INTERNAL PROCESS · KRI · LEADING

FPD5+ on telesales-originated vintageTS-09

2.6%✓ On target◇MANUAL

ACTUAL VS PLAN

VINTAGE LOSS CURVES

Is the book we are writing now worse than last year’s?

How much of this is measured: Curve SHAPE between the published points is modelled, not measured — ACF publishes peaks and 12M averages, not a full MOB series. The DWH fact must be built at cohort × channel × scheme × month-on-book or this chart cannot be produced for real (03 §6).

VARIANCE TO PLAN — computed in-platform, not in Excel

DEFINITION

Formula: FPD5+ balance ÷ vintage disbursed
Unit / direction: pct · lower better
Source system: DWH
Refresh: daily_t1
Target: ≤ 4%
Target status: From an ACF document
Baseline in context/: overall 12M 2.71%

OWNERSHIP — two roles, two people (R-G-02)

Metric owner — owns the target and the result

Head of Telesales

Data owner — owns the source system and pipeline

IT System Planning

Both proposed by Ikigai and awaiting ACF confirmation (DEC-02).

COMMENTARY — why the number is what it is

No commentary recorded for this metric. A red tile with no explanation is the failure mode the current monthly pack already has.

Commentary is attached to the metric and period, not to a slide. It survives the month — which is what makes a variance reviewable at the next meeting instead of re-argued. Prototype — read-only fixtures; at fullstack this is the COMMENT table with author identity from AD.