special · 2026-05-25

The Heirloom Gap Index — v2 Survey Instrument and Methodology Specification

Purpose. This document is the complete specification for the v2 fielding of the Heirloom Gap Index. It is the deliverable handed to the survey vendor (Qualtrics Panel or SurveyMonkey Audience finalists) and to the analyst running weighting and significance testing. It is also the artifact published alongside v2 of the Index as the methodology disclosure.

Read order. Section 1 (sampling) and Section 6 (weighting + analysis) describe the statistical design. Sections 2-5 are the survey instrument itself. Section 7 is the public-disclosure version of the methodology.

1. Sampling design

1.1 Population frame

Target population: U.S. adult heads-of-household, age 18+, currently residing in the 50 states or the District of Columbia. Renters and owners both included. Group quarters (military barracks, dormitories, nursing facilities) excluded.

Population frame source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2019-2023, release of December 2024. Household counts by state, age, sex, race/ethnicity, household income, household composition, and education used as the weighting universe.

1.2 Total sample size and structure

Stratum	Target N	Approximate % of total
National base sample	1,500	36%
State oversamples — top 10 most populous (CA, TX, FL, NY, PA, IL, OH, GA, NC, MI)	250 each × 10 = 2,500	60%
Demographic oversample — Black households	200	5% (across all states)
Demographic oversample — Hispanic/Latino households	200	5% (across all states)
Demographic oversample — Asian-American households	150	4% (across all states)
Total fielded N	~4,200

State oversample respondents also count toward the national base after appropriate weighting. Race/ethnicity oversamples count toward both the national base and the relevant state sample, again with appropriate weighting (see Section 6).

Statistical power: With N=1,500 nationally, point estimates carry approximately ±2.5% margin of error at 95% confidence for binary questions near 50% prevalence; oversampled state estimates carry approximately ±6.2% margin of error. Subgroup estimates by age cohort within state will have wider margins; we will publish margins alongside every reported figure.

1.3 Sampling method

Panel-based random sample. Recruitment via Qualtrics Panel or SurveyMonkey Audience (vendor selection finalized 60 days before fielding). Panel members invited via standard invitation email; sampling within the panel stratified to match Census household-head distribution by state, age, gender, race/ethnicity, and household income.

Vendor selection criteria:

Independently audited panel composition (Insights Association IQM compliance)
Minimum panel size: 1M U.S. respondents
State-level fielding capacity in all 50 states + DC
Median historical completion time on similar-length surveys: under 14 minutes
IP-deduplication and fraud detection (RelevantID or equivalent)
Demonstrated ability to incentivize within $4-$8 per complete

1.4 Quality controls

Attention checks: Two attention-check items embedded (one explicit "select option 3 to confirm you are reading"; one trap question with a logically required answer). Respondents failing either are removed before weighting.
Speeder check: Median completion time established after first 100 completes; respondents in the bottom 5% of completion time removed.
Straight-lining check: Identical responses across all matrix items within a single battery flagged for review.
IP and digital fingerprint deduplication: Vendor-managed.
Open-ended response check: Three open-ended items (Q14, Q22, Q31) reviewed manually; nonsense responses flagged.

Target final analytic N after quality controls: approximately 3,900 (assumes ~7% removal).

1.5 Field timing

Phase	Dates	Days
Vendor selection finalized	June 30, 2026	—
Instrument cognitive pretest (n=30)	July 8-15, 2026	7
Instrument revision	July 16-22, 2026	7
Pilot field (n=150)	July 27 - August 3, 2026	7
Pilot analysis + final revision	August 4-14, 2026	11
Main field	August 17 - September 28, 2026	42
Data cleaning, weighting, analysis	September 29 - November 13, 2026	45
Report drafting	November 14 - December 19, 2026	35
Public methodology comment period	January 15 - February 14, 2027	30
Final report drafting	February 15 - April 15, 2027	60
Publication: v2 release	May 1, 2027

2. Survey instrument — screener

S1. Are you 18 years of age or older?

(1) Yes — continue
(2) No — terminate

S2. Are you currently a resident of one of the 50 United States or the District of Columbia?

(1) Yes — continue
(2) No — terminate

S3. In your household, are you the person primarily responsible for major financial decisions, or do you share that responsibility equally with another household member?

(1) I am primarily responsible
(2) I share responsibility equally
(3) Someone else is primarily responsible — terminate

S4. In which state do you currently reside? [50 states + DC dropdown]

Used for state-quota fill.

