Opening the conversation, the incident that brought you here

• Tell me briefly about the last NAV calculation error that prompted this review.
• How often have NAV or reconciliation breaks occurred in the last 12 months? Options: More than once a month, Monthly, Quarterly, Less than quarterly, None reported
• When that break was discovered, which process found it first, an audit, client reporting, or an internal reconciliation? Options: External audit, Client reporting, Internal reconciliation, Regulatory query, Other
• Who on your team is typically first pulled into an investigation, and who owns external communications? Options: Head of Ops, Head of Investment Technology, Chief Operating Officer, Compliance Lead, Other
• How much financial impact or AUM movement did the most recent incident cause, or what is your best estimate of the first 90 day impact? Options: Under $100k, $100k–$1M, $1M–$10M, Over $10M, Prefer not to quantify
• Which artifacts from that incident are available for review, such as reconciliation logs, sample trade files, or audit memos? Options: Reconciliation logs, Sample trade files, Custody extracts, Audit memos, No artifacts available
• Would sharing those artifacts for a time-limited technical review be possible, and if not, why? Options: Yes, we can share, Yes, with NDA and redaction, No, confidentiality prevents it, No, legal review pending

Where reconciliation gaps hit you hardest

• If a reconciliation error hit one of your flagship funds again, what immediate operational decisions would you be forced to make?
• List the fund types or strategies that are most exposed to reconciliation failures, for example long-only equity, credit, derivatives, or private assets. Options: Long-only equity, Fixed income, Derivatives, Multi-asset, Private/illiquid assets, Fund-of-funds
• How many stakeholder groups must be coordinated when an exception occurs, for example portfolio management, operations, compliance, and client reporting? Options: 1-2, 3-4, 5-6, More than 6
• Describe the downstream consequences when a position mismatch persists for more than one business day.
• If fixing reconciliation discrepancies took longer than your target window, would you consider pausing inflows or suspending subscriptions, and who would sign that decision? Options: Pause inflows, Suspend subscriptions, Escalate to board, No immediate commercial action

The real architecture, not the brochure

• Why does your current environment still require manual reconciliation across multiple systems instead of a single position of record?
• Name the systems that currently act as partial sources of position data, such as portfolio accounting, OMS, custody feeds, or spreadsheets. Options: Portfolio accounting, Order management system, Custodian feed, Execution venue, Spreadsheets/Excel, Other
• Approximately how many distinct reference data mappings or identifier tables do you reconcile each night? Options: 1-5, 6-10, 11-20, More than 20
• Identify the role that owns APIs or custody feed connections internally, and how many FTEs maintain them. Options: In-house integration team, Operations team, Third-party managed, No dedicated owner
• How often do overnight batch processes fail and require manual correction, in an average month? Options: Daily, Several times a week, Weekly, Monthly, Rarely/never
• What single dependency would cause you to halt a migration if we discovered it during scoping?

Parallel test that proves or pauses the deal

• If you ran a parallel test tomorrow, which metric would immediately disqualify the candidate platform?
• Which sample portfolios would you include to stress-test private assets, multi-leg derivatives, and fund-of-funds structures? Options: Top 5 by AUM, Most complex by instrument type, Representative client set, Private/illiquid sample only, Other
• How will you define acceptable position parity, for example exact match, within 1-5 basis points, or within a quantity threshold? Options: Exact match, Within 1 basis point, Within 1-5 basis points, Quantity threshold, Custom rule
• Name the person or role who will sign off the pilot results, and describe their authority to commit to production cutover.
• If the pilot meets your parity and compliance rules, what internal approval or missing item would still block a go-live within 30 days? Options: Legal sign-off, Budget approval, Operational readiness, Data owner sign-off, Nothing significant

