Demonstration Case · Created From Public-Record Data · Real Forensic Patterns · Read OnlyConstructed from real court documents, public filings, and forensic accounting archetypes.

Prepared by Quarare LLC · Forensic Analysis Platform

Madoff Investment Securities — Multi-Decade Ponzi Scheme: A Quarare Forensic Analysis

Illustrative case study based on publicly-documented matters.

Methodology: v1.0.0
Status: Finalized
Provenance: Public-record sources

Drop your documents here, or click to browse

PDF · DOCX · XLSX · CSV · JPG · PNG — up to 50 documents, 100MB each

Demo mode — uploads are not processed in this preview. See the sample engagement workflow below.

Total

Scored

Mean Composite

Overridden

SortOCROverridesReliability

18 of 18

File	Type	Size	OCR	Reliability	Uploaded
Customer-Complaint-Letters-Bundle-1992-2008.pdf	PDF	5.8 MB	ready	78	Feb 12, 2009, 14:40 UTC	▶
Markopolos-2005-SEC-Submission-The-Worlds-Largest-Hedge-Fund-Is-A-Fraud.pdf	PDF	2.4 MB	ready	91	Feb 12, 2009, 14:14 UTC	▶
BLMIS-Employee-Witness-Statements-2008-12.pdf	PDF	5.5 MB	ready	81	Feb 4, 2009, 11:00 UTC	▶
DiPascali-FBI-302-Cooperation-Statement-2009-02-12.pdf	PDF	1.2 MB	ready	87	Feb 2, 2009, 09:14 UTC	▶
FINRA-Trade-Audit-Trail-Inquiry-Response-2009-01-15.pdf	PDF	574.6 KB	ready	96	Jan 19, 2009, 14:14 UTC	▶
Kingate-Global-Fund-Offering-Memorandum.pdf	PDF	2.9 MB	ready	64	Jan 14, 2009, 09:55 UTC	▶
Tremont-Rye-Select-Subscription-Memorandum.pdf	PDF	3.0 MB	ready	67	Jan 14, 2009, 09:32 UTC	▶
Fairfield-Sentry-Subscription-Agreement-and-Performance-1990-2008.pdf	PDF	4.6 MB	ready	65	Jan 14, 2009, 09:14 UTC	▶
House17-AS400-Forensic-Image-Inventory.pdf	PDF	8.3 MB	pending	95	Jan 9, 2009, 11:14 UTC	▶
SEC-Enforcement-Cause-Examination-Memo-2006-09.pdf	PDF	4.0 MB	ready	92	Jan 7, 2009, 10:42 UTC	▶
SEC-OCIE-Cause-Examination-Memo-2005-04.pdf	PDF	3.1 MB	ready	92	Jan 7, 2009, 10:18 UTC	▶
DTCC-Settlement-Records-Response-2007-2008.pdf	PDF	402.4 KB	ready	96	Dec 30, 2008, 15:14 UTC	▶
BLMIS-JPMC-703-Demand-Deposit-Account-Records-2002-2008.pdf	PDF	14.1 MB	ready	97	Dec 23, 2008, 14:14 UTC	▶
Friehling-Horowitz-Audit-Workpapers-Excerpt-2007-Audit.pdf	PDF	402.4 KB	failed	49	Dec 22, 2008, 11:14 UTC	▶
Extraction error: OCR engine produced low-confidence output across the document (mean character confidence 0.41); dot-matrix print degradation and handwritten annotations interfere with text extraction. Manual transcription queued — see analyst note in engagement log.
BLMIS-Form-ADV-2008-01.pdf	PDF	1.2 MB	ready	62	Dec 19, 2008, 11:00 UTC	▶
BLMIS-House17-Trading-Blotter-2007.pdf	PDF	17.4 MB	ready	30	Dec 18, 2008, 10:42 UTC	▶
BLMIS-Customer-Account-Statements-2003-2008.pdf	PDF	23.0 MB	ready	22	Dec 18, 2008, 10:14 UTC	▶
SEC-v-Madoff-Complaint-2008-12-11.pdf	PDF	2.1 MB	ready	98	Dec 17, 2008, 09:14 UTC	▶

Swipe table to see more columns →

Override actions are disabled in demo mode.