S5. What is your age? [numeric, 18-99]

Used for age-cohort quota fill.

S6. Quotas met check. If state and age cohort quotas filled, terminate with thank-you message.

3. Survey instrument — main questionnaire

Instructions to vendor: Estimated median completion time 12-14 minutes. All items required unless marked "skip allowed." Matrix items should be displayed one per screen on mobile devices to reduce straight-lining. Item order in Section 3.2 (Asset Inventory) and Section 3.3 (Documentation Status) should be randomized within section to control order effects.

3.1 Household composition (demographics)

Q1. How would you describe your household composition?

(1) Single, no children
(2) Single, with children at home
(3) Married or partnered, no children
(4) Married or partnered, with children at home
(5) Married or partnered, children grown and out of household
(6) Widowed
(7) Divorced or separated
(8) Other [open text]

Q2. What is your gender?

(1) Male
(2) Female
(3) Non-binary
(4) Prefer not to say

Q3. Which of the following best describes your race or ethnicity? (Select all that apply.)

(1) White / Caucasian
(2) Black / African American
(3) Hispanic / Latino
(4) Asian or Asian American
(5) Native American / Alaska Native
(6) Native Hawaiian / Pacific Islander
(7) Middle Eastern / North African
(8) Other [open text]
(9) Prefer not to say

Q4. What is the highest level of education you have completed?

(1) Less than high school
(2) High school or GED
(3) Some college, no degree
(4) Associate degree
(5) Bachelor's degree
(6) Master's degree
(7) Doctoral or professional degree

Q5. Which of the following best describes your total household income before taxes in 2025?

(1) Less than $25,000
(2) $25,000 - $49,999
(3) $50,000 - $74,999
(4) $75,000 - $99,999
(5) $100,000 - $149,999
(6) $150,000 - $199,999
(7) $200,000 - $299,999
(8) $300,000 - $499,999
(9) $500,000 - $999,999
(10) $1,000,000 or more
(11) Prefer not to say

Q6. Approximately what is your household's total net worth (assets minus debts, excluding the value of your primary residence)?

(1) Less than $25,000
(2) $25,000 - $99,999
(3) $100,000 - $249,999
(4) $250,000 - $499,999
(5) $500,000 - $999,999
(6) $1,000,000 - $2,499,999
(7) $2,500,000 - $4,999,999
(8) $5,000,000 - $9,999,999
(9) $10,000,000 or more
(10) Prefer not to say

3.2 Asset inventory (the $1.4T calibration)

Instructions: Q7-Q13 measure the existence and approximate value of asset categories in the household. We are intentionally not asking for precise values; we are asking for honest estimates with rounded bands.

Q7. Does your household own any jewelry with an estimated fair market value greater than $500 (including wedding rings, engagement rings, inherited pieces, branded designer items, or gemstone jewelry)?

(1) Yes
(2) No — skip to Q8
(3) Unsure

Q7a. [If Q7 = Yes] Approximately what is the total fair market value of all jewelry in your household?

(1) $500 - $2,499
(2) $2,500 - $9,999
(3) $10,000 - $24,999
(4) $25,000 - $49,999
(5) $50,000 - $99,999
(6) $100,000 - $249,999
(7) $250,000 - $499,999
(8) $500,000 - $999,999
(9) $1,000,000 or more
(10) Unsure

Q7b. [If Q7 = Yes] When was the last time any of your jewelry was professionally appraised?

(1) Within the last 12 months
(2) 1-3 years ago
(3) 4-7 years ago
(4) More than 7 years ago
(5) Never professionally appraised
(6) Unsure

Q8. Does your household own any physical precious metals in the form of coins, bars, or other bullion (gold, silver, platinum, palladium)?

(1) Yes
(2) No — skip to Q9

Q8a. [If Q8 = Yes] Approximately what is the total fair market value of physical precious metals in your household?

(1) Less than $1,000
(2) $1,000 - $4,999
(3) $5,000 - $24,999
(4) $25,000 - $99,999
(5) $100,000 - $499,999
(6) $500,000 or more
(7) Unsure

Q9. Does your household own any luxury watches with an estimated fair market value greater than $1,000 (any brand including but not limited to Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Omega, Cartier, etc.)?

(1) Yes
(2) No — skip to Q10

Q9a. [If Q9 = Yes] Approximately what is the total fair market value of luxury watches in your household?

