I don't feel pressed, no need to make assumptions, we already know you keep missing. I have left the field years ago and have no interest in it.

I developed audit strategies and methodologies, led a number of audits of international multi-billion and smaller companies as part of Big4, including pre-IPO, US/UK/IFRS/SOX, as well as went through those audits as a client FP&A. I also developed curriculum for my Big4 that thousands of audit new hires went through.

You have a case of Dunning-Kruger.

You don't have the foundational knowledge about the topic to talk about it; this is evident from your comment about 'methodology', and the lack of understanding of what exactly is an audit and how audits are performed. There are lots of bad auditors out there, but Big4 know what they are doing with some minor exceptions (like in any field), your blanket statement about auditors is the same as yelling "I have no clue what I'm talking about".

Also, as self proclaimed 'data geek', maybe open a wiki article, it will clearly explain why audit is not 'a joke'.

PS if a high level wiki article knows more than you about a given topic, maybe consider not going around sharing your opinions with such confidence.

You win, this is the dumbest comment in the whole thread. Not because of the take per se, but because you sound like 'geeks' in TV shows when script calls for "technospeak", you have no clue what you are talking about.

Lol, the education level in this comment section is lower than reddit in general.

What a dumb take. There is a reason companies pay $$$ to get audit opinion from trusted companies instead of smaller ones.

Mmm, why people share 'knowledge' about topics they don't know much about. Reddit is fascinating.