What could derail the program, the real blockers

• Point to the integration or data gap most likely to stop the project in its tracks.
• How clean and centralized is your historical position and trade data, judged by missing fields, unmatched identifiers, or duplicates? Options: Well cleaned and centralized, Mostly clean with gaps, Fragmented and inconsistent, Unknown
• Identify the role that must authorize custodial feed access, and the typical approval lead time.
• Do you have dedicated migration resources, for example a data engineer, a business analyst, and an operations lead, who can be committed to the project? Options: Yes, all roles committed, Partial coverage, No dedicated resources, We will hire/contract
• If we cannot obtain full historic cash and position extracts within your target window, would you cancel the migration or proceed with a reduced scope? Options: Cancel, Proceed with reduced scope, Phase migration, Unsure

Competitive landscape, the alternatives you are weighing

• List the external vendors, incumbent platforms, and internal options you are actively considering. Options: Incumbent portfolio platform, Point reconciliation tool, Custodian-led solution, Internal build, Other - specify
• Name the conditions that would need to hold for you to stay with the incumbent, for example lower total cost, existing integrations, or regulatory obligations.
• Has anyone on your team proposed building the missing pieces internally, and if so, what timeline and headcount did they estimate? Options: Yes, <3 months, Yes, 3-6 months, Yes, >6 months, No internal build proposed
• Describe the specific advantages an internal build would need to demonstrate to win your preference, focusing on cost, schedule, or data control.
• If the incumbent matched your acceptable pilot metrics and offered a comparable commercial package, would anything else keep you from staying with the incumbent? Options: Existing contract constraints, Change fatigue, Data residency/regulatory reasons, No, we would stay

Operational readiness and constraints we must surface now

• Identify the integrations and approvals that must be in place before configuration starts to avoid immediate delay.
• Select the external systems that will need active connectivity. Options: Custodian feeds, Order Management System, Portfolio Accounting System, Market data provider, Clearing and Settlement system, Private asset ledger, Other - specify
• Do the identified systems expose APIs or direct file extracts, and which of those are already available? Options: APIs available, File extracts available, Both, None available, Unknown
• Estimate the headcount you can dedicate to the migration, expressed in FTE weeks over the next 3 months. Options: Under 4 FTE-weeks, 4-8 FTE-weeks, 9-16 FTE-weeks, More than 16 FTE-weeks
• Are regulatory approvals or compliance reviews required to grant access to holdings or client-level data? Options: Yes, regulatory approval, Yes, compliance review only, No approvals needed, Unsure
• If one required custody feed cannot be made available within your cutover window, will you accept a phased cutover or would that stop go-live? Options: Accept phased cutover, Require full feed before go-live, Delay until feed available, Unsure

Acceptance criteria, timeline, and signing conditions

• What single acceptance criterion would make you sign off on cutover the same day we meet the pilot goals?
• Choose the metrics you will use to accept go-live, select all that apply. Options: Position parity by account, NAV reconciliation within threshold, Compliance rule coverage, Trade settlement success rate, Performance latency target, Reporting accuracy
• How quickly after pilot success do you want live cutover? Options: Within 2 weeks, Within 1 month, Within 2-3 months, Longer than 3 months, Unsure
• List the roles that must sign commercial and legal terms, and state their approval authority.
• Describe the contingency or rollback condition that would trigger an immediate reversal post-cutover.
• If the platform meets all acceptance metrics but one integration is delayed, what maximum settlement variance will you accept before halting go-live? Options: No variance accepted, Up to 1 business day of variance, Up to 3 business days, Allow phased correction, Unsure

Operational handoff, runbooks, and escalation

• Identify the role that will own operational governance after cutover, and the approval path for changes.
• Select the runbook items required for day one operations. Options: Position reconciliation checklist, Custody feed validation, Compliance rule audit, Trade settlement confirmation, Escalation contacts, Monitoring dashboard setup
• Estimate how many monitoring dashboards and alerts you require to feel confident in the first 72 hours. Options: 1-3 dashboards, 4-6 dashboards, 7-10 dashboards, More than 10
• List the stakeholders who must be on 24/7 escalation during the first week post-go-live. Options: Operations lead, Head of Investment Technology, Compliance lead, Custodian contact, Third-party integrator
• If a settlement integrity issue is detected post-cutover, what maximum time to resolution would you require before triggering rollback? Options: 4 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours, 48 hours, No hard limit

