Firms J, K, L, M, N
Recommended firms
Ranked by expected total cost at equal outcome · Conduct inquiries, consumer products, UK, last 24 months · pooled benchmark: this client plus 2 opted-in banks (k ≥ 20)| Rank | Firm | Expected total cost | Range (p20–p80) | Cycle time | No-enforcement rate | Compliance friction | Capacity | Confidence (n) |
|---|
Expected saving vs incumbent on this matter: —If applied as a routing rule for conduct inquiries under $2M: $3.1M/yrOverrides require a reason and feed the model.
Why — ranks first
What would change the answer
- Expected cost above $2.5M: Firm N moves to first (enforcement track record). Try it in the cost field.
- Enforcement-led posture: Firms N and M move up.
- Relationship weight set to high: Firm K stays, with a staffing covenant attached and the override logged.
Panel simulation
Apply this routing to all conduct inquiries under $2M (est. 36 matters/yr):
Expected annual saving$3.1MTime to closure−3 monthsMax firm concentration24%Firms losing volumeK, P