Master Trust Warehousing and Funding Plan

[Orangemaple23]

Hello,

Thank you for adding Funding plans and Bond groups! It opens up so many new possibilities.

I'm having some issues trying to get both of these new features working at the same time. I had a look at the Warehousing notebook you made but I'm still having a few issues. I've attached a jupyter notebook showing the example deal structure. Do you have any tips/help to assist? Thanks in advance! I am using local lib:0.28.10, server:0.28.13

warehouse_example.zip

[yellowbean]

I think I can locate the issue.

("servicing_fee",{"type":{"annualPctFee":[("bondBalance","A"),0.01]}})

The bond group balance can't be queried via "bondBalance" so far.
Let me fix it

[yellowbean]

It may take 1 or 2 days

[yellowbean]

warehouse_example_0714.ipynb.zip

Hi @Orangemaple23

I've fixed this issue at with https://absbox.org/api/dev ( version 0.28.14 )

The notebook I've attached contains the logic to back out the fees.

Let me know anything I can help further & Cheers

[Orangemaple23]

Hi @yellowbean Thank you for making the changes and for the help!

I have noticed one more thing when it comes to fees, it would be good if there was the possibility of having multiple formulas within the fees for the fee types.

For example I've noticed that a fee defined like below is not allowed:

"uncommited_fee":{ "type": { "annualPctFee": [("-",("originalBondBalance", "A"),("bondBalance", "A"),),0.01], "feeStart": "2024-02-21"}, },

Would this be possible to add?

[yellowbean]

"uncommited_fee":{ "type": { "annualPctFee": [("-",("originalBondBalance", "A"),("bondBalance", "A"),),0.01], "feeStart": "2024-02-21"}, },

I can confirm current the "compound type" formula doesn't work in current 0.28.14 ,
the formula supported is here:

Hastructure/src/Deal/DealAction.hs

Line 194 in 5285450

baseBal = case feeBase of

it always possible to include compound type formula, but the complexity is how to maintain a concise syntax easy for human memory and instinct.

The tricky part is ,engine can't just call a generic query on ("bondBalance","A") ,because ("bondBalance","A") means a snapshot of balance of A, but ("bondBalance","A") under fee type context, it refers to a weighted average balance of A.

Allow me to think about it ..

[yellowbean]

@Orangemaple23

I've release 0.28.15 which aims to resolve the coupond formula on weighted average type formula.

Here's the notebook to back out the values.

warehouse_example_0731.ipynb.zip

here is couple observations from the notebook:

• the notebook is using default key in the waterfall. Actually, user can set different keys like revolving and amortizing . Then the engine will choose revovling if current deal status is revolving. In this way , then the ["IfElse" ,["status","Revolving"] can be removed.

• The fee is being paid by two accounts:
  ["calcAndPayFee","collections_interest",["technology_fee","structuring_fee","security_fee"]]
["calcAndPayFee","collections_principal",["technology_fee","structuring_fee","security_fee","servicing_fee"]]

  It looks like, the deal is try to pay fees with collections_interest first, if there is shortfall ,then use cash from collections_principal.
  There is a short cut to do that:
  ["calcAndPayFee", {Account}, [<Fee>], {'limit':<limit> , 'support':<supports>}]

  ["calcAndPayFee", "collections_interest", [ Fee1, Fee2...], {'support':["account","collections_principal"]}]

  it will use collections_interest to pay fee first ,if there is any shortfall, it will draw cash from collections_principal