<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" article-type="Research Article" dtd-version="1.0"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="pmc">srjebm</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="pubmed">SRJEBM</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">SRJEBM</journal-id><issn>2788-9505</issn></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">https://doi.org/10.47310/srjebm.2025.v05i02.005</article-id><title-group><article-title>Approaches to Asset Valuation and Their Impact on the Quality of Accounting Earnings</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><given-names>Sadam</given-names><surname>Hamdan Akdh</surname></name></contrib><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-a" /></contrib-group><aff-id id="aff-a">College of Economic and Administion AI: Iraqia University, Iraq</aff-id><abstract>This research is interested in analyzing the interrelation of accounting conceptual diversity and valuation approaches and their implication on accounting earnings quality. It is interested in providing an explanation of how the selection and consistency of valuation approaches, more particularly fair value and historical cost, impact the reliability, relevance and sustainability of financial reporting outcomes. To pursue this aim, the researcher followed a descriptive-analytical method, complemented by a field study with a structured questionnaire administered to a representative sample of accountants, auditors and financial managers. Statistical procedures such as means, standard deviations, relative weights and t-tests were employed to test the significance of answers along the study’s primary axes. The findings revealed two key conclusions: (1) Accounting concept choices and chosen valuation of assets are significantly and statistically strongly related to each other and they directly affect reported earnings sustainability and credibility. (2) Fair value measurement enhances relevance for decision-makers but increases earnings volatility, while historical cost ensures stability and faithful representation across reporting period. Based on these results, the study provides two essential recommendations: (1) Institutions must establish a clear policy framework relating their objectives to the most appropriate valuation method and to ensure consistency and transparency of financial reporting. (2) Increased efforts are required to hone qualitative disclosures of valuation methods, assumptions and sensitivities, along with reinforcing the audit committee's supervision to limit earnings manipulation practices.</abstract></article-meta></front><body /><back /></article>