Description of Business—FARO Technologies, Inc. and its subsidiaries (collectively “FARO,” the “Company,” “us,” “we” or “our”) design, develop, manufacture, market and support software driven, three-dimensional (“3D”) measurement, imaging, and realization solutions for the 3D metrology, architecture, engineering and construction (“AEC”) and public safety analytics markets. We enable our customers to capture, measure, manipulate, interact with and share data from the physical world in a virtual environment and then translate this information back into the physical domain. Our technology enables highly accurate 3D measurement, imaging, comparison and projection of parts and complex structures within production, assembly and quality assurance processes. Our FARO suite of 3D products and software solutions are used for inspection of components and assemblies, rapid prototyping, reverse engineering, documenting large volume or structures in 3D, surveying and construction, assembly layout, machine guidance as well as in investigation and reconstructions of crash and crime scenes. We sell the majority of our solutions through a direct sales force across a range of industries including automotive, aerospace, metal and machine fabrication, surveying, architecture, engineering and construction, public safety forensics and other industries.

Historically, we operated in five verticals—3D Manufacturing, Construction Building Information Modeling (“Construction BIM”), Public Safety Forensics, 3D Design and Photonics—and had three reporting segments—3D Manufacturing, Construction BIM and Emerging Verticals. During the second half of 2019, our Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and FARO's management team formulated and began to implement a new comprehensive strategic plan for our business. Our strategic planning process included extensive conversations with employees, customers, investors and suppliers to identify both where the Company can provide sustained and differentiated customer value and where opportunities existed to improve operating efficiencies. We identified areas of our business that needed enhanced focus or change in order to improve our efficiency and cost structure. As part of our strategic plan, we reassessed and redefined our go-to-market strategy, refocused our marketing engagement with our customers, re-evaluated our hardware and software product portfolio and examined how key decisions are made throughout our global organization. Additionally, we focused on other organizational optimization efforts, including the simplification of our overly complex management structure.

As part of our new strategic plan, and based on the recommendation of our CEO, who is also our Chief Operating Decision Maker (“CODM”), in the fourth quarter of 2019, we eliminated our vertical structure and began reorganizing the Company into a functional structure. Our executive leadership team is now comprised of functional leaders in areas such as sales, marketing, operations, research and development and general and administrative, and resources are allocated to each function at a consolidated unit level. We no longer have separate business units, or segment managers or vertical leaders who report to the CODM with respect to operations, operating results or planning for levels or components below the total Company level. Instead, our CODM now allocates resources and evaluates performance on a Company-wide basis. Based on these changes, commencing with the fourth quarter of 2019, we are now reporting as one reporting segment that develops, manufactures, markets, supports and sells CAD-based quality assurance products integrated with CAD-based inspection and statistical process control software and 3D documentation systems. Our reporting segment sells into a variety of end markets, including automotive, aerospace, metal and machine fabrication, architecture, engineering, construction and public safety.

Principles of Consolidation—Our consolidated financial statements include the accounts of FARO Technologies, Inc. and its subsidiaries, all of which are wholly owned. All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated. The financial statements of our foreign subsidiaries are translated into U.S. dollars using exchange rates in effect at period-end for assets and liabilities and average exchange rates during each reporting period for results of operations. Adjustments resulting from financial statement translations are reflected as a separate component of accumulated other comprehensive loss. Foreign currency transaction gains and losses are included in net income (loss).