(1) $1,000 - $4,999
(2) $5,000 - $24,999
(3) $25,000 - $99,999
(4) $100,000 - $499,999
(5) $500,000 or more
(6) Unsure

Q10. Does your household own any other tangible collectibles that you would consider valuable heirlooms — for example, fine art, signed silverware, antique furniture, religious or ceremonial items, family-significant artifacts, etc.?

(1) Yes
(2) No — skip to Q11

Q10a. [If Q10 = Yes] Approximately what is the total fair market value of these items?

(1) Less than $1,000
(2) $1,000 - $9,999
(3) $10,000 - $49,999
(4) $50,000 - $249,999
(5) $250,000 or more
(6) Unsure

Q11. How were the majority of the heirloom items in your household acquired? (Select all that apply.)

(1) Inherited from a parent or grandparent
(2) Inherited from another relative
(3) Purchased for personal use
(4) Purchased as an investment
(5) Received as a gift
(6) Received at marriage or partnership commitment
(7) Other [open text]

Q12. Thinking about all the items you've identified in Q7-Q10, where are they primarily stored? (Select all that apply.)

(1) In a home safe
(2) In a bank safe deposit box
(3) In a third-party vault or storage facility
(4) In drawers, closets, or other unsecured locations in the home
(5) Some are worn or used regularly
(6) Some are stored at another family member's residence
(7) Other [open text]
(8) Prefer not to say

Q13. Approximately what percentage of the total fair market value of your household's heirloom items would you estimate is currently insured for full replacement value?

(1) 0% — none of it is insured for replacement value
(2) 1-25%
(3) 26-50%
(4) 51-75%
(5) 76-99%
(6) 100% — all of it is insured for replacement value
(7) Unsure

3.3 Estate planning status (the documentation rate)

Q14. Do you currently have any of the following estate planning instruments in place? (Select all that apply.)

(1) A current will (executed in the last 7 years)
(2) A will that is more than 7 years old
(3) A revocable living trust
(4) An irrevocable trust
(5) Powers of attorney (financial or healthcare)
(6) Beneficiary designations on financial accounts
(7) A "personal property memorandum" or similar supplement
(8) A letter of intent to your executor or heirs
(9) None of the above — skip to Q19
(10) Unsure — skip to Q19

Q15. [If any in Q14 selected] Within your estate planning documents, are any specific heirloom items (jewelry, watches, precious metals, collectibles) identified by name with a named recipient?

(1) Yes, all of my valuable items are identified by name
(2) Yes, some of my valuable items are identified by name
(3) My estate documents mention "personal property" or "household contents" as a category, but do not name specific items
(4) No, my estate documents do not address tangible personal property at all
(5) Unsure what my documents say

Q16. [If Q15 = 1 or 2] When was the most recent time you updated the list of specific items in your estate documents?

(1) Within the last 12 months
(2) 1-3 years ago
(3) 4-7 years ago
(4) More than 7 years ago
(5) Never updated since original execution
(6) Unsure

Q17. [If Q15 = 1 or 2] For the specific heirloom items named in your estate documents, do you have any of the following supporting documentation? (Select all that apply.)

(1) Recent (within 7 years) professional appraisal
(2) Photographs of the items
(3) Documentation of provenance (origin story, prior ownership)
(4) Receipts or purchase records
(5) Authentication certificates (e.g., GIA reports, manufacturer papers)
(6) None of the above

Q18. Do any of your estate documents address the disposition of your physical precious metals (coins, bars) specifically?

(1) Yes, by named recipient
(2) Yes, but as part of a general personal-property bequest
(3) No
(4) I do not own physical precious metals
(5) Unsure

3.4 Family communication (the executor knowledge gap)

Q19. Have you ever had a conversation with the person or people you intend to inherit your heirloom items in which you specifically identified what you have and what you intend for them to receive?

(1) Yes, a detailed conversation
(2) Yes, a brief mention
(3) No, never
(4) Not applicable — I have not designated specific heirs

Q20. If you were to pass away tomorrow, do you believe your executor or next-of-kin could correctly identify the location of all your valuable heirloom items?

(1) Yes, they would know the location of all of them
(2) They would know the location of most of them
(3) They would know the location of some of them
(4) They would not know where most of my items are
(5) Unsure

Q21. Do you maintain any kind of inventory or list of your valuable items that your heirs could reference?

