Bridging Old and New: Citi Steps Into Stablecoins and Crypto ETF Custody
From Treasury Masteminds Citigroup is making a bold move by exploring custody for stablecoins and crypto ETFs, alongside payment services that run on tokenized rails. For treasurers, this is more than just another headline in the ongoing “crypto meets banking” saga; it could reshape how we think about payments, liquidity, and safety in digital assets. Why Now? With new rules requiring stablecoins to be backed by high-quality assets like Treasuries and cash, banks are perfectly positioned to step in. Custody of those reserves is a natural fit. Add to that the surge in crypto ETFs and the growing demand for safe, regulated custody, and it’s clear why Citi is leaning in. What This Means for Corporate Treasury What to Watch Our2Cents This is where old meets new; and treasurers stand to benefit. In short; stablecoins could finally move from being a “crypto trading tool” to a treasury-grade liquidity solution. For corporate treasurers, that means faster payments, cheaper cross-border transfers, and the reassurance of real-asset backing—all wrapped in institutional compliance. Also Read Join our Treasury Community Treasury Mastermind is a community of professionals working in treasury management or those interested in learning more about various topics related to treasury management, including cash management, foreign exchange management, and payments. To register and connect with Treasury professionals, click [HERE] or fill out the form below to get more information. Notice: JavaScript is required for this content.
Franklin
Debunking 4 Currency Management Myths: Protecting Profit Margins in 2025
This article is written by Kantox When it comes to protecting profit margins with micro-hedging programs, most textbooks on corporate finance start with a discussion about the nature of currency risk. Next, they deal with risk mitigation through exposure netting and FX derivatives. This is a world of pristine simplicity, centred on transaction risk. Quite obviously, things are much more complicated in the real world, as firms have different pricing models and types of exposure to currency risk. By challenging some of the most common, but persistent myths around micro-hedging programs to protect profit margins, this blog will help you improve your decision-making as a currency manager. Some of the most entrenched myths include: Let us briefly tackle these myths one by one. And, most importantly, let us see what real-life best practices in fx-risk-management recommend when it comes to the issues involved. Myth #1: One-size-fits-all solutions Open up a book on currency risk management and you will see that transactional fx-risk-management is, mostly, the only game in town. Granted, there will always be an explanation of the different types of exposure to currency risk. But any example or illustration will tend to refer to individual, FX-denominated transactions. This approach leaves aside the challenge of protecting profit margins in the context of forecasted revenues and expenditures, instead of firm sales/purchase orders like in transactional hedging. But hedging based on forecasts creates three challenges: The dilemmas involved are easy to spot. Managers need to protect the budget rate, instead of the pricing rate in each transaction. In addition, the FX hedge rate displays a forward premium or discount compared to the spot rate—and the reality is that most firms have to face both scenarios. Finally, treasury teams would welcome some flexibility in order to take advantage of possible favourable moves in currency markets. These difficulties, conveniently absent from most textbooks, illustrate the the lack of realism that is the hallmark of ‘one-size-fits-all’ FX hedging solutions. When it comes to protecting profit margins in the real world (as opposed to textbooks), best practices indicate three types of FX hedging programs that reflect major scenarios in terms of pricing: Myth #2: Only risk managers are involved Where does FX hide in the business? This may be a surprising question to ask, given that most observers treat currency risk management as a ‘finance-only’ topic. In ‘siloed’ environments, CFOs talk about risk management and CEOs talk about growth. But what if treasurers could tell the C-suite that currencies can be used to spur growth in a decisive way? The case of Marriott International illustrates the point. CEO Anthony Capuano recently mentioned the group’s Bonvoy app: “Downloads rose nearly 30%. Our digital channels remain key drivers of direct bookings”. Here’s where FX is ‘hidden’: as a growth engine that generates high-margin sales. It is not a ‘finance-only’ topic! The case of Marriott International shows that FX may be ‘hidden’ above the EBIDTA line, at the level of the gross margin. Treasurers can do a better job at explaining this. Once the growth-oriented function of currency management is properly understood, protecting profit margins with micro-hedging becomes a necessity. Myth #3: The myth of oversimplicity