Revenue Recognition, Product Warranty and Extended Warranty Contracts—Revenue is recognized as performance obligations within a contract are satisfied in an amount that reflects the consideration we expect to receive in exchange for satisfaction of those performance obligations, or standalone selling price. Our contracts with customers may include multiple performance obligations. For such arrangements, we allocate revenues to each performance obligation based on its relative standalone selling price. We make this allocation estimate utilizing data from the sale of our applicable products and services to customers separately in similar circumstances. Revenue related to our measurement and imaging equipment and related software is generally recognized upon shipment from our facilities or when delivered to the customer's location, as determined by the agreed upon shipping terms, at which time we are entitled to payment and title and control has passed to the customer. Fees billed to customers associated with the distribution of products are classified as revenue. We generally warrant our products against defects in design, materials and workmanship for one year. A provision for estimated future costs relating to warranty expense is recorded when products are shipped. To support our product lines, we also sell hardware service contracts which revenues are recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the contract. Hardware service contracts generally extend between one month and three years. Costs relating to hardware service contracts are recognized as incurred. Revenue from sales of software only is recognized when no further significant production, modification or customization of the software is required and when the risks and rewards of ownership have passed to the customer. These software arrangements generally include short-term maintenance that is considered post-contract support (“PCS”), which is considered to be a separate performance obligation. We generally establish a standalone sales price for this PCS component based on our software maintenance contract renewals. Software maintenance contracts, when sold, are recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the contract. Revenues resulting from sales of comprehensive support, training and technology consulting services are recognized as such services are performed and are deferred when billed in advance of the performance of services. Payment for products and services is collected within a short period of time following transfer of control or commencement of delivery of services, as applicable. Revenues are presented net of sales-related taxes.

Accounts Receivable and Related Allowance for Credit Losses—Credit is extended to customers based on an evaluation of a customer’s financial condition and, generally, collateral is not required. Accounts receivable are generally due within 30 to 90 days and are stated at amounts due from customers, net of an allowance for credit losses. Accounts outstanding longer than the contractual payment terms are considered past due. We make judgments as to the collectability of accounts receivable based on historical trends and future expectations. Management estimates an allowance for credit losses, which adjusts gross trade accounts receivable to their net realizable value. The allowance for credit losses is based on an analysis of all receivables for possible impairment issues and historical write-off percentages. We write off accounts receivable when they become uncollectible, and payments subsequently received on such receivables are credited to the allowance for credit losses. We do not generally charge interest on past due receivables.

Inventories—Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value using the first-in first-out (“FIFO”) method. Shipping and handling costs are classified as a component of cost of sales in the consolidated statements of operations. Sales demonstration inventory is comprised of measuring and imaging devices utilized by sales representatives to present our products to customers. Management expects sales demonstration inventory to be held by our sales representatives for up to three years, at which time it is refurbished and transferred to finished goods as used equipment, stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value. Management expects these refurbished units to remain in finished goods inventory and be sold within 12 months at prices that produce reduced gross margins. Sales demonstration inventory remains classified as inventory, as it is available for sale and any required refurbishment prior to sale is minimal.

Service inventory is typically used to provide a temporary replacement product to a customer covered by a premium warranty when the customer’s unit requires service or repair and as training equipment. Service inventory is available for sale; however, management does not expect service inventory to be sold within 12 months and, as such, classifies this inventory as a long-term asset. Service inventory that we utilize for training or repairs which we deem as no longer available for sale is transferred to fixed assets at the lower of cost or net realizable value and depreciated over its remaining useful life, typically three years. See Note 6, “Inventories” for further information regarding inventories.

Reserve for Excess and Obsolete Inventory—Because the value of inventory that will ultimately be realized cannot be known with exact certainty, we rely upon both past sales history and future sales forecasts to provide a basis for the determination of the reserve. Inventory is considered potentially obsolete if we have withdrawn those products from the market or had no sales of the product for the past 12 months and have no sales forecasted for the next 12 months. Inventory is considered potentially excess if the quantity on hand exceeds 12 months of expected remaining usage. The resulting potentially obsolete and excess parts are then reviewed to determine if a substitute usage or a future need exists. Items without an identified current or future usage are reserved in an amount equal to 100% of the FIFO cost of such inventory. Our products are subject to changes in technologies that may make certain of our products or their components obsolete or less competitive, which may increase our historical provisions to the reserve.