Measuring success and next steps

• How will you measure whether the platform permanently reduced reconciliation effort and NAV risk?
• Choose the ongoing KPIs you want reported monthly. Options: Reconciliation exception count, Hours spent on manual fixes, NAV discrepancy incidents, Compliance false positives/negatives, Time to close exceptions
• Describe the cadence and participants for outcome reviews you expect over the first 12 months. Options: Weekly for 3 months, then monthly, Biweekly for 3 months, then monthly, Monthly
• If KPIs do not stabilize within 6 months, what contractual remedy or off-ramp would you require? Options: Service credits, Extended remediation support, Right to terminate, Renegotiate SLAs, Other
• Would you be willing to participate in a case study or reference call if the pilot achieves agreed outcomes? Options: Yes, Maybe, No

• Solution Experience Session — Single-Platform Positioning and Compliance

• Run the provided sample portfolio through the platform and deliver a position parity and reconciliation error comparison before the next session.
• You confirm the current-state summary and accept the stated cost of reconciliation failures to operations and risk.
• Confirm the current state and what it costs you
• Provide representative portfolio extracts that include public, private, and illiquid holdings plus examples of recent reconciliation failures and audit findings.
• Map your scenario to the single-platform flow
• You confirm the demonstrated single-platform workflows eliminate the manual reconciliation steps you described for the selected scenario.
• You agree on concrete parallel test acceptance criteria for position parity, compliance coverage, latency, and sample portfolios.
• Proof, position parity and reconciliation reduction
• Draft and share a parallel test plan with timelines and the agreed acceptance criteria for review prior to test kickoff.
• You identify any remaining gaps to close before authorizing the parallel test run.
• Confirm the evaluation committee members and the decision timeline to ensure necessary stakeholders attend the parallel test review.
• Proof, compliance enforcement across asset classes
• Agree parallel test acceptance criteria and metrics
• Validation check

• Solution Experience Session — Single-Platform Positioning and Compliance
• Solution Experience Deck
• Solution Brief

• meeting
• slides
• document

• Migrate Holdings and Trade History
• Backfill Historical Pricing and NAVs
• Normalize Reference Data and Enrichment
• Connect Custodians and Settlement Feeds
• Integrate Broker Execution Connectivity
• Deploy Real-Time Position Streaming
• Onboard Multi-Asset Data Model
• Model Private Assets and Fund-of-Funds Structures
• Configure Pre-Trade Compliance Rules
• Implement Post-Trade Reconciliation
• Deploy Automated Rebalancing Algorithms
• Setup Performance Attribution and Reporting
• Run Parallel Shadow Operations
• Train Portfolio and Operations Teams

Migrate Holdings and Trade History

• How many legal-entity portfolios and account IDs must be migrated from your current systems (list count by fund and account)?
• Which source artifacts hold your authoritative trade history and corporate actions (examples: exchange blotter CSVs, FIX gateway archive, custodian daily activity file)? Options: Exchange blotter CSVs, FIX session logs, Custodian activity files, Order management system export, Other
• List the date range of historical trades and corporate actions that must be migrated for each fund (for example: '2010-01-01 to present')
• Provide the expected tolerance for migrated position parity on day 0 (e.g., position quantity and cost basis match within 0.01% or exact match). Options: Exact match required, Within 0.01%, Within 0.1%, Negotiable
• Identify the primary identifier you use for securities across systems (ISIN, CUSIP, FIGI, internal instrument ID) and indicate any known mapping gaps. Options: ISIN, CUSIP, FIGI, Internal instrument ID, Multiple / mixed
• Who will provide signed extracts and legal attestation for migrated custodial statements and trade blotters (name the team or role, e.g., Middle Office Operations)?

