May APMs representing a biased measure of performance (i.e. a measure that includes one-off gains but disregards one-off related losses) violate the APM Guidelines even if they are correctly labelled?

Do the APM Guidelines require a numeric reconciliation of the APM to “the most reconcilable line item, total or subtotal” presented in the financial statements or is it sufficient to include a qualitative explanation of the items which adjust the financial statement’s figures?

How should an issuer define the APM measure “Organic growth”?

In which circumstances is the scope exemption in paragraph 19 (4th bullet) of the APM Guidelines applicable (i.e. issuers are not required to apply the APM Guidelines when APMs are used to explain the compliance with the terms of an agreement or legislative requirement such as lending covenants or the basis of calculating the director or executive remuneration)?

Does a segment measure of profitability – which is determined on different accounting basis than the basis defined or specified in the applicable reporting framework – fall within the definition of an APM in the APM Guidelines?