Obligor group

Concentration limits exist to cap exposure to a single point of failure. If a parent company files, its subsidiaries usually stop paying together, so measuring each subsidiary separately understates the real risk. Most agreements therefore define the obligor to include affiliates, and the concentration test runs at the group level. The same logic often extends to eligibility tests such as cross-aging: some agreements evaluate the past due percentage across the whole group.

Measured individually, every account passes a 10 percent limit comfortably. Grouped, Northwind is 17 percent of the pool and $2,800,000 becomes excess concentration. The five accounts might have different names, different bill to addresses, and different account numbers in the ERP, which is exactly why grouping gets missed.

• Legal entity data: parent and subsidiary relationships from corporate registries or entity identifiers such as LEIs, where available.
• Name and address matching to catch the same entity spelled three ways across billing systems.
• The agreement's own definition: some documents group on majority ownership, others on common control, and some carve out entities like franchisees that share a brand but not credit risk.
• Change tracking, because acquisitions and divestitures redraw group boundaries midway through a facility.

Field exams routinely find ungrouped affiliates, and the resulting restatement is rarely in the borrower's favor. Olycor maintains obligor group mappings as governed data: proposed matches are surfaced for review, approved groupings apply deterministically to every calculation, and each group level number decomposes back to the accounts and invoices inside it. When your lender asks how Northwind got to 17 percent, the answer is on screen.