An underwriter who cannot trace a number cannot rely on it. Model architecture is credibility infrastructure.
Open a weak feasibility model and the tell is immediate: numbers typed into formula cells, the same rate entered eleven places, a pro forma that cannot be flexed without breaking. The lender-grade alternative is architectural: every input lives once, on an Assumptions tab; every other cell is a formula or a link; and the visual convention announces which is which — in Wert-Berater models, blue font for inputs, black for formulas, green for links. An underwriter can flex any assumption and watch the entire model respond, which is the whole point of giving them a model.
The standard Wert-Berater package runs thirty-seven or more linked tabs covering the complete analytical battery: ten-year pro forma, sensitivity at ±5/10/15 percent, rate stress to +3.0 percent, Monte Carlo, discounted cash flow, ratio tables benchmarked to RMA data, and an Altman Z-Score trajectory — each ratio table carrying its own narrative so the reviewer understands the figure without reconstructing it.
Model audit is part of production, not an afterthought: a multi-point check covering formula integrity, link continuity, circularity, and cross-tab reconciliation, run before any model ships. The discipline pays for itself the first time a committee member changes one assumption and the determination’s arithmetic holds visibly together.
Borrower-built spreadsheets, whatever their arithmetic, fail the independence requirement — and usually the architecture test in the same hour. The model is not paperwork around the study; for the financial dimension, the model is the study.
Independent feasibility studies since 1998 — 4,000+ engagements, $40.2 billion in evaluated project value. Standard delivery in 10 to 15 business days. Fiduciary duty to the lender and agency.