Loading...

Stressed assets · 7 min read
By the time an account is formally classified SMA, the underlying stress has usually been building for months. Here is what tends to show up first.
SMA classification is a formal, rules-based trigger tied to overdue days or overdrawal against drawing power. But the underlying financial stress that eventually produces an SMA classification almost always shows up earlier, inside the business's own numbers and in small changes in how the bank engages. Recognising these signs early gives a business the widest set of options, since responses that are entirely realistic at this stage — renegotiating supplier terms, requesting a limit review, tightening receivable collection — become far harder once the account is formally flagged.
One of the more easily missed signs is a gradual narrowing of gross or operating margin while revenue itself still looks healthy or even growing. A business chasing volume to cover rising input costs, or discounting more heavily to retain customers in a competitive patch, can show a strong topline for several quarters even as the underlying economics quietly weaken. By the time this shows up as an obvious profitability problem, the cash flow strain has often already been building for two or three quarters — which is exactly why a margin trend, not just a revenue trend, is worth tracking on its own.
Individually, each of these behaviours has an innocent explanation — a relationship manager who is simply thorough, a routine policy update requiring more frequent statements across all accounts, a broader bank-wide tightening unrelated to your specific file. This is precisely why they are easy to dismiss one at a time. What is worth watching for is the combination: several of these showing up together, within a short period, is a considerably stronger signal than any single one taken in isolation.
A simple habit worth adopting is noting each of these interactions briefly as they happen — a short log of unusual requests or questions from the bank — rather than relying on memory. Reviewed together after a quarter, a pattern that felt like a series of unconnected, minor incidents in the moment can look very different once laid out chronologically, and this record is also useful evidence to bring into any later conversation about a limit review or restructuring request.
| What you notice | What it may indicate |
|---|---|
| Utilisation consistently above 90% of sanctioned limit | The current limit may no longer match the actual operating cycle, or cash generation has weakened |
| Receivable days rising steadily over three or more quarters | Collection discipline or customer creditworthiness may be deteriorating |
| Bank asking for more frequent stock statements | Internal monitoring flags may already be active on the account |
| Statutory dues paid later than in previous cycles | A genuine liquidity crunch, often one of the most reliable early indicators |
Some of the most useful early warning signs sit outside a business's own financial statements entirely. A sustained slowdown across an entire industry segment, a major customer showing its own signs of stress, or a key supplier tightening credit terms across the board can all point to trouble arriving before it shows up in your own receivables or margins. Keeping half an eye on how peers and key counterparties in your own supply chain are doing is a simple, low-cost complement to reviewing your own numbers, and can sometimes give a longer lead time than internal metrics alone.
A quarterly self-review catches most of this early
A simple quarterly review of utilisation trends, receivable ageing, and DSCR — even done in-house with a basic spreadsheet — surfaces most of these warning signs well before a bank's own monitoring flags them. The businesses that manage stress most effectively are usually the ones that noticed it themselves first.
A steady business with a quietly lengthening receivable cycle
A mid-sized industrial supplier has stable revenue and a loyal customer base, but over eighteen months its average collection period has stretched from around forty-five days to over seventy, largely because two large customers have quietly extended their own payment cycles. Cash credit utilisation creeps upward as a result, even though the business itself has not changed. Recognising this trend from its own ageing report — rather than waiting for the bank to notice tightening utilisation — gives the business time to renegotiate terms with those customers and, if needed, discuss a limit review with the bank from a position of clarity rather than crisis.
Questions
Not necessarily — utilisation naturally rises during a seasonal peak or a genuine growth phase. What is worth watching is utilisation staying consistently high without a corresponding seasonal or growth explanation.
Generally yes, if you are seeing early signs internally. Most lenders respond more constructively to a borrower who raises a concern proactively than to one identified only through the bank's own monitoring.
Sometimes, if the underlying cause is genuinely a limit that has not kept pace with a growing operating cycle. But if the cause is deteriorating receivable quality or falling profitability, a larger limit alone will not resolve it and may simply delay the underlying problem.
Look at whether the cause is specific and time-bound — one delayed customer payment, a one-off cost — versus broader, such as a genuine shift in demand or margin compression across the industry. A structural cause generally needs a different, more substantial response than a temporary one.
It can, both directly through penalties and interest, and indirectly, since lenders increasingly cross-check GST filings against declared financials as part of ongoing monitoring. Prioritise clearing statutory dues promptly wherever possible.
Questions
Related offerings
Keep reading
Share a few details and our team will follow up.