Surfaced

Promoted

Under Review

Dismissed

Insight I-1

InconsistencyHigh confidencePromoted

DTCC settlement records show no positions corresponding to BLMIS customer statements

BLMIS customer account statements (D-001) report end-of-day equity and option positions for every customer across every trading day in the 2007-2008 window. The DTCC subpoena response (D-003) reports zero positions held in BLMIS DTCC accounts on the same days. The discrepancy is total rather than fractional and is corroborated by the JPMC 703 demand-deposit account records (D-017), which show no cash settlement movement parallel to the claimed securities transactions.

Supporting Documents

DOC-MADOFF-001, DOC-MADOFF-003, DOC-MADOFF-017

Promoted To

Finding 1: Ponzi Scheme Structure — No Underlying Securities Trading Activity

Insight I-2

AnomalyHigh confidencePromoted

Fairfield Sentry monthly performance is outside the achievable frontier for the represented strategy

The Fairfield Sentry 1990-2008 performance summary (D-006) reports a 12.00% net annual return with 7 down months in 174, a Sharpe ratio of 2.55, and a beta-to-S&P-500 of 0.06. The publicly traded Gateway Option Income Fund (GATEX), pursuing substantially the same strategy with full disclosure, returned 10.27% annualized with 26 down months in the 87-month overlap window. The Markopolos analysis (D-012) reaches the same conclusion via direct option-pricing decomposition.

Supporting Documents

DOC-MADOFF-006, DOC-MADOFF-012

Promoted To

Finding 2: Split-Strike Conversion Strategy is Mathematically Incapable of Generating Reported Returns

Insight I-3

ConcentrationMedium confidencePromoted

Feeder-fund fee revenue is concentrated in continued BLMIS reporting integrity

Across the three principal feeder offering documents (D-006 Fairfield Sentry, D-007 Tremont Rye, D-008 Kingate Global), the substantially common fee waterfall (~1.0-1.5% management + 20% incentive over hurdle) generates an estimated $700M-$1.0B in annual revenue to the feeder operators across the period at representative AUM. The revenue stream depends entirely on continued BLMIS-reported returns; the absence of independent verification procedures in the operator due-diligence files is to be evaluated against this structural incentive.

Supporting Documents

DOC-MADOFF-006, DOC-MADOFF-007, DOC-MADOFF-008

Promoted To

Finding 3: Feeder-Fund Fee Structure Generated Structural Incentive for Willful Blindness

Insight I-4

SequenceHigh confidencePromoted

AS/400 statement-generation timestamps cluster after calendar month-end

AS/400 file-metadata analysis (D-011) shows that the customer-statement generation routines were executed in the first ten business days of each calendar month, with output files carrying nominal "trade dates" within the prior month. The seized House 17 trading blotters (D-002) exhibit the same temporal signature. The DiPascali cooperation statement (D-009) describes the after-the-fact back-dating procedure that produces this signature.

Supporting Documents

DOC-MADOFF-002, DOC-MADOFF-009, DOC-MADOFF-011

Promoted To

Finding 4: House 17 AS/400 Fabricated-Statement Generation Process

Insight I-5

OmissionHigh confidencePromoted

SEC drafted independent-verification correspondence that was never transmitted

The Enforcement cause-examination memo (D-005) references a FINRA inquiry letter drafted to verify BLMIS investment-advisory trading volume but never transmitted; the OCIE memo (D-004) records that DTC records were obtained from Madoff rather than from DTC itself. The FINRA response (D-018) independently confirms that no such inquiry letter was received in the periods identified. The omission of independent verification is a procedural pattern across the SEC examinations rather than an isolated event.

