by Agentronics

AGX Finance · CRONUS synthetic decision study

Understand the position.
Choose a permitted response.

Can Treasury and Controllership explain the covenant conclusion without finding its preparer? Start with the calculation and its support. If a collection delay puts the plan under pressure, explore the permitted choices using the same reviewed case.

Synthetic demonstration. Selected AXB1 records for AGX Synthetic Industrial Distribution, not consolidated CRONUS accounts. Agreement terms, debt and forecasts are authored assumptions. This demonstrates the workflow, not real-agreement compliance or realized savings.

01 / Review the position

What supports
the conclusion?

The case opens on 18 October 2026. Review net leverage, interest coverage and minimum unrestricted cash against the synthetic agreement. Each result stays linked to its source figures, assumptions and exact reviewed version.

Some cash cannot be counted. The source package records $2 million of restricted cash. Inspect the source assertion, the agreement rule and the review decision separately. Challenging its support makes the affected conclusion uncertain; an earlier approved result does not approve the newer unresolved version.

The first conversation stays in read-only Plan mode. Detailed workings and retained evidence are available when requested; discussion does not change treatment, approve a record or run a calculation.

02 / Assess the delay

What changes when
a customer pays late?

A four-week collection delay shifts receipts by 28 days. The review and response use the same case and covenant constraints. The planning comparison adds an explicitly reviewed forecast, payment permissions and funding alternatives.

The model retains 60 invoices, 274 permitted payment-date choices and four funding alternatives, including no borrowing. These are declared choices for this synthetic case; AGX does not invent permission to pay a supplier late.

03 / Optional response

A cheaper plan
can breach the limit.

The reference plan uses a short $10 million bridge and breaches the leverage limit. The independently checked selected plan meets the declared liquidity and covenant tests, repays its new borrowing and leaves $225 million of existing debt outstanding.

Modeled comparisonReference planSelected plan
Discounts less new borrowing interest$893,671.50$885,387.00
Declared covenant and liquidity testsLeverage breachPass
Existing debt remains$225 million$225 million

Respecting the covenant gives up $8,284.50 of modeled net benefit. That trade-off is the point: the lowest-cost permitted plan must also meet the reviewed constraints. These figures are not realized savings, and borrowing principal is not a benefit.

Planning is optional. Its forecasts, permissions and exact covenant dependency require separate review and approval. Approval authorizes analysis only; AGX does not make payments, draw debt or issue a certificate.

04 / Inspect the basis

One case.
Visible limits.

The synthetic calculation and planning results were independently checked. The review exercised challenges to supporting evidence, changing revisions and read-only discussion. These checks do not establish customer value, source truth or production readiness.

Open CoWork · sign-in required →

Sign in and select the CRONUS record available to your workspace. Discuss access with us before sharing company information.

Historical studies and separate ABL review

The historical Demo Holdings study and historical working-capital study retain their original assumptions, results and evidence. Their benefits cannot be added to this CRONUS comparison.

ABL verification is a complementary assurance workflow. Its borrowing availability is not connected to this planning model.

Evaluate your review process

One material agreement.
One completed period.

Have Treasury prepare the case and Controllership review it using customer-confirmed definitions. Measure preparation effort, reconciliation issues, reviewer questions and time to an accepted conclusion against the current process.

The useful test: can a reviewer defend the conclusion with less dependence on its preparer? Planning becomes a separate discussion once that value is demonstrated.

Review the covenant pilot →

Discuss your financial priority →