An article by Risk.net‘s Cole Lipsky mentions the prevalence of 20%-40%-60%- 80% layered hedging programs at US-based firms, as they tackle FX headwinds from the strong USD. This reflects what we call at Kantox the problem of oversimplicity. Such currency hedging programs beg the question: how do we know that the 20%-40%-60%- 80% schedule represents, for a given treasury team, the optimal solution in terms of: Here’s Kantox’s Antonio Rami on the subject: “Do not oversimplify with a 20%-40%-60%-80% layered FX hedging program just because of its easy implementation. The excessive simplicity of the model can have a huge impact, not only on the principal goal (a smooth hedge rate), but also on secondary goals such as the optimisation of forward points”. Myth #4: The need for super-accurate cash flow forecasts The treasury world stands in awe in the face of GenAI tools that are applied to increase cash flow forecasting accuracy. During a meeting of the European Association of Corporate Treasurers Summit in Brussels, ASML’s Jeroen Van Hulten mesmerised the audience as he presented an AI tool that took forecasting accuracy from 70% to over 96%. This is certainly remarkable. Yet, at Kantox we hold an out-of-consensus view: forecasting accuracy is overstated. For most companies, it should not be a major problem when deploying their fx-risk-management program. By design, a layered hedging program tackles the problem of forecast inaccuracy head-on, as it ‘builds’ the FX hedge rate in advance. And that’s not all. By adding a micro-hedging program for firm commitments, hedging is applied to near-certain exposures. With the right technology, hedging programs —and combinations of programs— can achieve a high standard of precision on their own, even with less-than-perfect forecasting accuracy. How technology puts fx-risk-managements myths to rest The last blog of this series will be devoted to a detailed discussion of the automation requirements in best-practices solutions for protecting profit margins from FX risk. We can already anticipate one conclusion: complex currency management scenarios —an undeniable reality in 2025— call for more, not less, technology. Understanding and properly managing currency risk is a challenging undertaking. As complexity increases, manually executing the required tasks will become more difficult. What’s more, it would add an unnecessary layer of operational risk in the shape of email risk, spreadsheet risk, and key person risk—and that’s the last thing treasurers need. Also Read Join our Treasury Community Treasury Masterminds is a community of professionals working in Treasury Management or those interested in learning more about various topics related to Treasury Management, including Cash Management, Foreign Exchange Management, and Payments. To register and connect with Treasury professionals, click [HERE] or fill out the form below to get more information. Notice: JavaScript is required for this content.
Scaling at warp speed: A CFO’s guide to controlling chaos
This article is a contribution from one of our content partners, Bound From surviving Amazon’s brutal due diligence to scaling Funding Circle from 100 to 1,500 employees, Alysha Randall has built a career out of successfully navigating chaos. Now a fractional CFO, she helps startups transform disorder into growth. Here, she spills her hard-earned career secrets. Helping a company to scale at hyper speed is not for the faint of heart. It requires huge amounts of resilience, creativity, and a willingness to embrace what Alysha fondly terms “controlled chaos”. While she now runs her own advisory business, Alysha is no stranger to being in the thick of it. Her passion for steering companies through messy times began in 2006, when she moved to the UK (from her native Australia) and joined LoveFilm as Director of Finance & Reporting. Back then, the company was on the brink of being acquired by Amazon, a process that would prove to be a crash course in financial due diligence. “It was absolutely savage,” she admits. “I mean, you’d expect nothing less from such a corporate giant, but Amazon scrutinised everything with a fine-tooth comb. And I spent days locked in a hotel room, being grilled on every inch of the finances. To the point that hotels still give me flashbacks!” Despite the baptism by fire, “it was also a great learning opportunity,” she admits. “That experience taught me how critical it is to have a clean balance sheet and robust financial processes. Regardless of everything else that is going on, those things should be your baseline, especially when preparing for major milestones like acquisitions, IPOs, or fundraising rounds.” Being prepared in advance is always going to be time well spent, she believes. “As FD or CFO, you don’t want to be the one holding up a deal, or worse, the reason it falls through.” Keeping your cool Thankfully, the LoveFilm acquisition went smoothly, so Alysha started looking for her next challenge, and joined Funding Circle in 2013 – when the startup was on the cusp of