The client already had a broader fund model running internally, but they were facing issues tracking short-term funding movement properly. Most of the reporting was happening at a quarterly level, while actual cash activity was moving much faster.

Because of that, it was becoming difficult to clearly see how much of the fund was being supported through available cash, investor drawdowns, or the bank credit facility at a given point in time.

There was also concern around leverage. The client wanted to avoid situations where new investments pushed the fund beyond its internal LTV threshold.

What Needed to Be Built

The requirement was to create a separate tracker that worked alongside the existing fund model instead of replacing it.

The tracker needed to show how expenses and deal funding were being managed week by week. It also had to account for situations where historical repayments or investor drawdowns did not exactly match the original assumptions, which meant manual adjustments had to remain possible.

The client wanted something practical, not just a reporting file.

How the Work Started

The first thing done was aligning the tracker structure with the client’s existing model. Inputs had to flow consistently between both files, otherwise the numbers would stop matching very quickly.

After that, the portfolio side was mapped out. Individual deals, debt tied to those deals, and valuation movement across the fund were organized first before working on the funding side.

Once those pieces were stable, the available borrowing capacity under the credit facility was calculated.

The funding schedule came after that. This became the core working section because it showed whether upcoming requirements would be covered through cash balances, investor capital, or the credit line itself.

A few override options were also left open because certain historical entries needed flexibility.

Problems That Came Up Along the Way

The model became messy once the funding flows started interacting with one another.

Circular references began showing up because several calculations depended indirectly on each other. At one stage, updating one line item affected multiple areas unexpectedly.

Another issue was timing. The main fund model worked on quarterly numbers, but the tracker needed weekly visibility. That mismatch created gaps initially because the timing of inflows and outflows was not lining up properly.

To fix this, a separate weekly cash schedule was added. Quarterly numbers from the larger model were spread across weekly periods so the tracker could reflect shorter-term cash movement more realistically.

The circular reference issue also had to be controlled separately by restructuring some of the calculation flow.

What Ended Up Being Useful

One thing that worked well was the visibility the tracker created.

Instead of waiting until leverage levels moved too high, the client could now see the likely impact of funding decisions earlier.

The flexibility inside the tracker also helped because real transactions rarely follow the exact same pattern every time.

Final Result

By the end, the client had a tracker they could actually use during regular fund monitoring instead of relying only on quarterly reporting.

It gave them a clearer picture of liquidity, funding pressure, and leverage movement across the portfolio.

More importantly, it made short-term funding decisions easier to manage without losing sight of the broader fund limits.