Supporting Documents

DOC-MADOFF-004, DOC-MADOFF-005, DOC-MADOFF-018

Promoted To

Finding 5: SEC Examination Failures — Multiple Red Flags Reviewed and Not Acted Upon

Insight I-6

InconsistencyHigh confidencePromoted

Friehling & Horowitz "no audit clients" AICPA filings inconsistent with BLMIS engagement of record

F&H filed annual representations to the AICPA Peer Review program from 1993 through 2008 that the firm had "no audit clients" requiring peer review. The BLMIS Form ADV filings (D-015) identify F&H as auditor of record across the same period. The two records are flatly inconsistent and the AICPA filing was materially false on its face; F&H workpapers (D-016) contain no substantive audit procedures consistent with an audit engagement of the represented BLMIS scale.

Supporting Documents

DOC-MADOFF-015, DOC-MADOFF-016

Promoted To

Finding 6: Family and Employee Participation — Including Frank DiPascali and the Accounting Function

Insight I-7

AnomalyHigh confidenceUnder review

Claimed OEX put hedge volume exceeds total market open interest

At the BLMIS-reported $17B AUM and the represented split-strike conversion strategy, the OEX put hedge requirement is approximately 312,000 contracts, against total OEX put open interest of approximately 340,000 contracts as of October 17, 2005 (per Markopolos analysis, D-012). The required share approaches or exceeds 100% of all OEX puts in existence at the higher third-party AUM estimates. Analyst note: evidentiary overlap with F-1 and F-2; deferred pending separate disposition rather than promoted as a stand-alone finding given that the market-capacity violation is a corollary of the no-trading-activity conclusion in F-1.

Supporting Documents

DOC-MADOFF-006, DOC-MADOFF-012

Total Findings

Finalized

Mean Composite

Flagged

Statement of Opinion

Across the engagement window, the investment-advisory business of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC ("BLMIS") conducted no securities trading activity corresponding to the positions, executions, or returns reported in customer account statements (D-001). The conclusion rests on three independent verification points, each produced by an entity not controlled by the subject:

— The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC) settlement-records response (D-003) shows no end-of-day positions in the equities or options that the customer statements claim to hold across every trading day in the 2007-2008 subpoena window. — The FINRA trade audit trail response (D-018) shows no order, route, or execution activity in the BLMIS broker-dealer CRD number corresponding to the claimed investment-advisory strategy across the same period. — The JPMorgan Chase 703 demand-deposit account records (D-017) show inflows from new investors and outflows to existing investors with no parallel securities-settlement cash movement; the wire pattern is the canonical signature of a Ponzi scheme rather than an investment business.

The customer account statements (D-001) and the seized House 17 trading blotters (D-002) are the records under examination, not records of truth. The 17th-floor AS/400 system imaged in D-011 produced fabricated trade tickets on a monthly batch process after the relevant calendar month-end, as described in the DiPascali cooperation statement (D-009) and corroborated by the December 2008 House 17 employee witness statements (D-010).

Quantification of investor losses under the Net Equity Method ultimately affirmed by the Second Circuit in *In re Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC*, 654 F.3d 229 (2d Cir. 2011) is performed in the supporting workpapers and reflected at engagement-archive valuation in the customer-claim-allocation memorandum (referenced in the engagement evidence log and not reproduced here).

Supporting Evidence

Doc ID	Filename	Reliability
DOC-MADOFF-001	BLMIS-Customer-Account-Statements-2003-2008.pdf	22
DOC-MADOFF-002	BLMIS-House17-Trading-Blotter-2007.pdf	30
DOC-MADOFF-003	DTCC-Settlement-Records-Response-2007-2008.pdf	96
DOC-MADOFF-009	DiPascali-FBI-302-Cooperation-Statement-2009-02-12.pdf	87
DOC-MADOFF-011	House17-AS400-Forensic-Image-Inventory.pdf	95
DOC-MADOFF-017	BLMIS-JPMC-703-Demand-Deposit-Account-Records-2002-2008.pdf	97
DOC-MADOFF-018	FINRA-Trade-Audit-Trail-Inquiry-Response-2009-01-15.pdf	96

Daubert Four-Factor Analysis

Testability95

The trading-versus-no-trading hypothesis is directly testable against three independent third-party record systems (DTCC, FINRA, JPMC). A single corroborating securities-settlement record in any of those systems would falsify the finding; the actual absence across all three is dispositive within the precision of the underlying record systems.