explosive growth. “When I started, there wasn’t a proper finance function,” she explains. “I had to build everything from scratch while the business was growing at an insane pace, going from 100 employees to 1,500 in just five years.” The growth might have been extraordinary, but it came with more than its fair share of issues. “It was such a fast-paced environment, and there was no CFO to guide me,” Alysha recalls. “I was figuring out leadership on the job, while setting up systems and processes to support the rapid expansion – and simultaneously trying to keep operations efficient and transparent.” It was quite the juggling act, she admits. “And when you’re building as you go, there’s absolutely no room to lose focus. You have to be on the ball 24/7.” This was especially true when it came to getting Funding Circle regulated by the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). “We had no FCA experience, and it felt like we were out of our depth,” she says. The process required Alysha’s team to implement controls and systems that satisfied regulatory standards, often at odds with the company’s drive to prioritise customers and growth. “It’s hard to convince a fast-moving business to slow down and focus on compliance, but it had to be done,” she explains. “At times it felt like trying to get a teenager to do something they don’t want to do,” she jokes. But Alysha credits key hires, like Gerard Hurley – now Compliance Director and MLRO at Bound – for helping the company navigate the roadblocks. “He was one of the first compliance experts we brought in. His work was instrumental in getting us across the line,” she says. And despite the steep learning curve, the company successfully achieved FCA regulation, laying the groundwork for its future success. Getting IPO-ready As Funding Circle continued to expand, Alysha took on the enormous task of preparing it for an IPO. This involved streamlining financial processes and data across teams and regions, ensuring the business could present a clear and consistent story to investors. “The biggest challenge was aligning our KPIs,” she explains. “Every team and region had its own definitions, and it took nine months to get everyone on the same page. But if we hadn’t made the effort, it would have severely undermined investor confidence.” For many, this mammoth task, combined with the company’s rapid growth journey, would have been overwhelming. But it fired Alysha up: “I’ve always been drawn to the messy, chaotic stages of businesses,” she admits. “That’s where I can make the biggest impact.” Making a quantum leap No surprise, then, that Alysha launched her own advisory business – Fast Growth Consulting – in 2019, offering fractional CFO services to startups at the seed and Series A stages. The move was about three things: independence, impact, and variety. “Fractional work is perfect for me,” she says. “I get to work with so many different founders and businesses. It’s incredibly rewarding to go into a company where the finances are in disarray, clean things up, and set them on a path to success.” Her clients often come to her at their most vulnerable point, with financial systems that are barely holding together. “At that early stage, most companies have only had an external bookkeeper or a founder trying to manage everything themselves,” she explains. “It’s usually a state of disorder, but that’s where I thrive!” One of her first tasks with any client looking to scale rapidly is aligning the company’s financials with its commercial narrative. “A lot of P&Ls are just lists of expenses in alphabetical order,” she says. “That doesn’t tell you, or investors, anything about the business.” By restructuring the P&L to mirror the founder’s pitch deck, Alysha ensures that the numbers reinforce the company’s narrative. “If your financials align with your pitch, it’s much easier to build trust with investors,” she says. “It’s about creating a cohesive story that shows where the business is going and why it’s worth investing in.” Survival of the fittest Having a strong narrative, backed up by numbers,…
FX Uncertainty: Why Financial Planning & Treasury Must Work Hand-in-Hand
This article is written by HedgeFlows The ongoing macroeconomic and foreign exchange (FX) volatility presents a critical challenge for international businesses. Its impact on earnings predictability, liquidity, and solvency demands a proactive and strategic approach. While Financial Planning & Analysis (FP&A) teams focus on forecasting and scenario planning, CFOs or finance executives managing Treasury are tasked with safeguarding the business against catastrophic scenarios. This dual responsibility makes it imperative for FP&A and treasury teams to work together. Collaborative action is the only way businesses can build resilience amid today’s ongoing market turbulence. Understanding FX Uncertainty and Its Dual Impact FX volatility doesn’t just affect large corporations; mid-market enterprises and even small businesses also feel the pressure. Its impact is twofold: Distinct Roles: Achieving alignment allows businesses to address both predictable and extreme impacts, fostering a cohesive and reliable financial outlook. FP&A’s Role: Forecasting Likely Outcomes FP&A teams are at the forefront of modelling likely scenarios to ensure organisations are prepared for foreseeable market conditions. For businesses that operate internationally, this includes FX rates used in the scenarios – so-called “budget rates” but more often than not, require treasury teams or other experts to provide such FX budget rates to FP&A. The FP&A priorities focus on the following key areas: Tools of the Trade: FP&A teams often employ forecasting techniques like rolling forecasts, sensitivity analyses, and scenario planning to create accurate and actionable models. These models include: By focusing on agility, accuracy, and responsiveness, FP&A establishes a strong foundation for decision-making. Treasury’s Role: Preparing for the Worst Treasury plays a complementary role, focusing beyond expected scenarios and preparing for extreme risk. This forward-looking approach ensures the business is safeguarded even under the harshest conditions. Key priorities include mitigating financial crises, extreme FX volatility, and even systemic banking risks. Treasury’s toolkit comprises a variety of strategies: Treasury ensures that even under catastrophic scenarios, the organisation’s liquidity and solvency remain strong. A bit of theory – the probability angle Planning for FX uncertainty is married to the notion that exchange rates move randomly over time, and the changes in the value of currencies over a specific period have different likelihoods. This likelihood is distributed in a manner close to a normal distribution. For example, the graph below shows the historical distribution of 90-day moves of the Pound Sterling vs the US Dollar (grey) and it is a normally distributed model. As one can see, most of the potential outcomes are small moves clustered around zero, but in rarer outcomes, the exchange rate moved more than 20% over 90 days. Treasury managers should be most concerned with potential 1 in 100 and 1 in 5 chances (red and orange areas) while FP&A team is focused on the area closer to the middle of the bell curve, trusting that the treasury or risk manager will take care of the tail risk scenarios. Connecting the Two: A Holistic Approach The connection between FP&A and Treasury lies in their ability to inform and enhance each other’s work. A coordinated approach can help businesses achieve more accurate forecasting and better risk mitigation. How FP&A Supports Treasury: How Treasury Enhances FP&A: For example, if FP&A forecasts a 10% risk to revenues and Treasury executes a targeted hedge using forward contracts, the combined effort ensures both predictability and protection. Bridging the Communication Gap Collaboration hinges on effective communication. Here’s how FP&A and Treasury can bridge the gap and work better together: Practical steps like the above can transform two siloed departments into a unified force against FX uncertainty. Real-Life Examples & Case Studies Success Story: An international mid-market retailer successfully navigated 2022’s currency chaos by establishing a joint FX task force between FP&A and Treasury. By pooling data-driven insights and implementing collaborative hedging strategies, the company reduced its FX-related earnings impact by 15%, while maintaining 20% liquidity buffers. What Happens Without Collaboration? On the other hand, a mid-sized manufacturing company experienced losses of up to $2 million due to misalignment. FP&A correctly estimated currency exposures, but Treasury underhedged due to making their decisions on the back of stale forecasts from FP&A, leading to unnecessary FX losses. This siloed approach resulted in volatile cashflows and strategic missteps. Collaboration is not just a best practice but a financial imperative. Common Pitfalls of Isolated Approaches When FP&A and Treasury operate independently, the risks grow exponentially, including: The cost of isolation far outweighs the investment in collaboration. Checklist: Integrating FP&A and Treasury Aligning FP&A and Treasury doesn’t have to be daunting. Use this framework to get started: This checklist ensures a practical roadmap for integration and synergy. Key Takeaways The key to managing FX uncertainty lies in the alignment of FP&A and Treasury. Together, they: With the stakes of FX volatility higher than ever, mid-market businesses must act now. Begin strengthening your FX strategy by fostering collaboration between these vital functions. Also Read Join our Treasury Community Treasury Masterminds is a community of professionals working in treasury management or those interested in learning more about various topics related to treasury management, including cash management, foreign exchange management, and payments. To register and connect with Treasury professionals, click [HERE] or fill out the form below to get more information. Notice: JavaScript is required for this content.
