statement of compliance with the IOSCO Principles for Financial Benchmarks.
cover note.
Workforce, Inc. (“the Administrator”) publishes this Statement of Compliance to disclose the extent to which the Workforce Labor Index (WLI) and the Workforce Agent Quality Output (AQO) score conform to the Principles for Financial Benchmarks issued by the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO PD415, July 2013, with subsequent IOSCO addenda).
This Statement follows the structure of the NY Federal Reserve’s annual Statement of Compliance regarding the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Production of Reference Rates (current edition: July 2025) and the public IOSCO compliance statements of ICE Benchmark Administration, CME Group, MSCI, and HSBC Reference Services.
The IOSCO regime is, by design, a regime of self-attestation by the Administrator. There is no IOSCO-issued license or registry seat. The Administrator is solely responsible for the accuracy of this Statement. Periodic independent review is performed under Principle 17.
The WLI is at an early stage of operation. The Administrator therefore disclaims any claim that the index is currently a “significant benchmark” in any regulator’s sense, and notes that several Principles below are reported as partially implemented with a stated path to full implementation.
methodology summary.
The WLI is a transaction-anchored, IOSCO-aligned reference rate for AI-agent labor. For each commodifiable AI-agent task category c it publishes a headline figure HAQOc(t) — the volume-weighted median of per-transaction AQOj over a rolling 90-day window — together with a published 80% bootstrap confidence interval (10,000 resamples), the underlying transaction count, the tier-weight distribution, the vendor count, and a status flag (LIVE, PREVIEW, or BELOW-THRESHOLD).
where cj is the realised cost in USD, epi,c is the provider’s eval score (0–1) for the category, and sj is the realised outcome score (0–1). Provider-level AQO uses Bayesian shrinkage with prior strength κ = 30. New providers shrink toward the category headline; established providers’ own data dominates as n grows.
Full methodology: /methodology (web rendering) and the arXiv preprint at DOI 10.5281/zenodo.x (forthcoming).
the 19 principles — workforce mapping.
The IOSCO Principles are organised in four parts: Governance (1–5), Quality of the Benchmark (6–10), Quality of the Methodology (11–15), and Accountability (16–19). Each Principle below is summarised, followed by the WorkForce control and a status flag: Fully, Partially, In progress, or N/A.
summary.
| # | Principle | Status |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Overall responsibility of the Administrator | Fully |
| 2 | Oversight of third parties | Partially |
| 3 | Conflicts of Interest | Partially |
| 4 | Control framework | Fully |
| 5 | Internal oversight | Fully |
| 6 | Benchmark design | Fully |
| 7 | Data sufficiency | Fully |
| 8 | Hierarchy of data inputs | Fully |
| 9 | Transparency of determinations | Fully |
| 10 | Periodic review | Fully |
| 11 | Content of the Methodology | Fully |
| 12 | Changes to the Methodology | Fully |
| 13 | Transition | Partially |
| 14 | Submitter Code of Conduct | N/A |
| 15 | Internal controls over data collection | Fully |
| 16 | Complaints procedures | Partially |
| 17 | Audits | In progress |
| 18 | Audit trail | Fully |
| 19 | Cooperation with regulators | Fully |
Score: 13 Fully · 5 Partially / In progress · 1 N/A. The Administrator’s posture is to be conservative in self-attestation. Several Principles report Partially / In progress where a less honest administrator might claim Full implementation. This is deliberate: the credibility of this Statement, and of the WLI, is built on the believability of its self-assessment, not on its score.