fpf.tools
Library / Financial Domain Modeling Principles Framework
Jump to passage
In this reading
Source · lines 36–53

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 11:52:20 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 11:53:41 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 12:00:09 UTC

FDM-E1 — A score is presented as a financial benefit

  • Situation: A better score is reported as a benefit to a borrower, but the financial change is unclear.
  • Question: What did the service change for this participant, and what remains unresolved?
  • First useful result or blocker: A supported contribution to the participant’s result, an unchanged financial outcome, or a missing term or event.
  • Start with: FDM.5 for the service’s use, then the position and event methods needed to establish the claimed change.
  • Stop or return: Finish with the supported contribution. Return to the terms, event or outcome connection when its premise fails.

A scoring team has improved its output and wants to describe the benefit to a borrower. FDM.5 locates the decision that uses the score. If an established rule gives the same decision and terms for the old and new score, improved accuracy alone establishes no change in this borrower’s financial outcome. That answer can finish the question. A different proposed benefit, such as less information-gathering effort, needs its own comparison.

Suppose instead that an adequately authorized decision arrangement uses the score to change a lending decision. FDM.1 identifies the resulting rights and obligations under the supplied terms; FDM.2 resolves a disputed lender or borrower identity if necessary. The score, agreement and usable funds answer different questions about the service. An actual agreement’s formation conditions determine which duties exist before funding.

The constructed loan supplies valid formation and terms under which successful funding of 100 creates a funded position with 105 due on day 30. FDM.3 derives the contractual flows for each party. FDM.4 determines what actually occurred and changed. If a payment of 60 is established, all 60 applies to the due amount, and no further interest or fees arise, 45 remains due. A record still showing 105 unpaid must be reconciled with that effect; the original contractual amount remains 105. If the evidence establishes only an instruction to pay 60, the reduction remains unresolved. Correct subtraction cannot settle whether payment occurred.

FDM.5 uses these effect results to explain what the service supplied. Funding can make the agreed proceeds usable even if the equipment bought with them later fails to arrive. The contribution account then identifies the failed delivery step without erasing the funding result. Whether the financed work produces a later business benefit is a further question. A wider outcome claim can therefore be narrowed while the supported service contribution is retained.

The return depends on the failure: ambiguous terms return to FDM.1 or FDM.3, a disputed occurrence to FDM.4, and an unsupported connection to the participant’s result to FDM.5. An adequate existing answer can be reused at any of these points.