Backfill Historical Pricing and NAVs

• Which pricing vendors and internal price feeds must be reconciled during backfill (list vendor names or 'internal mark' descriptors)?
• How many historical NAV runs (monthly/weekly/daily) need backfill and to what historical depth (e.g., 5 years of daily NAV)? Options: Daily - 1 year, Daily - 3 years, Daily - 5+ years, Monthly only
• Provide the acceptable NAV variance threshold between original records and backfilled NAVs for sign-off (for example: 0.05% absolute difference). Options: Exact match required, <=0.01%, <=0.05%, <=0.1%
• Specify how private/illiquid asset valuations are sourced today (examples: manager estimates, audited financials, GP NAV statements) and which sources we must ingest for backfill.
• Indicate whether corporate action adjustments (splits, dividends, spin-offs) must be reconstituted during the historical price backfill and which feeds provide that data. Options: Yes - reconstitute all, Yes - only for listed securities, No - not required
• Attach or describe the canonical NAV calculation document you use today (fields, accrual rules, fee waterfall) that we should reproduce during migration.

Normalize Reference Data and Enrichment

• Which reference-data domains require normalization (select all that apply)? Options: Security identifiers, Counterparty master, Instrument static fields, Corporate action rules, Currency and rate tables
• Provide sample discrepancies you currently see across systems (examples: ticker-to-ISIN mismatches, multiple internal IDs for same economic exposure).
• Identify the authoritative source for issuer/issuer-league data (for example: custodian master, internal registry, pricing vendor) for mapping priorities. Options: Custodian master, Internal registry, Pricing vendor, Third-party reference data hub
• Name the reference fields that must be preserved exactly during normalization (examples: CUSIP, legal entity identifier, share class code).
• Where do you store instrument corporate action rules today and do those rules need transformation to the platform's rule model? Options: In custodian feed, In internal rules engine, In spreadsheets, No rules stored
• Estimate the expected volume of unique instrument identifiers requiring manual mapping versus automated match (number or percentage). Options: <1%, 1-5%, 5-20%, >20%

Connect Custodians and Settlement Feeds

• Which custodians and settlement agents must be connected at go-live (list custodian names or 'Custodian A/B/C' placeholders)?
• Which transport mechanisms are available from each custodian today (SFTP, API, SWIFT/ISO messages, secure email)? Options: SFTP, REST API, SWIFT/MT/ISO, Secure email, Other
• Provide the expected latency window for position and settlement feeds required for operations (for example: intraday every 15 minutes, EOD by 06:00 UTC). Options: Real-time / streaming, Intraday 15m, Intraday hourly, End of day
• Identify the settlement cycle requirements you must support (examples: T+2 equities, T+1 for some markets, OTC settlement terms).
• Confirm whether you require reconciliation to custodian MT535/MT536 statement formats during initial connector certification. Options: Yes - MT535/MT536 required, No - use CSV extracts, Partial - some custodians
• Who owns the custodian connector testing and credentialing in your organization (role or team, e.g., Connectivity Ops)?

Integrate Broker Execution Connectivity

• Which execution brokers and OMS (order management systems) must be connected to the platform for order routing and blotter ingestion?
• Provide the message formats required for order and fill ingestion (examples: FIX versions, EMS vendor export, CSV). Options: FIX 4.2/4.4, Vendor EMS export, CSV/flat file, API push
• List pre-trade and post-trade data fields that must persist through execution integration (examples: strategy ID, broker algo, parent order ID, allocation instructions).
• Which continuity requirements must the broker integrations satisfy during cutover (for example: no order gaps, replay of fills for prior day)? Options: No gaps allowed, Accept short replay window, Broker-managed replays
• Identify any regulatory-reporting obligations tied to execution data (examples: best execution record retention, MiFID II-like obligations or client-specific reporting) that the integration must preserve. Options: Yes - regulatory reporting required, No - only internal reporting
• Which party will supply API keys, FIX credentials, or technical contacts for each broker during onboarding?

