Not as an estimate — as a measurement. Vectus quantifies uncertainty where today only assumptions exist: one integrated platform converting jurisdiction risk, airline distress, asset liquidity, deal structure and portfolio exposure into a single dollar-denominated credit decision.
Every institution financing aircraft faces a gap between what it knows and what it needs to know to commit tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. Vectus exists to shrink that gap.
A lender assembling a deal today receives appraisals, legal opinions, airline credit analysis and market data from independent providers. Each solves one piece. Nobody integrates everything into one coherent, defensible credit decision.
Mapping enforcement outcomes across hundreds of repossession events shows that every failure falls into one of three types — each with a completely different risk profile and a completely different mitigation strategy. The platform quantifies all three.
The modules are not separate products. They are layers of one architecture: four measurement engines feed one integration layer, which drives two decision engines — ending in a single number, in dollars, with a recommendation.
JES — the Jurisdiction Enforcement Score — is a 0–100 measure of what actually happens when a financier tries to recover an aircraft in a given country. It answers the three questions a legal opinion cannot: how long will recovery take, what will it cost, and what fraction of value will survive the process. Everything in aviation credit ultimately depends on this — which is why JES is the foundation the platform is built on. Scores are derived from 250+ documented enforcement events, not from legal frameworks.
Every score ships with a confidence rating, the event evidence behind it, and the enforcement timeline it implies. Full jurisdiction coverage is delivered to clients only.
Every factor has an economic explanation, a measurement methodology, a weighting rationale and validation evidence. Dimension weights, factor calibration and the integration formula are proprietary — disclosed to clients under NDA as part of the methodology documentation. The reasoning is always explainable: a credit officer can challenge any score and receive a documented answer.
The methodology is back-tested out-of-sample against documented enforcement events — every case scored using only the information available before the event. Not a fitted curve.
The model has never called EXTREME what turned out to be MINIMAL, or vice versa — across sovereign seizures, insolvency moratoria and voluntary administrations. The small number of near-misses are documented and disclosed to clients: each represents genuine enforcement ambiguity, not model failure. External validation by industry practitioners is the current objective — the methodology is built to be challenged.
"Vectus quantifies uncertainty where today only assumptions exist."
Not selling a subscription. Looking for practitioners in aviation finance who will stress-test the platform against a real deal — and tell us where it's wrong.