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 · YTD Mar 2026
Net hire revenue
USD 9.54M
−0.17M vs budget
EBITDA
USD 2.19M
−0.18M vs budget
EBITDA margin
22.9%
Budget 24.3%
Net result
USD 0.06M
−0.18M vs budget
Fleet utilization
93.1%
Budget 94.0% · 50 off-hire days
TCE per on-hire day
USD 14,236
Budget 14,343
Running cost per vessel-day
USD 3,519
Budget 3,507
G&A as % of revenue
6.3%
Budget 6.2%
EBITDA bridge · From budget to actual
Commentary · Generated automatically from the variances
- ▸YTD Mar 2026: EBITDA missed budget by USD 0.18M (-7.5%), at USD 2.19M against USD 2.36M.
- ▸Off-hire days took away USD 0.12M. Main drivers: MT Calypso (+7 days) and MT Aster (+1 day).
- ▸Charter rates took away USD 0.05M. Tanker rates ran above plan (MT Aster +4% TCE), partly offset by weaker dry bulk and offshore contracts.
- ▸Running cost took away USD 0.01M. Largest overruns: lubricants (USD 0.01M) and insurance (USD 0.00M).
- ▸Fleet utilization was 93.1% vs 94.0% budgeted; running cost per vessel-day USD 3,519 vs 3,507.
- ▸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.