Deploy Real-Time Position Streaming

• Which position latency SLA do you require for trading and compliance use (examples: sub-second, 1s, 1m)? Options: Sub-second, <=1 second, <=1 minute, End-of-day only
• Specify the position reconciliation threshold you want monitored for streaming parity (for example: positions diverging by >0.5% or quantity delta > 1 share triggers alert). Options: Quantity delta > 0, Quantity delta > 1, Value delta > 0.1%, Custom threshold
• Which feeds will provide the real-time position inputs (select all that apply)? Options: Broker fills, Custodian intraday statements, OMS position publishes, Market data-driven delta
• Describe how you handle intraday corporate actions or partial settlements today and whether streaming must apply those intraday (yes/no and details). Options: Yes - apply intraday, No - apply EOD only
• Who is responsible for monitoring streaming health and alerts in your organization (role or team)?
• Which security or permission model must apply to position streams (examples: role-based access, fund-level partitions)? Options: Role-based, Account-level only, Full visibility to all users, Custom

Onboard Multi-Asset Data Model

• Which asset classes must be fully supported at go-live (select all that apply)? Options: Equities, Fixed income, Derivatives, Cash, Alternatives / private assets
• List specific derivative instrument types you trade that require model support (examples: options, swaps, futures, exotics).
• Specify the level of instrument greeks and risk analytics required for the platform's model (examples: delta/gamma, full greeks, not required). Options: Full greeks required, Basic greeks, No greeks required
• Which settlement instructions and cash account mappings must the model preserve to support T+N settlement workflows?
• Identify any market or jurisdictional conventions that must be encoded (examples: bond day-count convention, FX settlement lag) for accurate P&L and NAV.
• Estimate the count of unique instrument structures (e.g., structured notes, credit tranches) that will need custom modeling extensions. Options: 0-10, 11-50, 51-200, 200+

Model Private Assets and Fund-of-Funds Structures

• Which private asset types must be represented (private equity, private credit, real estate, fund-of-funds) and how are valuations currently reported (GP statements, audited NAV)?
• Provide the frequency and format of capital call and distribution schedules you receive for private funds that must be modeled. Options: Monthly PDF statements, CSV schedules, API/portal extracts, Ad hoc emails
• List the fund-of-funds layering and share-class relationships that need mapping (examples: feeder->master fund, series share classes, side pockets).
• Describe the performance-fee or waterfall calculations applied in private funds that must be reproduced (examples: hurdle rate, catch-up, carried interest).
• Who provides limited-partner (LP) reporting requirements and templates that must be supported by fund-of-funds reporting?
• Are LP-level audit trails and statement-level reconciliations required for private assets during acceptance testing? Options: Yes - required, No - not required, Partial - some funds only

Configure Pre-Trade Compliance Rules

• Which compliance regimes or client mandates must be codified as pre-trade checks (examples: concentration limits, single-issuer exposure, client-specific restrictions)?
• Provide the quantitative thresholds for each pre-trade rule (for example: max position >5% of NAV, max sector exposure 20%).
• Who is the owner of compliance rule sign-off and change control in your organization (role or team)?
• Which order-routing stages must the pre-trade checks integrate with (OMS order entry, algo engine, broker gateway)? Options: OMS order entry, Algo engine, Broker gateway, All stages
• Describe the exception workflow for blocked pre-trade events (examples: auto-block with ticket creation, allowed with manual override and audit). Options: Auto-block and ticket, Allow with override and audit, Notify only
• How quickly must pre-trade rule evaluation occur to be acceptable during order entry (for example: sub-second, <1s, <5s)? Options: Sub-second, <1 second, <5 seconds, Not time sensitive

Implement Post-Trade Reconciliation

• Which reconciliation pairings are required at day end and intraday (examples: trade blotter vs custodian statement, ledger vs position model)?
• Provide the acceptable reconciliation pass-rate for automated matching during validation (for example: 99.5% of trades must auto-match). Options: >=99.9%, >=99.5%, >=98%, Custom
• Identify common reconciliation breaks today and their root causes (examples: fees, corporate actions, settlement fails).
• Which fields are used for canonical matching (examples: trade date, settlement date, ISIN, quantity, trade ID) and which are unreliable?
• Who will be assigned break investigation and resolution responsibilities during the migration (role or team)?
• Is automated break remediation desired (example: auto-adjust fees, route to exception queue) and for which break types? Options: Yes - limited to fees, Yes - broader rules, No - manual only

• desired_state
• success_criteria
• stakeholders
• current_state
• gaps
• decision_readiness
• gaps
• desired_state
• stakeholders
• current_state
• success_criteria
• decision_readiness
• stakeholders
• decision_readiness
• success_criteria
• current_state
• desired_state
• gaps
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness

• Master Services Agreement (MSA)
• Statement of Work (SOW)
• Order Form / Subscription Agreement
• Service Level Agreement (SLA)
• Data Processing & Security Addendum (DPA / Security Addendum)
• Data Access & Custodian Authorization
• Acceptance Criteria Sign-off
• Cutover & Rollback Governance Plan
• Change Order Agreement
• Source Code & Data Escrow Agreement

• Go-live Health Check (weeks 1-4)
• First Measurement Review (weeks 4-10)
• Acceptance Gate — Formal Decision (around day 90)
• Post-Acceptance Realization Review (30 days after acceptance)
• Quarterly Outcomes Review (ongoing quarterly)

• Operations to provide a 30-day reconciliation report showing parity checks and incident timelines.
• Publish the formal acceptance record with pass/fail status and the buyer signatory details.
• If any criteria failed, list remediation steps with owners and a verification schedule tied to the acceptance record.
• Execute the incumbent wind-down steps or document read-only retention, including archiving and contract action items.
• Present 30-day trend vs Solution Scope targets
• Confirm the NAV reconciliation pass rate and compliance false positive trend are acceptable or have a mitigation plan.
• Outstanding remediation items from the Acceptance Gate are on track with owners and dates.
• Enhancement requests are captured, prioritized, and assigned for scoping.
• Re-confirm success criteria and owners
• Support team to deliver a training refresh plan for any user groups below the expected weekly active user threshold.
• Product/engineering to scope high-priority enhancement requests and provide estimated delivery windows.
• Quarterly metrics and trend analysis
• Position parity and weekly active user rate are trending at or toward Solution Scope targets or have documented mitigations.
• Persistent tickets are assigned owners with realistic closure dates and a burn-down plan.
• Top enhancement requests for the next quarter are prioritized and have owners for scoping.
• Deliver a quarterly reconciliation and parity summary with incident timelines and resolution status.
• Operations to update contingency contact lists and confirm escalation windows for the next quarter.
• Product to produce a scoped plan and estimated delivery dates for the prioritized enhancements.
• All critical data feeds and imports verified as functional or assigned a remediation owner and date.
• A short remediation plan with owners and dates is agreed to remove blockers before metric measurement begins.
• Schedule and scope for the First Measurement Review are confirmed.
• Publish the go-live health checklist with owners and target fix dates for each open issue.
• Technical lead to validate custodial feed parity sample and report results within 72 hours.
• Operations lead to confirm user access for all portfolio managers and report any missing accounts.
• Present first-run metrics vs Solution Scope targets
• Position parity rate and NAV reconciliation pass rate status are documented relative to Solution Scope targets.
• Root causes for any shortfalls are identified with owners and fix dates.
• A remediation plan with milestones is in place to reach the Acceptance Gate on schedule.
• Deliver a remediation task list with data samples and proposed fixes for each failed parity reconciliation.
• Engineering to provide a patch or mapping update and a test plan for validation within the agreed timeline.
• Operations to prepare the acceptance dataset and schedule the Acceptance Gate meeting.
• Restate acceptance criteria and numeric targets from Solution Scope
• Each acceptance criterion recorded in Solution Scope is marked pass or fail with supporting evidence.
• Buyer-side named signatory provides the formal acceptance decision and it is recorded.
• A concrete plan for any failed criteria and the incumbent wind-down decision are agreed with owners and dates.
• Adoption and operational readiness check
• Longer-running issues and ticket burn-down
• Present outcome data against each criterion
• Diagnose root causes for each deviation
• Deployment and data feed validation
• Open issues, defects, and blocker burn-down
• Document pass/fail per criterion and capture formal acceptance
• Enhancement backlog prioritization
• Agree corrective actions and owners
• Early adoption signals and usage check
• Operational risks and contingency review
• Open issues and blockers
• Confirm timeline to Acceptance Gate
• Enhancement requests triage
• Agree remediation plan for any failed criteria
• Agree immediate remediation actions
• Incumbent system wind-down and data archiving