TDD tells you the condition of the asset. PIRV tells you the condition of the position.
Technical due diligence is necessary. It is not sufficient.
A standard TDD will assess the physical and technical condition of an asset, compliance and permitting status, and cost-to-complete estimates. What it does not reach — and is not designed to reach — is the commercial exposure, contractual position drift, governance integrity, and cash flow risk that sit beneath the technical surface.
These are the risks that convert a technically sound asset into a commercially exposed investment. PIRV — Pre-Investment Risk Visibility — is the assessment layer that covers what TDD leaves exposed.
THE TDD GAP — what technical due diligence covers, and what it leaves exposed.
TDD is built around physical and technical assessment. The commercial and contractual condition of the project at the point of investment falls outside its scope by design. Investors who rely on TDD alone are making a capital allocation decision based on half the picture — the half that is easier to assess, not the half that determines financial outcome.
Unresolved commercial exposure · Contractual position drift · Governance and cash flow risk.
COMMERCIAL EXPOSURE — where financial risk actually sits at the point of investment.
Cost-to-complete estimates rarely capture unresolved commercial exposure. Variations that were instructed but not formally valued, claims that were absorbed rather than challenged, and contract gap exposure that has not yet crystallized into a formal dispute — these are the items that convert cost estimates into liabilities at the point of acquisition or drawdown.
Unresolved variations · Disputed claims · Contract gap exposure.
CONTRACTUAL POSITION — whether the contract still protects the investor, or has drifted from it.
A contract that was well-drafted at signing may no longer reflect the project being delivered. Notice obligations may have been missed. Variation entitlement may have been eroded through informal instruction. The contractual position at the point of investment may be materially weaker than the contract document suggests — and that weakness transfers with the asset.
Notice compliance · Variation entitlement · Entitlement status.
GOVERNANCE INTEGRITY — whether the project is being run with the discipline a financeable asset requires.
Governance gaps compound silently. Authority structures that are unclear, reporting that is inconsistent, and escalation paths that do not function under pressure are structural risks — not operational inconveniences. They surface at the wrong moment: at drawdown, at dispute, or at exit.
Authority structures · Reporting reliability · Escalation clarity.
CASH FLOW INTEGRITY — whether projected cash flows reflect contractual reality, or operational assumption.
Liquidity pressure is usually visible in the contract long before it appears in the accounts. Payment mechanism misalignment, retention exposure, and final account risk are contractual realities that financial modelling frequently absorbs as assumptions rather than risks — until the project tests those assumptions.
Payment mechanism alignment · Retention and final account · Liquidity pressure points.
TDD tells you the condition of the asset.
PIRV tells you the condition of the position.
—
For investors, developers, and project owners, commercial and contractual exposure is often visible before it becomes financial distress.
ACC TRUST supports pre-investment assessment by identifying unresolved exposure across commercial position, contractual control, governance integrity, and cash flow logic.
Explore ACC TRUST services or contact us to discuss how Pre-Investment Risk Visibility can support your investment decision.