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)

Issuance logic, verifiability, monetisation advisory, sequencing discipline and counterparty assessment. AAL reviews SBLC-backed transactions for structural integrity before any MT760 or monetisation step is engaged.

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)

MTN placement advisory, ownership claim verification, programme assessment and fraud screening. AAL has direct experience identifying fabricated MTN ownership claims and misrepresented programme documentation.

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. 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.

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.

Deliverable Mindset

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, counterparties and communication priorities.

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

Have a complex transaction that needs structure before it needs noise?

Start with a confidential discussion. We will assess the mandate context, financing objective, counterparty profile and immediate execution risks before recommending any next step.