Talk to us
Talk to us
RISK SIMULATION / EXPLORE THE WHAT-IF

Explore the what-if.
Understand the impact.

Explore how changing income, costs, payment timing, and connected exposure could affect a financial assessment. Keep the evidence, assumptions, and trade-offs visible before your team decides.

Discuss your simulation use caseExplore a scenario

Explicit assumptions. Traceable calculations. Your judgment.

ONE BASELINE / MULTIPLE ASSUMPTIONSILLUSTRATIVE
Documented
baseline
Change the inputsHold the baselineInspect the difference
What if the conditions change?

Evidence + assumptions + a reviewable comparison

Explore possible outcomes without rewriting the observed facts.
ASK A BETTER WHAT-IF
  • Income & receipts
  • Operating costs
  • Payment timing
  • Connected exposure
  • Policy assumptions
BEFORE THE NEXT DECISION

Understand the sensitivity.
Keep the context.

A change in receipts can affect cash available for debt service. A delayed buyer payment can affect a seller’s liquidity. Useful simulation makes those relationships explicit, so your team can see what drives a result and what still needs investigation.

Start with evidence

Define the customer, exposure, evidence window, and baseline before introducing a hypothetical change.

Make the assumptions visible

State which inputs move, by how much, and over what period. Keep the unchanged inputs visible too.

Review the difference

Compare the outputs, inspect the calculation, and identify the assumptions most important to the decision.

INTERACTIVE SCENARIO LAB

Change an assumption.
Follow the calculation.

Try three fictional examples. Move the controls to compare a monthly baseline with an explicit change in income, costs, or collection timing.

FICTIONAL EXAMPLE / CAD PER MONTH

Receipts fall. Costs rise. What remains?

A fictional business with CAD 100,000 in monthly receipts, CAD 70,000 in operating outflows, and CAD 15,000 in scheduled debt payments.

0%30%
0%20%
Held constant

Scheduled debt payments and the observation period. No new borrowing, asset sales, or changes in payment timing are assumed.

BASELINE → SCENARIOILLUSTRATIVE
Baseline residual cash$15,000
Scenario residual cash-$5,000
Change from baseline-$20,000
Monthly inputs and resulting cash
InputBaselineScenario
Eligible receipts$100,000$80,000
Operating outflows$70,000$70,000
Scheduled debt payments$15,000$15,000
Residual cash$15,000-$5,000
Calculation

Residual cash = eligible receipts − operating outflows − scheduled debt payments.

Cash-flow coverage proxy: (($80,000 − $70,000) ÷ $15,000) = 0.67×.

A mechanical sensitivity example, not a forecast, default probability, or approval recommendation. Values are rounded to whole Canadian dollars.

DIFFERENT EXPOSURES. DIFFERENT QUESTIONS.

Frame the scenario
around your business.

Choose the financial question before choosing a model. Agree the methodology and delivery scope for your Amlok deployment.

01 / Business lending

How much room does the business have if receipts soften?

Explore changes in operating receipts, costs, collection timing, and scheduled obligations. Examine which assumptions drive capacity and where a related customer or supplier adds concentration.

Discuss business cash-flow scenarios
02 / Consumer lending

What happens to the household’s monthly buffer?

Compare consistent net-income, essential-expense, and debt-payment definitions. Explore income interruption or higher expenses without treating a single ratio as a universal approval rule.

Discuss consumer affordability scenarios
03 / Insurance & specialty finance

What if a buyer pays later than expected?

Explore the financial effect of delayed collections, buyer concentration, or a principal’s changing liquidity. Keep seller cash flow, buyer non-payment, and insured claims as separate outcomes.

Discuss exposure scenarios
THE ECOSYSTEM BEHIND THE EXPOSURE

A shock starts somewhere.
Trace the financial connection.

A customer’s delayed payment may reduce a business’s available cash. The consequence depends on buyer concentration, payment terms, reserves, and the obligations falling due.

Identify the link

Use supported relationships and authorized evidence to establish which counterparties and obligations belong in scope.

Define the mechanism

Explain how an assumed change affects receipts, expenses, timing, or exposure. A graph connection alone does not establish a causal effect.

Review the boundary

Keep unknown relationships and missing contract terms visible. Avoid counting the same exposure or shock more than once.

Explore the risk graph
HYPOTHETICAL TRANSMISSION
01
Buyer payment

Part of an expected collection is deferred.

02
Seller cash flow

Less cash arrives within the review period.

03
Scheduled obligations

Existing payments still fall due.