Fair Banking: Why Corporate Treasurers Should Pay Attention
From Treasury Masterminds Last week, President Trump signed the “Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans” executive order.In short? It’s aimed at stopping banks from “debanking” customers for political, religious, or other non-risk-based reasons. For treasurers, this is more than just U.S. political news. It’s about bank access, predictability, and risk management—three things you really don’t want messed with. What’s Changing? Why Treasurers Should Care Bottom Line This order might reduce uncertainty for corporate banking relationships—at least in the U.S.—but it won’t remove the need for treasurers to run a tight ship.Strong governance, clean data, and transparent operations will still be your best insurance against losing access to critical banking services. And frankly—we need more of this in the EU too. Fair, transparent, risk-based banking should be a global standard, not a local policy experiment. Also Read Join our Treasury Community Treasury Mastermind is a community of professionals working in treasury management or those interested in learning more about various topics related to treasury management, including cash management, foreign exchange management, and payments. To register and connect with Treasury professionals, click [HERE] or fill out the form below to get more information. Notice: JavaScript is required for this content.
Build vs. Buy. What is the right path for treasurers investing in new tech?
This article is written by Palm Treasurers who have the budget and resources to implement a treasury system should view this as an opportunity to leave their legacy. A successful implementation creates a more effective and happier team that can manage treasury operations efficiently. We all know the negative effects a poor system implementation can have on a team. That’s why dedicating time to find and plan the right solution for your business is crucial for success. The first major decision point is whether to build a custom solution in-house or partner with a suitable treasury SaaS provider to do the heavy lifting. This blog explores tips to help you decide, along with important considerations you may not have thought of before deploying your hard-won tech budget. The Problem: What Are You Trying to Solve? Let’s start by defining the scope of the project. Is the primary goal of the software to automate cash forecasting, reduce risk, or simply to streamline operations? A well-selected solution should directly address the challenges you’re facing. Are your challenges commonplace in the treasury industry and likely to be addressed by off-the-shelf software, or are they more bespoke? A treasury Saas solution can connect to your banks and offer pre-built features for cash management, liquidity forecasting, reconciliation, and bank account management, providing a quick path to operational improvements without the need for complex custom development. However in complex organisations, specifically those with a web of intercompany relationships, regulatory requirements and policies a custom built solution may be the only way to achieve the outcome you need. A simple tool you can use to prioritise your scope requirement is the The MoSCoW Method commonly used by product managers developing new software. The Resources: What Do You Have Available? When deciding whether to build or buy, you must evaluate the resources your team has at its disposal. This includes your budget, timeline, technical expertise, and the internal capacity to either develop or implement a new system. Key Factors to Assess: When answering these questions don’t just think about your state of play in the business right now. As this is a long term investment you need to consider where to business will be in 5 or 10 years time. In a large enterprise, budget squeezes are common to achieve shareholder targets, headcount today may not mean headcount tomorrow. The commitment of maintaining an in house solution in the long term maybe a challenge. Similarly in a fast moving company, changes of direction and priorities could similarly divert budget and resources elsewhere. Consider these possibilities when making your final decision to set up your team for the best possible outcome in the long term. The Cost: What’s the ROI of Building vs. Buying? Cost is one of the most important factors in deciding whether to build or buy your treasury solution. Consider the upfront costs, ongoing maintenance, and long-term ROI of each option. Key Questions to Ask: Example Scenario: Building vs. Buying Here’s how the costs can compare: Buying an out-of-the-box SaaS solution usually results in a faster ROI. You’ll also benefit from built-in customer support, ongoing updates, and no hidden costs for software enhancements. Plus, since the solution is subscription-based, you’ll have more flexibility to scale up or down as your needs change over time. The Verdict: Build or Buy? When choosing between building a custom solution or buying an off-the-shelf SaaS treasury software, the following factors should guide your decision: Build In-House if: Buy an Out-of-the-Box SaaS Solution if: Frameworks to Help You Decide Consider using the following frameworks to make your decision clearer: Wrap Up The choice between building or buying cash management software is a critical one, and it ultimately depends on your organisation’s needs, resources, and long-term objectives. If you require a customised, specialised solution that addresses unique business needs and have the internal resources to manage it, building may be the best option. However, for most treasury teams, buying an out-of-the-box SaaS solution offers a more efficient, cost-effective, and scalable alternative that can deliver immediate value, reduce complexity, and allow your team to focus on strategic decision-making. Also Read Join our Treasury Community Treasury Masterminds is a community of professionals working in treasury management or those interested in learning more about various topics related to treasury management, including cash management, foreign exchange management, and payments. To register and connect with Treasury professionals, click [HERE] or fill out the form below. Notice: JavaScript is required for this content.