Business Combinations—We allocate the fair value of purchase consideration to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on their fair values at the acquisition date. The excess of the fair value of purchase consideration over the fair value of these assets acquired and liabilities assumed is recorded as goodwill. When determining the fair values of assets acquired and liabilities assumed, management makes significant estimates and assumptions, especially with respect to intangible assets. Critical estimates in valuing intangible assets include, but are not limited to, expected future cash flows, which include consideration of future growth rates and margins, customer attrition rates, future changes in technology and brand awareness, loyalty and position, and discount rates. Critical estimates are also made in valuing earn-outs, which represent arrangements to pay former owners based on the satisfaction of performance criteria. Fair value estimates are based on the assumptions management believes a market participant would use in pricing the asset or liability. Amounts recorded in a business combination may change during the measurement period, which is a period not to exceed one year from the date of acquisition, as additional information about conditions existing at the acquisition date becomes available.

Each period, and for our single reporting unit, we can elect to perform a qualitative assessment to determine whether it is necessary to perform a quantitative goodwill impairment test. If we believe, as a result of our qualitative assessment, that it is not more likely than not that the fair value of our reporting unit containing goodwill is less than its carrying amount, then the quantitative goodwill impairment test is unnecessary. If we elect to bypass the qualitative assessment option, or if the qualitative assessment was performed and resulted in the Company being unable to conclude that it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit containing goodwill is greater than its carrying amount, we will perform the quantitative goodwill impairment test. We calculate the fair value of the reporting unit using a discounted cash flow method and market approach method, and then comparing the respective fair value with the carrying amount of the reporting unit. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, we record the amount of the impairment loss, if any.

Management concluded there was no goodwill impairment for the year ended December 31, 2020, $21.2 million impairment loss for the year ended December 31, 2019 and no goodwill impairment for the year ended December 31, 2018. We test goodwill for impairment annually on December 31 of each reporting year or more frequently if an event occurs or circumstances would indicate that it is more likely than not the fair value of the reporting unit is less than the carrying value. We performed our annual quantitative test of goodwill during 2020 and 2018 as of December 31. We changed the timing of our annual test of goodwill during 2019 to align with our updated strategic plan and annual budgetary process. Accordingly, we performed our annual quantitative test for impairment of our recorded goodwill as of December 10, 2019. As a result of this test, the estimated fair value of each of the Photonics reporting unit, which included goodwill recognized with the Instrument Associates, LLC d/b/a Nutfield Technology (“Nutfield”), Laser Control Systems Limited (“Laser Control Systems”) and Lanmark Controls, Inc. (“Lanmark”) acquisitions, and the 3D Design reporting unit, which included goodwill recognized with the acquisition of Opto-Tech SRL and its subsidiary Open Technologies SRL (collectively, “Open Technologies”), were determined to be significantly less than the carrying value of such reporting unit, indicating a full impairment. This $21.2 million impairment loss was driven primarily by historical and projected financial performance lower than our expectations and changes in our go-forward strategy in connection with our new strategic plan. See Note 7, “Goodwill” for further information regarding goodwill.

As a result of historical and projected financial performance being lower than our expectations and changes in our go-forward strategy in connection with our new strategic plan, the estimated fair value of acquired intangibles recognized with the Nutfield, Laser Control Systems, Lanmark and Open Technologies acquisitions were determined to be less than the net carrying value for such assets. We recognized an impairment charge related to such acquired intangibles of $10.5 million in 2019. We recognized no impairment charges related to intangibles in 2020 or 2018. See Note 8, “Intangible Assets” for further information regarding intangible assets.

Reserve for Warranties—We establish at the time of sale a liability for the one-year warranty included with the initial purchase price of our products, based upon an estimate of the repair expenses likely to be incurred for the warranty period. The warranty period is measured in installation-months for each major product group. The warranty reserve is included in accrued liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. The warranty expense is estimated by applying the actual total repair expenses for each product group in the prior period and determining a rate of repair expense per installation-month. This repair rate is multiplied by the number of installation-months of warranty for each product group to determine the provision for warranty expenses for the period. We evaluate our exposure to warranty costs at the end of each period using the estimated expense per installation-month for each major product group, the number of units remaining under warranty, and the remaining number of months each unit will be under warranty. We have a history of new product introductions and enhancements to existing products, which may result in unforeseen issues that increase our warranty costs. While such expenses have historically been within expectations, we cannot guarantee this will continue in the future.

