Projects at FID
Each option and size arrives with its capex, schedule and NPV range, and the value of deferring, staging or abandoning.
Capital committee
The capital committee places every candidate from the four decisions on one envelope and one risk appetite, then solves the whole book for the most value inside it. Members see the pooled plan beside today's separate plans, the shock that would break it, and what would change the answer.
Illustrative example, not client data. In the coastal refiner example, whose figures are invented for illustration, the pooled plan delivers $865M of value after hurdles against $812M for the separate plans, with a bad-year value (P10: nine scenarios in ten do better) of $540M against $497M, using $45M less capital.
Four decisions, one committee
Building plants, backing ventures, recovering projects in construction and funding this year's capex lines all draw on one balance sheet and the same shocks. Each decision brings its candidates to the committee in the same form: a P50, P80 and P90 range from the same correlated scenarios.
Each option and size arrives with its capex, schedule and NPV range, and the value of deferring, staging or abandoning.
Ticket sizes inside concentration limits, with the value from strategic synergy kept separate from the financial return.
P80 cost and finish updated from actuals, and each recovery option priced in money before anyone commits to it.
A hundred or more small projects fitted to the envelope, crew capacity and turnaround windows, with the cost of every deferral.
The committee pack
A recommendation the committee cannot question is not much use. Every figure in the pack traces back to a file, a parameter or a run, and the alternatives sit beside the recommended plan.
The pooled plan is shown next to the separate plans each budget holder would have made, on the same money and the same scenarios, so the gain from pooling is visible rather than asserted.
The bad year is the average outcome in the worst 5% of scenarios. The committee chooses how much of it to accept, and the book is solved for the highest expected value within that appetite.
Stress tests sit beside the plan, along with the reverse stress test: the smallest shock that breaks the plan and its estimated return period.
The thresholds that would flip the recommendation are stated in advance, on factors with live data, so they can become tripwires once the decision is made.
Staging, a smaller tranche, deferral and releasing the capital are all on the table. The committee can choose any feasible alternative, and the record keeps the ones it did not choose.
The pack says how well the ranges have held in back-tests and which inputs are labelled estimates, so members know how much weight the numbers can bear.
From files to decision
How Capibud carries a book of options from the files your teams already produce to an approved decision that replays. Eight stages; drag across the stage to scrub.
Try it
Switch the stress scenario to re-price the book, and select a claim to read its verdict, outcome band and the factors behind it.
Capital used
$520M
Value after hurdles
$1,180M
Bad-year value
$815M
Stress scenario
| Claim | Decision | Budget | P50 return | Bad year(P10 return) | Verdict |
|---|
Illustrative figures, not client data.
Decision readout
← Polypropylene unit
0
Decision score
Fund
Outcome band (P10 → P90): →
Why pool the decisions
When each budget holder ranks their own projects and funds down the list, the money runs out pot by pot and nobody sees that three projects share one supplier. Pooling places every candidate on one envelope, so capital goes where it earns the most for the risk it adds to the whole book.
Illustrative example — figures invented for illustration; not a client or a Capibud demo. Both plans are scored on the same shared scenarios in the coastal refiner example.
In the room
The committee keeps its judgement. Capibud makes sure that judgement is exercised on the whole book, against the bad year, and written down in a form that can be checked later.
Around the table
Capital decisions have many readers and few builders. Each seat at the table gets the view it needs from the same run.
One envelope, one appetite
Evaluate
Execute
Invest
Questions committees ask
More on how decisions are kept and replayed is on the decision record page, and on how tripwires are watched on the brain.
Yes. The committee can record any feasible alternative as its decision. The record keeps the recommended plan, the alternatives and the run the committee relied on, so the choice can be explained later.
The average outcome in the worst 5% of scenarios (CVaR at 5%). The committee chooses how much of it to accept, and the book is solved for the highest expected value within that appetite.
No. The simulation and optimisation engines produce every number. Language models are optional; any number they write must match the recorded run exactly or the text is rejected. Capibud works with the AI layer switched off.
A seven-project book with 4,000 correlated scenarios and its optimiser runs in about 0.8 seconds, so the committee can ask "what if" in the meeting rather than after it.
No. Capibud sits above Primavera, SAP and your planning tool and reads the files they already produce. Capibud works with what P6, MS Project and your ERP export today (XER, XML, Excel); native connectors are rolling out. See the platform.
With a Decision Sprint: one real decision on your own files in six weeks, such as a sanction, an annual capex allocation, a fund deployment or a recovery plan. You receive an executive readout and a decision memo.
A Decision Sprint runs one real decision on your own files in six weeks, with success criteria agreed before work starts.