Regulatory exposure
The Direct Disbursement Ratio exceeded its 30% cap from September 2025 and reached a board deck roughly twelve months later — by which time the State Bank had opened an enforcement action. A ratio breached for twelve months before anyone reported it is a measurement failure, not only a compliance failure. This panel is the remedy, and it is the cheapest thing in the programme to build.
Circular 43 Art. 8a(4) constrains a ratio; ACF's own PQR reports 66.7% without stating the denominator. Rather than guess and be silently wrong on a metric with a live enforcement action, both variants are computed and labelled. The comparison is what forces the decision.
Balance basis — outstanding ÷ outstanding. Ikigai's reading of Circular 43 Art. 8a(4). ALERTING IS BOUND TO THIS. Awaiting ACF confirmation.
direct-disbursement outstanding ÷ total consumer outstanding
Flow basis. Shown for comparison — NOT the basis alerting is bound to.
direct disbursement in period ÷ total disbursement in period
Both breach the cap, but by 18.5 points of margin — which is why the basis has to be settled before anything is reported to SBV. Alerting is bound to the balance basis; if ACF rules otherwise that is a one-line registry change.
OTHER REGULATORY METRICS — 4
Every metric on this panel is 🔴 Manual today. For the function that owns regulatory exposure that is the most uncomfortable line in the programme — and the most defensible reason to start here.