Income Taxes—We review our deferred tax assets on a regular basis to evaluate their recoverability based upon expected future reversals of deferred tax assets and liabilities, projections of future taxable income, and tax planning strategies that we might employ to utilize such assets, including net operating loss carryforwards. Based on the positive and negative evidence for recoverability, we establish a valuation allowance against the net deferred tax assets of a taxing jurisdiction in which we operate unless it is “more likely than not” that we will recover such assets through the above means. Our evaluation of the need for the valuation allowance is significantly influenced by our ability to maintain profitability and our ability to predict and achieve future projections of taxable income.

We recognize tax benefits related to uncertain tax positions only if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained upon examination by taxing authorities. For those positions where it is not more likely than not that a tax benefit will be sustained, no tax benefit has been recognized in the financial statements. In the ordinary course of business, we are examined by various federal, state, and foreign tax authorities. We regularly assess the potential outcomes of these examinations and any future examinations for the current or prior years in determining the adequacy of our provision for income taxes. See Note 12, “Income Taxes” for further information regarding income taxes.

Earnings (Loss) Per Share (“EPS”)—Basic (loss) earnings per share is computed by dividing net (income) income by the weighted average number of shares outstanding. Diluted earnings per share is computed by also considering the impact of potential common stock on both net income and the weighted average number of shares outstanding. Our potential common stock consists of employee stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock units and performance-based awards. Our potential common stock is excluded from the basic earnings per share calculation and is included in the diluted earnings per share calculation when doing so would not be anti-dilutive. Performance-based awards are included in the computation of diluted earnings per share only to the extent that the underlying performance conditions (and any applicable market condition) (i) are satisfied as of the end of the reporting period or (ii) would be considered satisfied if the end of the reporting period were the end of the related contingency period and the result would be dilutive under the treasury stock method. When we report a loss for the period presented, the diluted loss per share calculation does not include our potential common stock, as the inclusion of these shares in the calculation would have an anti-dilutive effect. A reconciliation of the number of common shares used in the calculation of basic and diluted EPS is presented in Note 15, “(Loss) Earnings Per Share.”

We measure and record compensation expense using the applicable accounting guidance for share-based payments related to stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock units and performance-based awards granted to our directors and employees. The fair value of stock options, including performance awards, without a market condition is estimated, at the date of grant, using the Black-Scholes option-valuation model. The fair value of restricted stock unit awards and stock options with a market condition is estimated, at the date of grant, using the Monte Carlo Simulation valuation model. The Black-Scholes and Monte Carlo Simulation valuation models incorporate assumptions as to stock price volatility, the expected life of options or awards, a risk-free interest rate and dividend yield. In valuing our stock options, significant judgment is required in determining the expected volatility of our common stock and the expected life that individuals will hold their stock options prior to exercising. Expected volatility for stock options is based on the historical and implied volatility of our own common stock while the volatility for our restricted stock units with a market condition is based on the historical volatility of our own stock and the stock of companies within our defined peer group. The expected life of stock options is derived from the historical actual term of option grants and an estimate of future exercises during the remaining contractual period of the option. While volatility and estimated life are assumptions that do not bear the risk of change subsequent to the grant date of stock options, these assumptions may be difficult to measure as they represent future expectations based on historical experience. Further, our expected volatility and expected life may change in the future, which could substantially change the grant-date fair value of future awards of stock options and, ultimately, the expense we record. The fair value of restricted stock and restricted stock units, including performance awards, without a market condition is estimated using the current market price of our common stock on the date of grant.

