Skip to main content

Scoring in Street Diligence

How does SD score agreements and concepts?

Updated over 9 months ago

Overview of SD's scoring system

Street Diligence provides an enhanced ranking system that offers end users the ability to measure the strength of their documents against other documents, their portfolio, and our Credit Consortium database. It can be used to provide a clear indicator of whether the document's terms are more favorable to a certain party in the transaction. You can find this analysis on the Term Summary tab in the document analysis page.

The scores range from the numbers 0 to 10. The higher the score is, the more favorable that document is to Party A. However, if the score shows a lower number it would be more favorable to Party B. An example of this would be when referring to a Credit Agreement, Party A is the Lender and Party B is the Borrower.

The agreement scores are calculated by averaging the pool of concepts that we have measured holistically.

Each agreement will have three scores:

  1. Agreement Score

  2. Agreement Company Score

  3. Agreement Consortium Score

Let’s use an example where our agreement received the following scores:

  1. Agreement Score of 2.95

  2. Agreement Company Score of 4.45

  3. Agreement Consortium Score of 5.25

Agreement Score

The agreement score is the weighted average of all concept scores, which is the numerical value attached to each particular term or tag captured in the document.

The way that we determine our concept scores is by creating an internal reference portfolio. This contains ideal agreements that are generated by our experts here at Street Diligence. When we receive a new agreement from a client, each concept value is compared to this reference portfolio in order to populate what we then call our concept score.

Note: In our example, the agreement received a score of 2.95/10 which indicates a more borrower-friendly deal.

Agreement Company Score

The agreement company score is a great way for end users to gain insight into how a specific document (or instrument) compares to everything in their portfolio. This number is calculated by taking the average Agreement Score of each related document uploaded by Street Diligence users within the company. If you looking at a US Credit Agreement, this number will only show you the average of all other US Credit Agreements uploaded by your company.

For public documents, you will see a N/A for this field as this is only relevant for company-submitted documents.

Note: In the example at the top, the agreement company score received a 4.45/10 which indicates a neutral stance against other company-submitted documents.

Agreement Consortium Score

The last score you will see under the term summary is the agreement consortium score. This number will only appear if your company is subscribed to our consortium. The consortium is a pool of aggregated, anonymized private loan data. This is a great way to gauge where the deal sits within the competitive landscape compared to similar deals submitted to Street Diligence. Similar to the agreement company score, the agreement consortium score will only show the average score of documents within the Credit Consortium similar to the document in view.

Note: In our example, the agreement consortium score received a 5.25/10 which indicated a neutral stance against the data within the consortium.

Ranked Terms

Street Diligence will showcase the best and worst lender terms within your agreement within the ‘Ranked Terms’ section of the Term Summary tab. Based on how the terms were scored, these will be populated here.

The best lender terms will show any term where the prevalence is greater than 75% and the concept scored higher than a 6.0.

The worst lender terms will show any term where the prevalence is greater than 75% and the concept scored less than 4.0.

Filtering by Concept Scores

Using the filters within the Term Analysis tab, you can not only get a view of how the concepts are distributed across the agreement (i.e., more borrower vs. lender-friendly), you can filter your concepts by how they scored. Type in your desired range on a scale of 0-10 to view the terms relative to the scores you would like to see within your agreement. You can also filter by the prevalence, borrower favorability, neutral favorability, and/or lender favorability.

Frequently Asked Questions

What do the colors of the agreement scores mean?

  • 🔴 Red indicates the agreement leans borrower-friendly. This is in the range from 0-3.99.

  • 🟡 Yellow indicates the agreement is neutral. This is in the range from 4-5.99.

  • 🟢 Green indicates the agreement leans lender-friendly. This is in the range from 6-10.

What if our company doesn't subscribe to the consortium?

If your company hasn't opted into the consortium and you would like to hear more about this, please email sales@streetdiligence.com.

How can the scoring system be used?

Each aspect of the score has a slightly different value added to your workflow. The agreement score is a great way to quickly gauge if your document and the terms within it are more favorable to one party in a transaction.

The agreement company score provides insight into how your company's documents usually perform or rank, and where this instrument sits with respect to that competitive set. Lastly, the agreement consortium score is useful when wanting to take a deeper look at how your submissions measure up to similar documents that have been processed by us.

Ultimately, all of these scores serve as additional information that our users can add to their artillery when evaluating and weighing deal options.

How are the concept scores populated?

Each concept score is designed to combine the existence and the value of a given term. For example, from a lender's point of view, they would prefer a restricted payments basket to be as small as possible. However, the lender would prefer it even more if the basket did not exist. The concept score seeks to reflect this intuition in a single number.

As an example, imagine a deal that had a very small general restricted payments basket, such as 1% of EBITDA. This value is smaller (more lender-favorable) than pretty much any other value we see. However, if 70% of deals do not contain any general restricted payments basket, this small basket is still worse than those 70% of deals. Therefore, this concept would be scored in approximately the 70th percentile, which corresponds to a concept score of 3 out of 10.

Did this answer your question?