Frequently Asked Questions

Para Bellum works across the full derivatives lifecycle. From first principles hedge and overlay design to novations, unwinds, and restructurings under pressure. The kind of work that consultants are not equipped to deliver and banks are conflicted to advise on.

That includes:

• Hedge Rebuild™ – hedge and overlay design from inception, and redesign of existing structures that have drifted, broken, or were never correctly built.

• Balance Sheet and Capital Efficiency Rebuild™ – releasing trapped capital across collateral, margin, and funding frameworks where the structure is working against the client, not for them.

• Structuring-as-a-Service™  – embedded senior derivatives capability on a retained basis for institutional investment teams and corporate treasury functions that need the expertise without the permanent headcount.

• Derivatives Portfolio Review™ – a targeted diagnostic of existing hedge, overlay, or treasury derivative programmes to surface what is actually leaking value and why.

• Bespoke structuring and transaction support for situations that do not fit a standard frame, including novations, portfolio unwinds, divestments, ISDA infrastructure builds, FX policy frameworks, and derivative programme design for corporate treasury teams.

All work is grounded in live market experience, not frameworks borrowed from a textbook.

Most of what passes for derivatives advisory is not advisory in any meaningful sense. It is documentation review, process management, and RFQ coordination, delivered by former risk managers, accountants, or bank salespeople who understand derivatives conceptually but have never been at the pointy end of designing, pricing, and owning risk exposures.

That is not this.

Mike Duncan has traded derivatives, structured complex transactions, managed risk as a portfolio manager, built pricing models and curve construction tools from scratch, and negotiated ISDA and CSA terms directly with bank legal and pushed back on XVA desks from a position of knowing exactly what the numbers mean and exactly where the bank’s interest diverges from the client’s.

Novations, portfolio divestments, unwinds, restructurings, transitions under market stress. These are not concepts. They are things that have been done, owned, and delivered under real constraints, across multiple asset classes, instrument types and jurisdictions.

Process support has its place. But when the structure is genuinely broken, the instruments are complex, the counterparties are difficult, and the stakes are high, you need someone who has been in the market, knows how the other side thinks, and can price, design, and negotiate from a position of genuine technical authority.

That is what Para Bellum is.

Completely.

No products, no commissions, no referral arrangements with banks, brokers or vendors.

That independence is not incidental. It is the whole point. Every recommendation is driven by what is optimal for the client’s portfolio or balance sheet, not by what generates a fee somewhere else in the chain.

Yes, and this is an area where genuine expertise is rare.

Banks are conflicted counterparties. Law firms focus on legal risk, not capital efficiency. Most consultants have never sat across the table from a bank’s legal and credit team and negotiated terms from a position of knowing exactly how those terms will behave when markets move.

ISDA documentation is notoriously layered. Bank legal teams work from their own templates, which are written for the bank’s protection, not the client’s. Clauses accumulate over successive ISDA updates and rarely get removed. Many are redundant, jurisdiction-specific, or simply inapplicable to the client’s situation. Few clients ever read the full document. Fewer still understand what they have agreed to.

That negotiation experience matters. ISDA and CSA terms are not just documentation. They determine margin behaviour, collateral eligibility, funding costs, and liquidity flexibility across the full life of a derivatives programme. Poor terms do not announce themselves. They trap capital and remove flexibility, often years before anyone notices.

This is particularly relevant for corporate treasury teams setting up their first ISDA framework, and for private credit, infrastructure and project finance teams or asset managers moving away from sole reliance on lending bank relationships and expanding their counterparty panel, where in each case the bank’s starting position is almost always written for the bank’s benefit, not the client’s. Revisiting legacy documentation to rebalance those terms is one of the most consistently high-value interventions Para Bellum delivers.

Private credit funds, infrastructure investors, project finance teams, asset managers, family offices, and corporate treasury teams carrying real capital risk without a full derivatives desk in-house.

The common thread is not the client category. It is the situation: complex exposures, lean internal resources, governance pressure, and a derivatives programme that needs to work harder or be fixed.

The core geographic focus is Australia, Singapore, and Hong Kong, as well as the wider Asia-Pacific region (including Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia). Clients in Europe, the Middle East and North America are supported where there is a clear strategic fit.

Para Bellum does not work with retail clients.

No. Para Bellum does not execute trades or act as a trading counterparty.

That is deliberate. The role is to design, challenge, price, and govern derivative structures while working alongside existing banks, brokers, and counterparties. Clients retain full control of trade execution and counterparty relationships.

What Para Bellum does is ensure the client understands exactly what trades they are executing, why, at what price, and whether the terms are acceptable before anything is agreed.

Yes, and this is one of the most effective ways to engage.

Rather than a one-off review that produces a report, Para Bellum can operate as an embedded structuring desk, available on a retained basis to provide pricing support, transaction design, counterparty negotiation, governance input, and ongoing portfolio and balance sheet oversight.

This works particularly well for teams that need institutional-grade derivatives capability without building a full in-house desk, and for corporate treasury teams that need senior expertise on demand as their derivatives programme grows in complexity.

Fixed-fee or retainer-based, scoped to complexity, instrument types, and outcomes. No time-based billing, no scope creep, no surprises.

Fees are agreed upfront. The incentive is to deliver a result, not to extend the engagement.

Project-based work typically runs two to twelve weeks, depending on scope and complexity.

Retained engagements such as Structuring-as-a-Service are ongoing by design. They function as an embedded capability for as long as the mandate is in place.

All engagements operate under mutual NDAs.

Portfolio, trade, counterparty, and any documentation information is treated as highly sensitive throughout and is never reused, shared, or referenced without explicit permission.

Book an Exploratory Discussion here or email [email protected] directly.

Every engagement starts with an honest assessment of whether the work will actually move the needle. If the value case is not clear, that will be said directly. There is no interest in engagements that do not deliver a measurable result.