The assessment in this paper leads to the conclusion that, in the context of subsequent measurement of individual asset and liabilities, fair value measurement is more consistent with the objective of financial reporting and the qualitative characteristics than either modified or unmodified historical cost; although a key concern is the extent to which fair value is free from error. The assessment reveals that unmodified historical cost is consistent with some concepts but it is difficult to support a case for modified historical cost, particularly given the myriad ways in which cost id modified in accounting standards today. Thus, the extent to which a particular measurement base possesses the qualitative characteristics is likely to depend on the specific circumstances. The discussion highlights the fact that the aggregate of individual asset or liability amounts based on modified or unmodified historical cost lack meaning. The aggregate of fair values does have meaning, but it does not capture the effects of synergies among the assets. Separately reporting the difference between aggregate fair values and the value of the aggregate assets, which would reflect the value of synergies, could provide useful information to financial statement users. However, the conceptual issues related to doing so---including how narrowly or broadly to define such asset groups---are unresolved and beyond the scope of this paper.