(1) Yes, a current detailed inventory with photographs
(2) Yes, a current written list without photographs
(3) Yes, but it is more than 3 years old
(4) No, no inventory exists
(5) Unsure

Q22. [Open-ended] In your own words, what do you think would happen to your valuable items if you were to pass away tomorrow? [Open text, max 500 characters]

3.5 Attitudes and intentions

Q23. How important is it to you that specific heirloom items in your household pass to specific named recipients after your death (as opposed to being divided generally or sold)?

(1) Extremely important
(2) Very important
(3) Somewhat important
(4) Not very important
(5) Not at all important

Q24. In your view, what is the single biggest barrier to documenting your household's heirloom items more thoroughly?

(1) I haven't gotten around to it
(2) I'm not sure how to do it properly
(3) The cost of professional appraisal or attorney time
(4) I don't think it's necessary
(5) Emotional difficulty — I don't want to think about my own death
(6) Family dynamics — I'm worried about conflict if I name specific recipients
(7) Other [open text]
(8) No barrier — I have documented everything

Q25. In the last 24 months, have you done any of the following? (Select all that apply.)

(1) Met with an estate planning attorney
(2) Used a digital estate planning service or app
(3) Had an item professionally appraised
(4) Photographed and inventoried your valuable items
(5) Updated beneficiary designations on financial accounts
(6) Had a family conversation about inheritance
(7) None of the above

Q26. Have you ever used a digital platform or app specifically for documenting physical heirloom items (for example, an inventory app, an estate-planning service with an inventory feature, or a jewelry-specific documentation tool)?

(1) Yes, currently using one
(2) Yes, used in the past, no longer using
(3) No, have considered it
(4) No, have never considered it
(5) Unsure what such a tool would be

3.6 Experience as an heir (downstream effects)

Q27. Have you ever inherited or expected to inherit valuable heirloom items from a relative who has passed away?

(1) Yes, I have inherited items
(2) No, but I expect to in the future
(3) No, and I do not expect to — skip to Q31
(4) Unsure — skip to Q31

Q28. [If Q27 = 1] In the inheritance(s) you have experienced, did you encounter any of the following? (Select all that apply.)

(1) Items were missing or could not be located
(2) Disputes among family members about who was to receive which items
(3) Difficulty determining the value of items received
(4) Items were sold for cash before distribution (e.g., to a cash-for-gold buyer)
(5) No documentation existed for the items
(6) The will or trust did not specifically address the items
(7) None of the above

Q29. [If Q27 = 1] For items you inherited, what was the eventual disposition? (Select all that apply.)

(1) I kept them and continue to own them
(2) I gave some to other family members
(3) I sold some to a cash-for-gold or scrap buyer
(4) I sold some at retail or auction
(5) Some were lost or could not be located
(6) I am still deciding

Q30. [If Q27 = 1] Looking back, do you wish there had been better documentation of the heirloom items you inherited?

(1) Yes, strongly
(2) Yes, somewhat
(3) Neutral
(4) No, the documentation was adequate
(5) Not applicable

3.7 Closing questions

Q31. [Open-ended, optional] Is there anything else you'd like to share about your household's heirloom items, your estate planning, or your experience with inheritance? [Open text, max 1,000 characters, skip allowed]

Q32. [Attention check] For quality assurance, please select the third option below.

(1) Option one
(2) Option two
(3) Option three
(4) Option four

4. Question design notes

4.1 Why we ask value in bands, not free text

Asking respondents to estimate the value of items they have not appraised is a known source of measurement error. Bands reduce false precision and allow respondents to answer honestly without anchoring. We will impute point estimates within bands using the band midpoint, except for the top band ("$1,000,000 or more"), where we will use the Pareto-distributed conditional mean derived from SCF wealth-distribution tables — approximately $2.4M for top-band jewelry holdings, approximately $4.8M for top-band collectibles.

4.2 Why we separate "owns" from "documented"

The Q7-Q10 block measures ownership; the Q14-Q18 block measures documentation. The two are intentionally separated to allow the documentation rate to be calculated within each asset class without conflating ownership prevalence with documentation prevalence.

4.3 Why we include the executor-knowledge question (Q20)

Documentation in a sealed will is, operationally, no better than no documentation if the executor does not know what to look for. Q20 measures the operational documentation rate, which we expect to be substantially lower than the formal documentation rate measured in Q14-Q18. The gap between Q15 (formal documentation) and Q20 (executor knowledge) is a primary headline number in v2.

4.4 Why we ask about heir experience (Q27-Q30)

The downstream-effects estimates in v1 are derived from third-party data (ABA, ACTEC). v2 will replace these with first-person reports from people who have actually experienced an inheritance event. This produces a higher-quality estimate of value-destruction (Q29.3 + Q29.5) and dispute prevalence (Q28.2).

4.5 What we deliberately do not ask

We do not ask for itemized listings of specific items owned. This is invasive, error-prone, and would extend the instrument beyond completion-rate tolerance.
We do not ask about Bitcoin or other digital asset holdings. v2 of the Index is about physical heirloom-adjacent assets; a separate Digital Asset Inheritance Index is planned for 2028.
We do not ask about specific brand ownership (Rolex vs Omega, Cartier vs Tiffany). This is marketing data and is not needed for the headline figures.
We do not ask about life insurance or non-tangible inheritance. These are well-covered by existing research.

5. Estimated completion time and cost

Component	Estimate
Median completion time	12-14 minutes
Vendor incentive per complete	$4-$8
Vendor recruitment + panel cost (3,900 quality-passed completes at est. 7% removal rate, fielded N ~4,200)	$18,000-$24,000
Pilot fielding (n=150)	$1,200-$1,800
Cognitive pretest (n=30, qualitative)	$1,500
Independent statistical review and weighting (subcontract to an academic survey methodologist)	$4,000-$5,000
Analyst time (internal — Touchstone Report editorial)	included in operating budget
Total fielding budget	$24,700 - $32,300

Budget target: $25,000-$30,000. The figure published in the v1 report (a $25-30K budget) is consistent with this estimate.

6. Weighting and analysis specification

6.1 Base weighting

After data collection, raw responses will be weighted to the U.S. household population using the following Census American Community Survey 2024 release marginal distributions:

State (50 + DC)
Age cohort (18-29, 30-44, 45-59, 60-74, 75+)
Sex (male, female)
Race/ethnicity (White non-Hispanic, Black, Hispanic, Asian, other)
Household income quintile
Household composition (single, married no children, married with children, single parent, other)
Educational attainment (HS or less, some college / associate, bachelor's, graduate)

Weighting will be performed via iterative proportional fitting (raking), with weight trimming at the 0.5th and 99.5th percentiles to prevent any single respondent from dominating an estimate. Effective sample size after weighting will be reported alongside every estimate, per AAPOR Standard Definitions for Final Disposition Codes (Standard 5.0, 2023).

6.2 State-level estimates

For the ten oversampled states, state-level estimates will be computed using state-specific weights raked to that state's ACS marginals. For the 40 non-oversampled states, state-level estimates will be reported only where the within-state subsample after weighting exceeds N=30 and the margin of error is reportable; below that threshold, the state estimate will be reported as the regional average with a note.

6.3 Value estimation methodology

Total heirloom value per household will be computed as the sum of band-midpoint imputations across Q7a, Q8a, Q9a, Q10a. For the top band in each, the conditional mean from SCF top-coded distributions will be substituted for the midpoint.

National totals will be computed as: (estimated mean per household) × (number of U.S. households per Census 2024).

A separate sensitivity analysis will be run substituting (a) band-floor values, (b) band-ceiling values, and (c) zero values for "unsure" responses. The 95% confidence interval reported in v2 will be derived from this sensitivity range combined with sampling variance.

6.4 The documentation rate calculation

The headline "documented heirloom share" will be computed as:

weighted sum (across respondents) of:
  (heirloom value × documentation_score)
divided by
weighted sum (across respondents) of:
  (heirloom value)

Where documentation_score is a 0-to-1 weight defined as:

1.0 if Q15 = "all items identified by name" AND Q16 = "within 7 years" AND Q17 includes both appraisal and photographs
0.7 if Q15 = "all items identified by name" AND Q16 = "within 7 years"
0.4 if Q15 = "some items identified by name" AND Q16 = "within 7 years"
0.2 if Q15 = "all" or "some" but Q16 > 7 years
0.0 otherwise

This produces a value-weighted documentation rate, which we expect to differ materially from a respondent-weighted rate. v2 will publish both.

6.5 Significance testing

Differences between subgroups (state, age cohort, income quintile, household type) will be tested using two-sample t-tests with weight-corrected variance (Korn-Graubard intervals for proportions, design-effect-corrected for means). A finding will be reported as "significantly different" only at p < 0.01 with effective sample size on each side > 100. Multiple-comparison correction (Benjamini-Hochberg) will be applied to the full set of pairwise state and cohort comparisons.