We expense stock-based compensation for stock options, restricted stock awards, restricted stock units and performance awards over the requisite service period. For awards with only a service condition, we expense stock-based compensation using the straight-line method over the requisite service period for the entire award. For awards with both performance and service conditions, we expense the stock-based compensation on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for each separately vesting portion of the award, taking into account the probability that we will satisfy the performance conditions. Furthermore, we expense awards with a market condition over the three-year vesting period regardless of the value that the award recipients ultimately receive. All income tax-related cash flows resulting from share-based payments are reported as operating activities in the statement of cash flows in the deferred income tax benefit line item. We elect to account for forfeitures related to the service condition-based awards as they occur.

Impact of Recently Adopted Accounting Standards—In February 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) (“ASU 2016-02”), which is intended to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet and disclosing key information about leasing arrangements to enable users of financial statements to assess the amount, timing and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. ASU No. 2018-11, Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements, was issued by the FASB in July 2018 and allows for a cumulative-effect adjustment transition method of adoption. We adopted ASU 2016-02 effective as of January 1, 2019 utilizing the cumulative-effect adjustment transition method of adoption, which resulted in the recognition on our consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2019 of $18.4 million of right-of-use assets for operating leases, $19.6 million of lease liability for operating leases, $0.8 million of property and equipment, net for finance leases and $0.8 million of lease liability for finance leases under which we function as a lessee. We elected certain practical expedients available under the transition provisions to (i) allow aggregation of non-lease components with the related lease components when evaluating accounting treatment, (ii) apply the modified retrospective adoption method, utilizing the simplified transition option, which allows us to continue to apply the legacy guidance in FASB ASC Topic 840, including its disclosure requirements, in the comparative periods presented in the year of adoption, and (iii) use hindsight in determining the lease term (that is, when considering our options to extend or terminate the lease and to purchase the underlying asset) and in assessing impairment of our right-of-use assets. The adoption of ASU 2016-02 also required us to include any initial direct costs, which are incremental costs that would not have been incurred had the lease not been obtained, in the right-of-use assets. The recognition of these costs in connection with our adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, Intangible - Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment (“ASU 2017-04”), which is intended to simplify the subsequent measurement of goodwill by eliminating Step 2 from the goodwill impairment test. Under the new guidance, we perform our goodwill impairment test by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. An impairment charge is recognized for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value up to the amount of the goodwill allocated to the reporting unit. The new guidance also eliminates the requirements for any reporting unit with a zero or negative carrying amount to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if it fails the qualitative assessment. We adopted this guidance in connection with our annual impairment test for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments (“ASU 2016-13”), which requires the measurement and recognition of expected credit losses for financial assets held at amortized cost. ASU 2016-13, and subsequent related amendments to ASU 2016-13, replace the existing incurred loss impairment model with an expected loss model that requires the use of forward-looking information to calculate credit loss estimates. It also eliminates the concept of other-than-temporary impairment and requires credit losses related to available-for-sale debt securities to be recorded through an allowance for credit losses rather than as a reduction in the amortized cost basis of the securities. These changes will result in earlier recognition of credit losses. We adopted ASU 2016-13 effective as of January 1, 2020, and the adoption of the new guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

•Depreciation and amortization expenses are being reported in the accompanying statements of operations to reflect departmental costs. Previously, those expenses were reported as a separate line item under operating expenses. Amounts related to depreciation and amortization expenses for the year ended December 31, 2018 has been restated throughout this Annual Report on Form 10-K to reflect this reclassification of depreciation and amortization expenses and to conform to the current period presentation, as set forth in the following tables;

•Selling and marketing expenses and general and administrative expenses are now being reported in the accompanying statements of operations together in one line as Selling, general and administrative. Previously, those expenses were reported as two separate line items under operating expenses. Amounts related to selling, general and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2018 have been reclassified throughout this Annual Report on Form 10-K to reflect this reclassification of selling, general and administrative expenses and to conform to the current period presentation, as set forth in the following tables;