FP&A · Budget control
Actual vs budget
Monthly budget control for Northwind Shipping (fictional), an 8-vessel fleet of tankers, bulk carriers and offshore supply vessels. Actuals are closed through Sep 2026. All names and figures are synthetic; the structure mirrors a real budget-control model I ran in shipping.
Key figures · Mar 2026
Net hire revenue
USD 3.03M
−0.12M vs budget
EBITDA
USD 0.49M
−0.14M vs budget
EBITDA margin
16.3%
Budget 20.1%
Net result
USD −0.21M
−0.16M vs budget
Fleet utilization
85.9%
Budget 89.1% · 35 off-hire days
TCE per on-hire day
USD 14,242
Budget 14,278
Running cost per vessel-day
USD 3,592
Budget 3,514
G&A as % of revenue
6.7%
Budget 6.3%
EBITDA bridge · From budget to actual
Commentary · Generated automatically from the variances
- ▸Mar 2026: EBITDA missed budget by USD 0.14M (-22.2%), at USD 0.49M against USD 0.64M.
- ▸Off-hire days took away USD 0.13M. Main drivers: MT Calypso (+7 days) and MT Aster (+1 day).
- ▸Running cost took away USD 0.02M. Largest overruns: lubricants (USD 0.02M) and insurance (USD 0.00M).
- ▸Charter rates added USD 0.01M. Tanker rates ran above plan (MT Aster +7% TCE), partly offset by weaker dry bulk and offshore contracts.
- ▸Fleet utilization was 85.9% vs 89.1% budgeted; running cost per vessel-day USD 3,592 vs 3,514.
- ▸Full-year outlook: EBITDA USD 9.33M, below the USD 10.24M budget by USD 0.91M, assuming current rate levels, the wage increase and higher lubricant prices persist through December.
Rule-based: the engine ranks the EBITDA bridge drivers, finds the vessels and cost lines behind each one and writes the sentences. The analyst reviews and edits instead of starting from a blank page.
Synthetic data for a fictional company, for illustration only.