04
Review question

Can the available buffer absorb the timing gap?

Illustrative mechanism. A delay is not automatically a default or an insured claim.
COMPARE ON THE SAME FOUNDATION

One baseline.
A disciplined comparison.

Make the scenario review repeatable by keeping the scope, assumptions, and interpretation together.

  1. 01

    Frame

    Specify the decision, eligible cases, evidence cutoff, and financial period.

  2. 02

    Define

    Choose a plausible change. Document severity, timing, affected inputs, and fixed constraints.

  3. 03

    Compare

    Inspect the baseline and scenario using the same definitions. Separate missing evidence from changed outcomes.

  4. 04

    Challenge

    Review sensitivity, limitations, and alternative explanations. Record the institution’s conclusion.

SCENARIO REVIEW / ILLUSTRATIVE
Make the discussion
evidence-led.Keep the baseline. Document the alternative.

EvidenceSame population and observation window

AssumptionsChanged inputs and fixed constraints

ComparisonBaseline, scenario, and difference

LimitationsMissing inputs and untested effects

DecisionInstitution review and rationale

SUPPORT POLICY & PORTFOLIO DISCUSSIONS

Make the trade-off
open to review.

Use a defined scenario to ask where capacity becomes sensitive, which exposures deserve closer review, or what a proposed policy change would mean for the same cases.

Underwriting teams

Examine the assumptions supporting repayment capacity and the conditions that could change the assessment.

Portfolio teams

Identify which segments or connected exposures warrant deeper investigation under a defined shock.

Policy & oversight teams

Compare alternatives with consistent criteria. Keep simulated eligibility changes separate from demonstrated repayment outcomes.

Plan a scenario review with us
EVIDENCE, SCENARIOS & OBSERVED CHANGE

Connect the analysis.
Keep the distinctions.

Insights supports the original assessment. Scenario exploration asks what would change under specified assumptions. Signal follows new evidence as the actual relationship evolves.

Insights

Establish the assessment.

Organize the evidence and review the financial context.

Risk graph

Understand the relationships.

Explore supported connections behind the exposure.

Signal

Follow observed change.

Compare new evidence with the original baseline.

Start with the decision you need to support.

Bring your data sources, product definitions, and review requirements. We’ll discuss the simulation approach and delivery scope that fit your institution.

Talk through your use caseExplore API
BEFORE YOU RUN A SCENARIO

Questions behind
the what-if.

Explore the research approach
What is risk simulation for?

Scenario analysis helps your team explore how explicit changes to financial inputs or policy assumptions affect a documented baseline. It supports underwriting discussions, portfolio reviews, and questions about resilience. It does not establish that a scenario will happen.

Are the interactive examples real portfolio results?

No. They are fictional, deterministic examples in Canadian dollars. Each uses the displayed inputs and formulas. They are not live customer records, model forecasts, default probabilities, or evidence of Amlok’s predictive performance.

Which simulation workflows can we use with Amlok?

Start with the decision you want to support, the evidence available, and the output your team needs. Agree the simulation methodology, delivery scope, and integrations with Amlok for your deployment. The examples here demonstrate the analytical approach rather than promise a preconfigured production workflow for every product.

How should we select assumptions?

Use assumptions relevant to the product, evidence window, and contractual terms. State what changes and what remains fixed. For example, a rate change should only affect a payment where the contract and timing allow repricing. Review related assumptions together to avoid double-counting the same shock.

Can we compare policy alternatives?

A policy review can compare the same eligible cases and evidence snapshot under clearly defined alternatives. Keep missing evidence, exceptions, and changes in case composition visible. A different number of cases meeting a threshold is not proof of better repayment outcomes.

How is this different from monitoring?

A simulation changes assumptions to explore a hypothetical result. Signal monitoring evaluates newly observed evidence against an existing baseline. Keeping those two views distinct lets your team compare a possible change with a change that has actually been observed.

Who makes the final decision?

Your institution owns policy, approvals, terms, pricing, coverage, and any customer action. Scenario results inform that judgment. The evidence, assumptions, limitations, and decisions should remain distinguishable in the review.

CONTINUOUS RISK INTELLIGENCE

Keep up with riskas fast as it changes

A point-in-time decision does not need to become a blind spot for the life of the deal.

Talk to us Explore API
A barista handing a coffee to a customer across a wooden café counter, with pale brick walls and cool natural daylight.
Early signalRevenue trend changed-18% against baseline
Portfolio baseline90 daysContinuously refreshed
Monitoring activeRisk trajectory updatedEvidence attached · team notified