This document defines a uniform, production anchored method for determining the fair market value of name, image, and likeness compensation, and specifies the requirements a conforming valuation record must meet to serve as defensible documentation.
1 Purpose and Scope
1.1This standard establishes (a) a production anchored methodology for determining the fair market value (FMV) of NIL compensation, and (b) the contents a conforming FMV record must contain to be relied upon at the points of review described in Section 7.
1.2The standard is free to cite and to adopt by reference. The application of the standard to a specific athlete or transaction, producing a CPWS Certificate, is a separate engagement performed for a flat fee as provided in Section 8.
2 Normative Anchor
2.1A determination of value under IRS §4958 establishes a rebuttable presumption of reasonableness when it rests on appropriate comparability data and a contemporaneous written record (Treas. Reg. §53.4958-6). This standard specifies a production anchored comparability basis and a conforming record that satisfy those requirements.
2.2The structure parallels the §409A safe harbor for private company equity valuation: a defined methodology, applied by an independent party, produces a presumption that the determined value is reasonable.
2.3The methodology underlying this standard is on the public docket in House v. NCAA, No. 4:20-cv-03919-CW (N.D. Cal.), at ECF 1104.
3 Definitions
| Term | Meaning |
|---|
| Production Anchor | A valuation basis tied to on-field production rather than brand perception, market comparables, or asking price. |
| Cost Per Win Share (CPWS) | Total NIL compensation divided by attributable win shares. The unit cost of production. |
| Win Shares Provenance | The source tier of the win shares input: verified (a published figure, cited), modeled (a documented deterministic formula), or unavailable. |
| Hype Tax | The portion of compensation that exceeds the production anchored fair market value. |
| Mercenary Score | A behavioral risk indicator (retention, breach, movement), 0 to 10. |
4 The Four-Core Model
4.1FMV is determined by a weighted composite of four cores, with weights fixed by this standard and not adjustable for any client or engagement:
| Core | Weight | Measures |
|---|
| Performance | 45% | On-field production, efficiency, win contribution |
| Market | 25% | Portal demand, competing offers, position scarcity |
| Brand | 20% | Documented commercial return, social reach, sponsorship history |
| Risk | 10% | Mercenary Score, eligibility, injury, program fit (inverse scored) |
4.2The fixity of these weights is the comparability guarantee: the same facts produce the same valuation across every record issued under this standard.
5 CPWS Computation and Win Shares Integrity
5.1CPWS = total NIL compensation ÷ attributable win shares, computed in code, not estimated by judgment.
5.2Reference benchmarks: Efficient ≤ $218,000/WS · Market ≈ $350,000/WS · Overpay > $450,000/WS.
5.3Win shares must be sourced as verified (a published figure, cited) or modeled (a documented, deterministic formula). A win shares value produced by unverifiable or discretionary estimation does not conform. A litigation-grade or §4958 certificate requires verified provenance.
Why integrity of the input matters. A standard whose core input can swing between determinations is itself arbitrary. This standard requires that win shares be reproducible: the same player and season yield the same number every time.
6 Conformance: Required Contents of a CPWS Certificate
6.1A record conforms to this standard only if it contains all of the following:
aAthlete and transaction identifiers; total compensation under review.
bWin shares value, provenance tier, and source.
cCPWS and its benchmark class; Four-Core composite score.
dFair market value range and the Hype Tax amount, if any.
e§4958 clearance reading (Green / Yellow / Red) and Mercenary Score.
fMethodology version, issuance date, certificate identifier, independence attestation, and a verification reference.
6.2A document lacking any element of 6.1 is not a conforming CPWS Certificate and should not be relied upon as one.
7 Points of Reliance
7.1A conforming record is designed to be relied upon at the following points of review:
| Gate | What the record supplies |
|---|
| Capital diligence | Roster unit economics: cost per unit of production, for an investment committee or limited partner. |
| IRS §4958 | Contemporaneous comparability documentation for the rebuttable presumption of reasonableness. |
| Conference / clearinghouse review | A production anchored range against which an associated-entity deal can be assessed. |
| Litigation | An independent, reproducible valuation that withstands cross-examination. |
8 Independence and Integrity
8.1The methodology is published and version-locked. It is not adjusted for any client, engagement, or desired result.
8.2Fees for applying the standard are flat, for the analytical process, and fixed in advance. No fee is contingent on the outcome, the value determined, or whether any transaction closes. No equity, commission, or success fee is accepted from any party whose value is the subject of a record.
8.3The standard itself is free and public. Only its application is a paid engagement. The party that needs to clear a point of reliance pays for the record; the determined value is whatever the methodology returns.
9 Versioning and Governance
9.1This standard is version-controlled. Changes are dated and published. Prior versions remain identifiable so that records cite the version under which they were issued, preserving comparability across the audit record.
10 Citation
10.1Cite as: NIL Command Standard for the Fair Market Valuation of College Athlete NIL Compensation, NCS-FMV-1.0 (2026).