Treasury Leaders Interview: The Key to Effective Liquidity Management
This article is written by our content partner, Nilus A Conversation with Kaseya’s Director of Treasury, Devin Scott As someone who’s spent his career in treasury operations, I’m always eager to learn how other leaders think about liquidity management. Recently, I had the chance to sit down with Devin Scott, Director of Treasury at Kaseya, to discuss how he approaches one of treasury’s most critical functions: managing day-to-day liquidity while minimizing risk. What I love about these conversations is how they reveal the evolving complexity of modern treasury operations. Let me share some key insights from our discussion that I think every treasury professional should consider. 1. The Foundation: Getting Your Daily Liquidity Right When I asked Devin about ensuring efficient daily liquidity management, his answer resonated deeply with my own experience: “A bottom-up view of transactions expected to hit your accounts is crucial,” he explained. “Where this isn’t possible, assumptions can be made based on actuals and other longer-term inputs, such as FP&A expectations and market trends.” This is something I’ve seen repeatedly in my work with high-growth companies – the best treasury teams don’t just look at the numbers, they build relationships across the organization. As Devin puts it: “Building relationships with teams whose inputs significantly impact cash fluctuations—like Payroll, Collections, AP, Tax, and others—is essential.” 2. The Art of Building an Effective Liquidity Structure One of my favorite insights from our conversation came when discussing the key factors for setting up an effective liquidity structure. Devin outlined three critical elements: These might sound straightforward, but the execution is where many companies struggle. As Devin notes, it’s about being proactive: “You need to plan for debt payments, large tax payments, payroll payouts like bonuses and commissions.” 3. Handling the Unexpected Perhaps most valuable was Devin’s perspective on navigating unexpected changes in liquidity needs. He shared a particularly insightful example: “An acquisition or strategic transaction can sometimes come unexpectedly. Depending on your organization’s cash structure, you might need to review your maturing investments to confirm whether you have sufficient cash on hand to execute.” But what about when you’re facing a cash crunch? Devin’s practical advice hits home: “If your organization has limited cash and equivalents—perhaps collections are falling short of the plan—you may need to navigate a cash low point. Delaying AP while managing vendor relationships and exploring short-term credit options, like revolvers, can help maintain liquidity.” 4. The Technology Factor One area where I was particularly curious about Devin’s perspective was the role of technology in modern treasury operations. His view aligns closely with what we’re building at Nilus: “Technology and automation can be very useful when it comes to liquidity management. Tools that automate the mapping of actuals and set forecast inputs based on those actuals save significant time when building cash positions or forecasts.” What I found especially interesting was his perspective on TMS solutions: “From my experience with various tools, including legacy TMS providers, they can provide value through immediate actuals mapping and robust controls that improve efficiency and oversight. However, legacy systems can fall short when it comes to unique or evolving needs.” This is exactly why modern treasury teams need solutions that combine the robust functionality of a TMS with the flexibility of Excel-like workflows. The ability to collaborate in real-time, leverage AI for automation, and adapt quickly to changing requirements has become essential for today’s treasury operations. Looking Ahead As we wrapped up our conversation, one thing became clear: the role of treasury is becoming increasingly complex and strategic. The days of pure cash management are behind us. Today’s treasury leaders need to be technologically savvy, relationship-focused, and always prepared for the unexpected. More from Nilus Join our Treasury Community Treasury Masterminds is a community of professionals working in treasury management or those interested in learning more about various topics related to treasury management, including cash management, foreign exchange management, and payments. To register and connect with Treasury professionals, click [HERE] or fill out the form below. Notice: JavaScript is required for this content.
Why your risk management system might be sabotaging your business
written by Jeroen Overmaat with his background of Sales at Kyriba Amsterdam, July 28, 2025 Most treasury systems are digital scorekeepers. They track what happened, calculate some numbers, and generate reports. But here’s the uncomfortable truth: tracking risk isn’t the same as managing it. Your current risk management platform probably falls into this trap. It tells you about problems after they’ve already cost you money. It creates beautiful dashboards showing yesterday’s volatility. And it generates compliance reports that make auditors happy but don’t actually improve your business outcomes. The gap between risk tracking and risk management has never been wider. Companies are drowning in data but starving for insight. The scorekeeper problem Traditional treasury systems solve only part of the risk equation. They track transactions, value positions, and generate accounting entries. They don’t improve your risk programs. This creates a dangerous illusion of control. You have visibility into your exposures, so you assume you’re managing risk effectively. But visibility isn’t management. It’s just expensive record-keeping. Consider the 2008 financial crisis. Firms with basic tracking systems collapsed under pressure. Companies with proper hedging, diversification, and real-time monitoring emerged stronger. The difference wasn’t luck. It was the gap between scorekeeping and strategic risk intelligence. Risk isn’t an abstract concept. It’s the hidden variable shaping every financial decision your company makes. Some businesses use risk management to adapt and grow stronger. Others ignore it and become cautionary tales. What real risk management looks like Effective risk management requires five steps that most systems can’t handle properly. First, you need to identify existing risks through systematic assessment. This isn’t just brainstorming in quarterly meetings. It’s continuous monitoring across all business units, currencies, and market conditions. Second, you assess risks by understanding root causes and business impact. Not all risks are equal. A sudden credit downgrade isn’t the same as missing a loan payment. High-priority risks require immediate action. Third, you prioritize based on severity and urgency. Because it’s impossible to mitigate all risks simultaneously, smart prioritization becomes your competitive advantage. Fourth, you develop appropriate responses. Avoidance, mitigation, or acceptance. Each strategy requires different tools and different levels of automation. Fifth, you create preventive mechanisms for ongoing monitoring. Risk management isn’t a project with an end date. It’s an operating system that runs continuously. Most treasury platforms fail at step three. They can identify and assess risks, but they can’t prioritize intelligently or automate responses effectively. The daily rate complexity trap Here’s where things get interesting. Companies operating in daily rate environments face a particular challenge that exposes the limitations of traditional systems. Daily rate companies need automated daily exposure capture, real-time analytics, and frequent hedge adjustments. Manual processes simply can’t keep pace with market volatility. A company like Ecolab eliminated €40 million in FX volatility by moving from manual monthly processes to automated daily risk management. Single rate companies have different problems. They rely heavily on forecasting accuracy and periodic true-up adjustments. They need sophisticated scenario modeling and what-if analysis capabilities. Most treasury teams are stuck managing mixed methodologies across different entities. This creates operational complexity that traditional systems can’t handle elegantly. You end up with multiple point solutions, manual workarounds, and gaps in coverage. The result? Treasury teams spend their time processing data instead of managing risk. Beyond tracking to intelligence The most effective tools combine AI-driven analytics, integrated financial modeling, and automated compliance tracking. However, the key differentiator is platforms that provide complete back-office risk automation rather than just tracking capabilities. Leading solutions offer embedded risk analytics that capture, normalize, and quantify risk across multiple asset classes (FX, interest rates, commodities) while enabling automated hedge execution and accounting entries. Look for platforms that integrate pre-trade exposure analysis with post-trade position management and hedge accounting. They capture, normalize, and quantify risk across all business units simultaneously. They enable actual mitigation instead of just measurement. This isn’t about having better dashboards. It’s about having systems that improve your risk programs through intelligent automation and decision support. Companies report quarterly risk reduction savings, automation cost savings and error reduction benefits. More importantly, they achieve earnings predictability and financial stability that supports strategic growth initiatives. The technology exists to move beyond scorekeeping. The question is whether your organization is ready to make the shift. Leading tools feature embedded risk analytics, automated hedge accounting, and complete back-office automation. The leadership challenge Effective risk management requires active senior leadership involvement. Executives need to understand that risk management isn’t a defensive strategy. It’s a competitive advantage that creates stability, protects investments, and identifies opportunities others miss. This means supporting teams with sophisticated platforms that provide actionable intelligence, not just data. It means embedding risk considerations into all business activities. And it means fostering a culture where risk awareness drives better decision-making. The ability to anticipate and control risk separates elite financial professionals from the rest. In finance, the cost of poor risk management isn’t just monetary. It’s reputational. How to bridge the gap? Treasury systems typically solve only part of the risk equation. They track transactions, value positions, and generate accounting entries. They don’t improve your risk programs. What I have learned in the past few months working for Kyriba and talking to prospects and customers and seeing the vendor selection first hand: Kyriba stands apart from other treasury risk management systems by delivering complete back-office risk automation and embedding risk analytics to capture, normalize, and quantify risk. This enables you to mitigate risk exposures and reduce volatility in your financial statements. The difference lies in the embedded approach. Instead of bolting risk analysis onto existing processes, Kyriba builds intelligence into every transaction. Pre-trade exposure analysis tells you about potential risks before you create them. Automated hedge effectiveness testing runs continuously in the background. Real-time position management adjusts as market conditions change. This integrated approach handles the complexity that breaks traditional systems. Multi-currency exposures across different rate methodologies. Automated accounting entries that comply with IFRS9 and ASC 815. Comprehensive audit trails that satisfy regulators without creating administrative burden….
Toughening Up on Late‑Payment Laws: A Global Shift in SME Protection
From Treasury Mastermind Governments around the world are increasingly stepping in to curb long‑standing corporate practices of stretching payment terms—often at the expense of small and medium‑sized suppliers. A recent UK announcement outlines plans for “the toughest late‑payment laws in the G7,” setting maximum B2B payment terms at 60 days (with a phased move to 45), mandating interest on overdue invoices, and giving regulators the power to issue multimillion-pound fines. Audit committees will also be legally required to oversee supplier payment practices at board level. This follows earlier European Commission proposals to revise the Late Payment Directive, with ideas such as a 30‑day payment cap under consideration. While initial pushback led to further consultation, the direction is clear: long payment terms are under scrutiny, and legislative momentum is building. Why This Matters for SMEs & Corporates Bridging the Power Imbalance Large corporations often negotiate payment terms of 90–120 days or more, leveraging their bargaining power. SMEs, lacking that leverage, are left to absorb the strain. These reforms aim to level the playing field, helping small suppliers maintain liquidity and avoid the knock-on effects of delayed payments. Working Capital Fallout For corporates, long payment terms have historically served as a cheap form of working capital. But as regulation shortens these windows, buyers will see earlier cash outflows, putting pressure on internal cash management. On the supplier side, SMEs lose the flexibility of absorbing long waits for payment and may face cash flow issues that limit their ability to grow, invest, or even survive. Working Capital Solutions: Factoring, Reverse Factoring & More To deal with the stricter rules, both buyers and suppliers are likely to turn to alternative financing models: Factoring SMEs sell their invoices to a third party to receive immediate cash, reducing the cash flow burden of waiting for payment. While helpful, it can be expensive and is dependent on supplier creditworthiness. Reverse Factoring (Supply Chain Finance) Buyers use their own stronger credit rating to help their suppliers get paid earlier via a financing partner, while still maintaining longer payment terms from their own books. This can preserve working capital for both parties if structured correctly. Dynamic Discounting Suppliers offer discounts for early payment, and buyers can take advantage of savings while improving supplier relationships. Other traditional options such as overdrafts, credit lines, and invoice discounting also remain on the table, but the focus is shifting toward more digital and embedded finance options. Fairer, but Not Without Trade‑Off While it’s clearly fairer for SMEs, this regulatory shift introduces new challenges for corporates: Still, the broader benefit is a healthier and more predictable supply chain, with less disruption caused by late payments and bankruptcies. What Should Treasurers Do? In Summary Governments are putting late payments under the microscope—and rightly so. The goal is to create a more equitable environment for SMEs and reduce systemic financial risk. But for corporate treasurers, this means a shift in how working capital is managed. Stricter rules may cut into traditional levers like stretching payables, but the right combination of internal forecasting, financing tools, and supplier collaboration can soften the blow—and may even lead to more resilient supply chains. If you’re concerned about how upcoming rules could affect your cash position or payment policies, now is the time to act. Better to get ahead of regulation than scramble to catch up later. Also Read Join our Treasury Community Treasury Mastermind is a community of professionals working in treasury management or those interested in learning more about various topics related to treasury management, including cash management, foreign exchange management, and payments. To register and connect with Treasury professionals, click [HERE] or fill out the form below to get more information. Notice: JavaScript is required for this content.