Peer Review90

The methodology of cross-verifying claimed broker-dealer activity against DTCC custody records and FINRA audit-trail records is standard in SEC enforcement practice and is documented in the AICPA Audit Guide for broker-dealers and in the ACFE Fraud Examiners Manual. The specific application to a Ponzi scheme of this scale is novel only in magnitude.

Error Rate92

Error rate is bounded by the completeness of the DTCC, FINRA, and JPMC record systems for the periods covered, each of which is independently certified. The joint probability that all three systems would fail to record genuine trading activity of the claimed magnitude is negligibly small.

General Acceptance91

Cross-system independent verification of claimed broker-dealer activity is generally accepted forensic practice across securities-litigation, SEC enforcement, and bankruptcy-trustee work. The technique is referenced in standard practitioner texts and applied routinely.

Composite92

Limitations

The finding addresses the investment-advisory business of BLMIS only; the legitimate market-making and proprietary-trading business operated on the 18th and 19th floors of the Lipstick Building is not within scope and is the subject of a separate operational review. The finding quantifies the absence of trading activity in the periods covered by independent third-party records (2002-2008 for JPMC, 2007-2008 for DTCC and FINRA); the conclusion that the absence extends backward to the early 1990s rests on the consistent pattern across the period for which independent records exist and the absence of any contrary evidence in the seized BLMIS records, but is itself an inference rather than a direct measurement.

Subject S-001

Bernard L. Madoff

Principal; founder and sole owner, Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC; former Chairman, NASDAQ Stock Market board of directors

Key Documents

DOC-MADOFF-001BLMIS-Customer-Account-Statements-2003-2008.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-009DiPascali-FBI-302-Cooperation-Statement-2009-02-12.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-014SEC-v-Madoff-Complaint-2008-12-11.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-015BLMIS-Form-ADV-2008-01.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-017BLMIS-JPMC-703-Demand-Deposit-Account-Records-2002-2008.pdf

Notable Patterns

Sole signing authority over the JPMC 703 demand-deposit account through which all investment-advisory customer funds flowed (D-017). Verbally confessed to two senior BLMIS employees on December 10, 2008 that the investment advisory business was "all just one big lie ... basically a giant Ponzi scheme" (D-014, paragraphs 24-26). Form ADV signatory of record for the January 2008 filing reporting $17B AUM and 23 clients (D-015), a representation rebutted by every independent third-party record obtained in this engagement.

Subject S-002

Frank DiPascali Jr.

Director of Options Trading; principal lieutenant; supervisor of the 17th-floor House 17 operation

Key Documents

DOC-MADOFF-002BLMIS-House17-Trading-Blotter-2007.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-009DiPascali-FBI-302-Cooperation-Statement-2009-02-12.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-010BLMIS-Employee-Witness-Statements-2008-12.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-011House17-AS400-Forensic-Image-Inventory.pdf

Notable Patterns

Direct supervisor of the AS/400 statement-generation process imaged in D-011 and reflected in the seized House 17 trading blotters (D-002). His February 2009 FBI 302 cooperation statement (D-009) describes the month-end procedure by which fabricated trade tickets were back-dated to produce account statements (D-001) consistent with the reported Fairfield Sentry monthly returns (D-006). Identified by four separate House 17 employees in the December 2008 witness interviews (D-010) as the person who instructed staff to generate the trade tickets.

Subject S-003

Peter B. Madoff

Senior Managing Director and Chief Compliance Officer; brother of Bernard L. Madoff

Key Documents

DOC-MADOFF-004SEC-OCIE-Cause-Examination-Memo-2005-04.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-005SEC-Enforcement-Cause-Examination-Memo-2006-09.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-015BLMIS-Form-ADV-2008-01.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-016Friehling-Horowitz-Audit-Workpapers-Excerpt-2007-Audit.pdf

Notable Patterns

CCO of record for the investment advisory business during the entirety of the period reviewed in the SEC OCIE (D-004) and Enforcement (D-005) examinations; counter-signatory on the Form ADV (D-015). Maintained the engagement-of-record relationship with Friehling & Horowitz (D-016) throughout the period during which F&H filed annual "no audit clients" representations to the AICPA Peer Review program — a representation materially false by virtue of the BLMIS engagement.

