**3. The method of the dynamic standard**

The essence of the method of the dynamic standard is the formation in accordance with some objective (e.g., maximization of the company's profit, increasing the cost of equity, increasing regional investment appeal), groups of indicators characterizing the purpose and, to the greatest extent, reflecting the real state of the object of research in dynamics. The quantitative composition of the indicators should be no lower than the established (no less than 6 and no more than 25). The method of the dynamic standard is the procedure of selection of economic indicators and their ordering.

The main idea of the method belongs to Syroezhin [11], it was further developed by his students [12]. It consists of the fact that not commensurable indicators in statics become commensurable in dynamics.

In modern scientific works and publications, there are examples of the application of the method of dynamic standard [13–17].

Syroezhin noticed that noncomparable static characteristics of the national economy are comparable in dynamics. The proposed dynamic standard is organized by pace (coefficients, indexes) growth (or base chain) set (system) of indicators, such that maintaining for a longtime interval specified in a dynamic normative order of indicators provides the maximization of integral evaluation. Form of expression the ordering of the indicators is the ranking of performance (assigning grades), if not all indicators are able to link strictly in order, the presentation days to serve the count of preferences and/or the corresponding matrix of preferences, in this case, the integral meter has the form of a normative model. The quantitative level of the integrated meter (integrated assessment) in this case is the ratio of the number of performed correlations between growth rates (indices) of growth of actual indicators characterizing the specific object under study, to the number of set relations in a normative model. Accordingly, the resulting quantitative levels vary in the range from 0 to 1, the closer the value is to 1, the more quantitative is the valuation level.

The algorithm for constructing normative models is disclosed in detail in the work of Pohostinsky [18]. The normative model differs from the matrix of preferences and its indicators are categorized by the transitive property, and this allows to obtain always a single measurement result.

Advantages of the method over other methods of building an integrated measure, for example, multidimensional average, are as follows:

