MoraeSpend Intelligence
Financial Services edition

Explain the variance before cutting rates

Group outside-counsel budget, FY28 planning · model matter commitments before requesting more budget
Scenario · not an approved planSave scenario for GC review
$640.0M
Approved budget
$652.6M
Current expected annual cost · 3,420 matters × $191K expected cost
—
modeled
—
Unresolved gap after modeled actions
Why the plan changed
Variance decomposed from matter-level data; volume forecast from Legal Tracker
DriverContributionImpact
Original plan · 3,000 matters × $200,000
$600.0M
Regulatory matter volume · 46 extra inquiries × $200K
Conduct and prudential inquiries up 18%
+$9.2M
Deal volume · 6 extra deals × $1.4M
Corporate development pipeline
+$8.4M
Rates · 3,420 × $2,900
Rate card increases, 8.6% at top-20 firms
+$9.9M
Staffing leverage · 3,420 × $1,800
Partner share drift at Firms K and P
+$6.2M
Settlements and AFAs
Early resolution on 12 matters
−$21.1M
Expected annual cost$652.6M
Management implication. Matter and deal volume explain $17.6M; rates and leverage explain $16.1M, which is where negotiation and covenants work. Rate holds and leverage covenants at the top-20 firms address half the gap; the rest is volume to fund.
Model available actions
Overlaps removed before totals · tick to test
$3.1M
$2.4M
$1.8M
$4.2M
Selected actions—Overlapping benefit removed—Net modeled reduction—Unresolved gap to fund or accept—
These are assumptions to test. Provider capacity, matter quality and exceptions can change the result; each action becomes a decision record with an owner, a baseline and a follow-up date once saved.
Forecast range before actions: $628M–$684M (p10–p90 from matter-arrival and deal-pipeline simulation; not a point estimate)
Inspect comparable firmsOpen phase comparisonsM&A pipeline