Subject S-004

Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC

Subject entity; SEC-registered broker-dealer and investment adviser; debtor in SIPA liquidation

Key Documents

DOC-MADOFF-001BLMIS-Customer-Account-Statements-2003-2008.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-002BLMIS-House17-Trading-Blotter-2007.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-011House17-AS400-Forensic-Image-Inventory.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-015BLMIS-Form-ADV-2008-01.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-017BLMIS-JPMC-703-Demand-Deposit-Account-Records-2002-2008.pdf
DOC-MADOFF-018FINRA-Trade-Audit-Trail-Inquiry-Response-2009-01-15.pdf

Notable Patterns

Operated a legitimate market-making business on the 18th and 19th floors of the Lipstick Building at 885 Third Avenue, New York, NY, and a wholly fictitious investment-advisory business on the 17th floor (House 17). The 17th-floor operation produced fabricated trade tickets, position records, and account statements via the AS/400 system imaged in D-011 and described in D-009 and D-010. No transactional activity corresponding to the claimed investment-advisory strategy is reflected in DTCC records (D-003), FINRA trade audit trail records (D-018), or the JPMC 703 demand-deposit account (D-017) through which all customer funds in fact flowed.

Public-Record Sources

Citations to the publicly-documented matters underpinning this analysis. All sources are independently retrievable from the issuing authority.

[1] Court filing
SEC v. Bernard L. Madoff and Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, No. 08-CV-10791 (S.D.N.Y., complaint filed Dec. 11, 2008).
Civil enforcement complaint filed contemporaneous with the criminal arrest; recites the post-arrest admissions framework.
[2] Court filing
United States v. Bernard L. Madoff, No. 09-CR-213 (S.D.N.Y., guilty plea allocution Mar. 12, 2009).
Plea allocution describes the operating Ponzi scheme on the record.
[3] Court filing
Securities Investor Protection Corporation v. Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, Adv. Pro. No. 08-01789 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.).
SIPA liquidation proceeding; net-equity allocation framework affirmed in In re BLMIS, 654 F.3d 229 (2d Cir. 2011).
[4] Court filing
United States v. Frank DiPascali, Jr., No. 09-CR-764 (S.D.N.Y., information filed Aug. 11, 2009; cooperation plea same date).
DiPascali information and cooperation; describes the monthly statement-fabrication batch process at the source.
[5] Regulatory order
Open link →
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Inspector General, Investigation of Failure of the SEC to Uncover Bernard Madoff's Ponzi Scheme, OIG Report No. OIG-509 (Aug. 31, 2009).
Official OIG investigation; documents examination-procedure deficiencies and the unsent FINRA inquiry letter.
[6] Published report
Harry Markopolos, "The World's Largest Hedge Fund Is a Fraud," submission to U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (Nov. 7, 2005).
Independent quantitative analysis reaching the mathematical-infeasibility conclusion on publicly available data.
[7] SEC filing
Form ADV, Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, SEC IARD/EDGAR filing (Jan. 2008).
Investment-advisory registration filing; signatory of record for the represented $17B AUM and 23 clients.
[8] Court filing
United States v. Daniel Bonventre, Annette Bongiorno, Joann Crupi, Jerome O'Hara, and George Perez, No. 10-CR-228 (S.D.N.Y., superseding indictment filed Oct. 1, 2012; trial verdict Mar. 24, 2014).
Trial record establishes operational roles of BLMIS back-office and programmer personnel.
[9] Court filing
United States v. David G. Friehling, No. 09-CR-700 (S.D.N.Y., information filed July 30, 2009).
Auditor-of-record information; describes the absence of substantive audit procedures supporting the BLMIS opinion.
[10] Court filing
In re Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, 654 F.3d 229 (2d Cir. 2011).
Second Circuit decision affirming the Net Equity Method for customer-claim allocation under SIPA.

← Back to demo overview Process Documents →