Auditing vs. Fraud Examination

Although fraud examination and auditing are related, they are not the same discipline. The following table lists some of the principal differences.

Issue	Auditing	Fraud Examination
Timing	Recurring Audits are conducted on a regular, recurring basis.	Non Recurring Fraud examinations are non recurring. They are conducted only with sufficient predication.
Scope	General The scope of the audit is a general examination of financial data.	Specific The fraud examination is conducted to resolve specific allegations.
Objective	Opinion An audit is generally conducted for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the financial statements or related information.	Affix Blame The fraud examination’s goal is to determine whether fraud has/is occurring, and to determine who is responsible.
Relationship	Non Adversarial The audit process is non-adversarial in nature.	Adversarial Fraud examinations, because they involve efforts to affix blame, are adversarial in nature.
Methodology	Audit Techniques Audits are conducted primarily by examining financial data.	Fraud Examination Techniques Fraud examinations are conducted by (1) documentation examination; (2) review of outside data such as public records; and (3) interviews.
Presumption	Professional Skepticism Auditors are required to approach audits with professional skepticism.	Proof Fraud examiners approach the resolution of a fraud by attempting to establish sufficient proof to support or refute an allegation of fraud.