Structured Finance Advisory

Structured finance advisory for projects that must withstand scrutiny

AAL helps clients design, refine and stress-test financing structures before they are exposed to lenders, investors, strategic partners or complex counterparties. The goal is not cosmetic presentation. The goal is a structure that survives serious diligence.

Structured finance advisory meeting reviewing transaction documents, financial analysis and cross-border mandate materials

The Problem

Most weak transactions do not look weak until the wrong counterparty exposes the flaw

Projects often enter financing discussions with a story that sounds compelling but a structure that is incomplete. Common weaknesses include unclear risk allocation, unrealistic sequencing, unresolved jurisdictional issues, weak documentation logic or a capital approach that does not match the project’s stage and risk profile.

Instrument Types & Transaction Contexts

Structured finance instruments AAL advises on

A significant portion of AAL’s structured finance advisory work involves instrument-backed transactions where the instrument itself — and the claims made about it — must be independently assessed before any commitment is made. AAL advises on the following instrument types and associated transaction structures:

Standby Letters of Credit (SBLC)

Assessment of issuance logic, verifiability, proposed monetisation structures, sequencing discipline and counterparty risk. AAL reviews the commercial and procedural integrity of SBLC-backed proposals before a client accepts any issuance, delivery, verification or monetisation sequence.

Bank Guarantees (BG)

Structuring, SWIFT message sequencing (MT799 pre-advice, MT760 issuance), issuing bank assessment and procedural compliance. AAL identifies sequencing errors and documentation gaps before they become transaction failures.

Medium-Term Notes (MTN)

Transaction-structure and ownership-claim assessment, programme-document review and fraud screening. AAL evaluates whether the stated issuer, holder, custody position, settlement route and proposed mechanics can withstand verification.

Deeds of Agreement (DOA)

Commercial review of DOA terms, MT103 payment sequencing, procedure compliance and counterparty obligation logic. AAL reviews DOAs for internal consistency and alignment with stated transaction objectives.

Red flag advisory: AAL has direct experience in structured finance contexts where instrument fraud is the material risk — including fabricated SWIFT messages, misrepresented issuing banks, advance fee payment demands disguised as procedural requirements, and instruments that cannot withstand even basic verification. In the past twelve months alone, files reviewed by AAL have included fabricated SWIFT confirmations attributed to two global banks, an MTN programme whose claimed owner did not exist, and a standby letter of credit whose issuing officer had left the named bank three years earlier. None survived first-pass verification. Where a proposed transaction involves instrument claims that have not been independently verified, counterparties without traceable institutional relationships, or payment requests ahead of instrument delivery, scope a due diligence review before proceeding.

Scope boundary: AAL provides strategic, commercial and due-diligence advisory only. AAL does not act as a broker-dealer, placement agent, lender, asset manager or regulated investment adviser; does not arrange instrument monetisation or capital raising; and does not buy, sell, place, custody or execute transactions in financial instruments.

Counterparty Due Diligence →

What We Review

Core workstreams

Financing Structure

Debt, equity, hybrid, collateral, milestone, repayment and risk-allocation logic.

Transaction Sequence

What must happen first, what should wait, and where the deal can break if the order is wrong.

Counterparty Readiness

How the mandate will be viewed by lenders, investors, development partners and commercial counterparties.

Documentation Logic

Commercial review of key terms, information gaps and consistency between transaction documents.

How an Engagement Runs

Sharper structure, cleaner sequencing, fewer avoidable mistakes

01

Mandate Intake

Project, parties, jurisdictions, financing target and prior transaction history.

02

Structure Review

Stress-test the proposed financing logic against market and execution realities.

03

Gap Analysis

Identify missing documents, unresolved risks and weak commercial assumptions.

04

Execution Path

Recommend sequencing, counterparty-review priorities and communication steps.

05

Coordination

Support the mandate as parties, documents and timing evolve.

Best Fit

Who this is for

  • Mining, energy and infrastructure sponsors preparing for financing or strategic discussions.
  • Operators or principals needing an independent second opinion before committing to a structure.
  • Cross-border mandates where counterparties, timing and documentation are fragmented.
  • Projects with real potential but weak presentation, sequencing or transaction architecture.

Confidential Mandate Review

A structure worth financing is a structure that has already been argued with.

Bring us the transaction before you bring it to a lender. We will tell you where it holds and where it does not.