testing of controls, no external confirmations and no attendance at the inventory count.
Report: the conclusion is in negative form, stating nothing has come to your attention that causes you to believe the statements are not prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the framework. An audit report gives a positive opinion.
Professional skills: explain to the bank that a review is not an audit, so it should not treat it as proof that the numbers are right.

Answer: ISRE 2400 applies. The review gives limited assurance using enquiry and analytical procedures, with extra work only where concerns arise. The report gives a negative-form conclusion rather than the positive opinion of an audit.

Example 2

You are the auditor of a listed company. The board asks you to review its half-year financial information before publication. During analytical procedures you find gross margin fell from 32% to 24% with no explanation from management. Explain how you would proceed and the effect on your conclusion. (7 marks)

Show the solution

Standard: you are the entity's auditor reviewing interim information, so ISRE 2410 applies.
Recognise the issue: the fall of 8 percentage points (32% minus 24%) is unexpected and unexplained. It may indicate misstatement, such as inventory overstated in the prior period, understated sales or cost errors.
Enquire further: ask management for reasons, such as price cuts, input cost rises or a change in sales mix, and ask for supporting information.
Corroborate: management's explanation alone is not enough where a concern remains. Perform further procedures, such as comparing selling prices and purchase costs with invoices, and reviewing inventory valuation and cut-off.
Evaluate: decide if any misstatement found is material and ask management to correct it.
Conclusion: if uncorrected material misstatement remains, give a qualified or adverse conclusion. If management stops you from obtaining enough information, this is a scope limitation, and you qualify or disclaim.
Professional skills: show scepticism, and communicate promptly with those charged with governance before publication.

Answer: ISRE 2410 applies. The unexplained 8 percentage point fall requires further enquiry and corroborating procedures. If a material misstatement is not corrected, or a scope limitation exists, the conclusion is modified. Otherwise a negative-form clean conclusion can be given.

Exam tips

Always state the assurance level first. It earns easy marks and frames the rest of your answer.
Make procedures specific. Say what you would ask and compare, and link it to a figure or risk in the scenario.
When asked to compare audit and review, use a clear structure: level of assurance, procedures, evidence, conclusion wording and cost. Do not just list facts about one.
Remember professional skills marks: explain limits of a review clearly to a non-expert reader such as a bank or a board.
If a review finds a problem, do not stop at identifying it. Say what extra work you do and how it affects the conclusion.

Practice questions from Specific assignments

Review Engagements (ISRE 2400 and 2410): frequently asked questions

What is the difference between an audit and a review engagement?

An audit gives reasonable assurance and a positive opinion, supported by extensive testing. A review gives limited assurance and a negative-form conclusion, based mainly on enquiry and analytical procedures. A review is cheaper and quicker but gives less comfort.

When is ISRE 2410 used instead of ISRE 2400?

ISRE 2410 is used when the entity's own auditor reviews its interim financial information. ISRE 2400 is used when a practitioner who is not the entity's auditor reviews historical financial statements.

Can a review report be qualified?

Yes. If there is a material misstatement or a limitation on the scope of the work, the practitioner can qualify, give an adverse conclusion or disclaim a conclusion. The logic is similar to modifications under ISA 705.

Does a review involve testing controls or confirming balances?

Not normally. Reviews rely mainly on enquiry and analytical procedures. You perform further procedures only if something suggests the information may be materially misstated.