What Verdica's 656 score means for Michael Davis
Michael Davis's composite score of 656 places him in the "elevated risk" band (580–669). This means his overall compliance profile shows meaningful concerns that warrant closer attention, though he does not fall into the highest-risk category. A score in this range suggests unresolved issues or gaps in one or more compliance dimensions that a prospective client or business partner should understand before engaging services.
The score reflects a mixed picture: strong regulatory standing in one area offset by material gaps in another. Readers should interpret this as a yellow flag rather than a red one—suitable for proceeding with additional due diligence, but not for blind trust. Anyone considering working with Michael Davis should review the underlying sub-scores and ask clarifying questions about the lower-scoring dimensions before making a final decision.
How the sub-scores break down
License & Credentials: 340 This sub-score is critically low and is the primary driver of the elevated overall composite. A score of 340 in this category indicates substantial deficiencies in documented qualifications, active licensing status, or credential verification through state board records. In the accounting industry, this dimension typically reflects whether a provider holds current CPA licensure, meets continuing education requirements, or maintains proper registration with state accounting boards. A score this low suggests either missing documentation, lapsed credentials, or incomplete registration information in Verdica's indexed sources.
PCAOB Record: 810 This sub-score is excellent and reflects strong standing with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. A score of 810 indicates that Michael Davis has minimal audit findings or quality control violations in PCAOB inspection records. This suggests that where his work has been reviewed by federal auditors, the quality and compliance standards have been sound. This is a significant positive and indicates that when regulated inspection occurs, his practices meet or come close to federal standards.
Disciplinary: 850 This is a perfect sub-score, meaning no disciplinary actions, complaints, or sanctions have been indexed against Michael Davis in available state or federal records. This indicates a clean record with no documented violations, enforcement actions, or regulatory censures. For an accounting provider, this is the baseline expectation and represents the absence of red flags.
What regulators in MA track for accounting providers
Massachusetts state boards and the PCAOB monitor accounting providers along several key dimensions:
State Board Registration & Credentials track whether a provider holds an active, current CPA license in Massachusetts and meets all renewal and continuing education requirements. Deficiencies here may indicate lapsed licensing, incomplete application materials, or failure to complete mandatory professional development hours.
PCAOB Audit Findings are federal-level quality reviews conducted on firms that audit public companies or broker-dealers. These inspections assess the firm's audit quality, adherence to auditing standards, and internal quality controls. Violations in this area might include inadequate audit procedures, insufficient documentation, or failures in engagement quality review processes. High marks here indicate that inspectors found acceptable-to-strong adherence to standards.
Disciplinary Records capture enforcement actions by state boards, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), or other regulators. These include complaints, settlements, license suspensions, restitution orders, or other formal actions. The presence of such actions signals regulatory concern about competence, ethics, or legal compliance.
Together, these dimensions paint a picture of both formal credentials and actual regulatory oversight. A provider can have a clean disciplinary record but weak credentials, or vice versa—and each tells a different story about risk.
Bottom line
Michael Davis presents a mixed compliance profile: his federal audit quality and disciplinary history are clean, but a low credential sub-score raises questions that require clarification. Before engaging, verify his current Massachusetts CPA license status independently and ask about the gaps reflected in his registration records.