6.6 Pre-registration

The analysis plan (this section 6) will be pre-registered with the Open Science Framework before fielding begins. Deviations from the pre-registered plan will be disclosed in the final report.

7. Public methodology disclosure (the version published with v2)

The following section is the version of the methodology that will be published alongside the v2 release. It is the same content as Sections 1-6, condensed for non-technical readers, with citations.

The Heirloom Gap Index v2 — methodology summary

The v2 release is based on a national survey of 4,200 U.S. adults responsible for household financial decisions, fielded August-September 2026 via [vendor TBD]. Respondents were drawn from a panel meeting Insights Association IQM standards; recruitment was stratified to match Census American Community Survey 2024 distributions on state, age, sex, race/ethnicity, income, household composition, and education. Weighting was performed via iterative proportional fitting; after weighting, the effective sample size for national estimates was approximately 3,400 (design effect ~1.15).

The instrument measured: (a) ownership and approximate value of four heirloom-adjacent asset categories (jewelry, precious metals, luxury watches, other collectibles); (b) presence and specificity of estate-planning instruments addressing tangible personal property; (c) family communication about asset location and disposition; and (d) experience as an heir. The full instrument is published at /heirloom-gap-index/methodology/instrument.

The headline "documented heirloom share" is a value-weighted rate, defined as the share of total household heirloom value covered by a current (executed within 7 years), specific (item-level identification), and operationally adequate (executor or recipient is aware) documentation framework. Items partially meeting these criteria are counted at a graduated weight; the full scoring rubric is published with the methodology.

Margins of error are reported alongside every figure. State-level estimates for the ten oversampled states (CA, TX, FL, NY, PA, IL, OH, GA, NC, MI) are based on direct measurement; estimates for the other 40 states are derived from a hierarchical Bayesian model using demographic structure as a prior — these are flagged as "model-based" rather than "direct measurement" throughout.

The analysis plan was pre-registered with the Open Science Framework on [date]. The full data set will be released as a public-use file approximately 90 days after the v2 release, after removing respondent identifiers and applying standard disclosure-avoidance procedures.

Corrections, methodology suggestions, and questions: methodology@touchstonereport.com.

8. Open questions and risks

These are decisions outstanding as of v1 publication that need resolution before v2 fielding begins.

8.1 Vendor selection

Qualtrics Panel vs. SurveyMonkey Audience. Decision driver: panel composition quality on race/ethnicity oversamples (Qualtrics has historically performed better on small-population oversamples) versus cost (SurveyMonkey is approximately 20% cheaper at the volume we need). Decision deadline: June 30, 2026.

8.2 The wealth-band top-coding question

Our band-midpoint imputation requires an assumption about the distribution within the top band. We are using a SCF-derived Pareto conditional mean; an alternative is to require open-text follow-up for top-band respondents (which we have rejected for v2 due to completion-rate concerns but may revisit for v3).

8.3 The "operational documentation" definition

We have defined operationally adequate documentation as requiring executor or recipient awareness (Q20 + Q21). An alternative would require the document itself to be physically accessible to the heirs (a stricter definition). This choice materially affects the headline number; we will publish both rates and label the headline as the value-weighted formal documentation rate, with the operational rate disclosed alongside.

8.4 The Bitcoin and digital-asset omission

v2 excludes digital assets from the asset base. As crypto-native households age into the heirloom-transfer window, this omission becomes more material. v3 (2028) is planned to include a separate digital-asset addendum. The risk is that v2 underreports total heirloom-adjacent value for younger and higher-income cohorts where digital asset holdings are non-trivial.

8.5 The international scope question

v2 is U.S.-only. The methodology is portable to other countries with comparable estate-planning frameworks; a U.K. version is under consideration for v3 contingent on identifying a U.K. data partner. No commitment as of this draft.

8.6 The annual republication budget

v2 fielding is budgeted at $25-30K. If the index becomes annual, the budget recurs. We are evaluating whether a smaller annual refresh ($8-12K, N=600) combined with a full re-fielding every three years is operationally preferable to annual full fielding.

9. Sign-off checklist

Before fielding begins, the following must be complete:

This document is a draft. v1.0 of the public version will be published when vendor selection is finalized. Internal feedback: methodology@touchstonereport.com.

The Touchstone Report editorial team, May 25, 2026.