For comparative analysis of four accounting standards: 2 of them from Australian Accounting Standards Board, 1 from IFRS - International Accounting Standards Board and 1 from Malaysian Accounting Standard Board, and the standards are AASB 13 Fair Value Measurement, AASB 16 Leases, IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures, and MFRS 2 Share-based Payment respectively You are (required to discuss how well or badly each standard aligns to the conceptual framework applicable in the jurisdiction and to the IASB conceptual framework, if different. You should concentrate on representational faithfulness and relevance to investment decisions in making your selections and writing up your answers, but you may also include the other elements in the framework such as verifiability, reliability of measurement etc but only as secondary matters. The greater the contrast between your selections as regards their alignment with Framework principles, the greater your chance of high marks across three of the four marking criteria. Your answer should be in details with each standards aligns with conceptual frame work and discuss about level, representation faithfulness and relevance to investment decisions in standards selection. Reference and citation is compulsory from journal and other research article (words limit 3000) Points should include in each standards are Recognition, measurement, disclosure Alignment with conceptual framework contradiction Alignment with conceptual framework to the IASB conceptual framework Alignment with investment Representation faithfulness, verifiability, reliability of measurement