capital-allocation-framework
Skill1 starsChanged 20 days agoMITView on GitHub
Ranks competing investments using Net Present Value (NPV), Internal Rate of Return (IRR), payback period, Profitability Index (PI), and strategic option value - then produces a portfolio-level recommendation. Use when evaluating capital expenditure requests; comparing Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) targets; sizing Research and Development (R&D) bets; prioritizing engineering investments; sun-setting initiatives; or preparing a board capital allocation memo.
In this repository41 other files it gives its agents.
- ai-activation-optimizerSkill
- ai-content-quality-gateSkill
- ai-feature-experiment-designerSkill
- ai-launch-playbookSkill
- ai-pricing-margin-modelerSkill
- ai-product-positioningSkill
- ai-search-visibility-optimizerSkill
- agent-autonomy-level-mapperSkill
- ai-failure-state-designerSkill
- ai-usability-test-plannerSkill
- ai-ux-auditSkill
- human-in-the-loop-designerSkill
- prompt-surface-designerSkill
- uncertainty-and-explainability-patternsSkill
- ai-agent-financial-analystSkill
- burn-rate-runway-plannerSkill
- dcf-valuation-builderSkill
- financial-statement-analyzerSkill
- saas-cohort-analyzerSkill
- competitive-response-modelerSkill
- mechanism-design-plannerSkill
- nash-equilibrium-solverSkill
- negotiation-strategistSkill
- repeated-game-strategistSkill
- ai-decision-engineSkill
- ai-product-strategySkill
- ai-stakeholder-translatorSkill
- customer-interview-synthesizerSkill
- jobs-to-be-done-extractorSkill
- opportunity-solution-treeSkill
- product-discovery-coachSkill
- product-roadmap-prioritizerSkill
- blue-ocean-strategy-canvasSkill
- go-to-market-strategySkill
- gtm-engineeringSkill
- market-sizingSkill
- okr-cascade-plannerSkill
- porters-five-forces-analyzerSkill
- pricing-strategy-analyzerSkill
- strategic-landscape-mapperSkill
- swot-tows-analyzerSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 54
Profitability Index (PI): - use this, not NPV, when capital is rationed (ranks correctly per dollar invested).
- Distinctive: line 131
Use PI when capital is constrained
- Distinctive: line 138
Treat strategic projects as exempt from NPV
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Capital Allocation Framework
A disciplined process for ranking competing investments and producing a defensible capital plan.
What this skill is
An end-to-end framework that combines quantitative return metrics - Net Present Value (NPV), Internal Rate of Return (IRR), payback, Profitability Index (PI) - with strategic option value and execution risk scoring. It surfaces the efficient frontier of investments, flags portfolio-level concentration risk, and produces a one-page memo a Chief Financial Officer (CFO) or board can actually approve.
What it solves
- Ranking by IRR alone (which is scale-blind) instead of NPV
- Comparing projects of different durations without an Equivalent Annual Annuity (EAA) adjustment
- Treating "strategic" projects as exempt from financial discipline
- Approving full capital up front for unproven initiatives (no stage gates)
- Ignoring the option value of follow-on investments
When to invoke
- Annual operating plan or capital expenditure budgeting cycle
- Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) target ranking when multiple deals compete for the same capital
- Sun-setting decisions across a product portfolio
- Trade-offs between Research and Development (R&D), marketing, and infrastructure investment
- Pre-board preparation for any material capital deployment decision
Phase 1: Inventory the opportunity set
Catalog every competing use of capital - including do-nothing, share buyback, dividend, and debt paydown:
| ID | Initiative | Sponsor | Ask ($M) | Horizon | Reversibility |
| 1 | [name] | [team] | $X | 3 years | Two-way / One-way |
Reject any submission missing sponsor, horizon, or success metric.
Phase 2: Financial returns
Net Present Value (NPV) - primary metric:
NPV = Σ FCFt / (1 + r)^t − initial investmentwhere FCFt is the Free Cash Flow (FCF) in period t and r is the discount rate. Use the Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) adjusted by project risk class (consumer versus enterprise, mature versus early-stage, geographic).
Internal Rate of Return (IRR) - flag multiple-IRR pitfalls for projects with interim negative cash flows.
Payback (undiscounted and discounted) - liquidity and execution-risk lens, not a primary ranking metric.
Profitability Index (PI) - use this, not NPV, when capital is rationed (ranks correctly per dollar invested).
Equivalent Annual Annuity (EAA) - required when comparing projects with different lifespans:
EAA = NPV × r / (1 − (1 + r)^−n)Phase 3: Strategic option value
NPV undervalues optionality. For each project, value each option type:
| Option type | Question | Driver |
| Expand | Does success unlock follow-on? | Decision tree or real-options model |
| Abandon | Can we kill cheaply on failure? | Limits downside |
| Defer | Can we wait for better information? | Volatility input |
| Switch | Can the asset be repurposed? | Salvage or alternative-use value |
| Scale | Are unit economics replicable across markets? | Multiplier |
Express each as a dollar range, even if rough.
Phase 4: Risk adjustment
For each project:
- Scenario analysis: 10th-percentile (P10), median (P50), and 90th-percentile (P90) NPV
- Sensitivity tornado on top 5 drivers
- Monte Carlo simulation (≥ 1,000 trials) when inputs have known distributions
- Probability-of-success weighting for Research and Development (R&D) or venture-style bets
Decision rule: if the P10 NPV is negative, the project requires an explicit downside mitigation plan.
Phase 5: Execution risk scoring
Score each project 1-5 on each dimension:
| Dimension | Weight |
| Team capability | 20% |
| Time-to-impact | 15% |
| Dependency risk | 15% |
| Capital flexibility | 15% |
| Strategic clarity | 15% |
| Competitive urgency | 10% |
| Cultural fit | 10% |
Multiply the weighted score × NPV → risk-adjusted value.
Phase 6: Portfolio view
Rank opportunities and plot the efficient frontier:
| Rank | Initiative | NPV | PI | Risk-adjusted NPV | Option value | Cumulative capital |
| 1 | [name] | $X | x.xx | $Y | $Z | $X |
Draw cumulative capital versus cumulative NPV. The kink is the optimal capital envelope. Cross-check for:
- Concentration risk (any bet > 25% of total ask?)
- Time-bucket balance (under 2 years / 2-5 years / 5+ years)
- Capability cluster (stacking too many bets on one team?)
- Strategic theme balance (aligned with the 3 stated priorities?)
Output
- Ranked initiative table with NPV, PI, risk-adjusted value, and option value
- Efficient-frontier chart with recommended capital envelope
- One-page memo: what's funded, what's deferred, what's killed - and why
- Capital flex scenarios (+20% / −20%) with what changes
- Stage-gate triggers for the top 3 bets
- Pre-mortem for each top-3 initiative
Operating rules
Always
- Include "do nothing" as an option
- Show every input that produced the NPV
- Apply project-specific WACC, not blended
- Use PI when capital is constrained
- Quantify option value, even approximately
- Stage-gate large bets
Never
- Rank by IRR alone
- Compare different-horizon projects without EAA
- Treat strategic projects as exempt from NPV
- Hide downside scenarios
- Approve full capital up front for unproven initiatives
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

