Published: June 2026
A feasibility is a model of a project that has not happened yet. The financial problems of small to mid-scale Sydney developers almost never live in the feasibility; they live in the gap between the feasibility and the actuals at month nine, and in the stretch of time where costs are certain, settlements are not, and the facility covenants do not care about either. This is a different finance problem from the one builders face, which is why this page exists separately from our construction virtual CFO guide. Builders manage progress claims and WIP. Developers manage capital through time.
For a developer running one to four concurrent projects in the $5M to $50M gross realisation range, the finance function has four jobs: keep the live feasibility honest against actuals, manage cash between facility drawdowns, hold the project inside its covenants, and time equity so the next project is not starved by the current one. Most small developers run all four jobs in the original feasibility spreadsheet, updated occasionally, which is roughly like navigating with the map you drew before you left.
The instrument that fixes this is not a better feasibility. It is a project cashflow model that reconciles to the feasibility, updates monthly against actuals, and shows the founder the cash position week by week through to settlement, the developer's version of the 13-week cashflow forecast, extended across the project timeline.
Take a hypothetical 14-unit infill project in Sydney's inner west. The feasibility showed gross realisation of $19.6M, total development cost of $16.1M, and a development margin of 17.9%. Eighteen months in: a six-month approval delay added holding interest, two trades repriced between feasibility and contract, and a design change pushed construction cost up $840,000. Sales are tracking 2.5% under feasibility pricing on the back half of the building. The live margin is now 11.3%, and the founder is making decisions, on the next site, on whether to hold or discount the remaining stock, against a number seven points stale.
None of those movements is unusual. The failure is not that the margin moved; it is that no document in the business showed it moving. A feasibility-versus-actuals bridge, rebuilt monthly with documented variances, is the first artefact we build for most developer engagements, because every other decision keys off it. It is the same discipline our unit economics build applies elsewhere: the real margin, fully loaded, at the unit that matters, which for a developer is the project and then the unit within it.
Presales de-risk the facility, not the developer's cash. Between exchange and settlement, a developer carries certain outflows (construction draws fund most but rarely all of cost, plus interest capitalising, consultants, marketing, land tax) against revenue that arrives almost entirely in one settlement window, the timing of which is hostage to registration, valuations, and purchaser finance. A project can be profitably presold and still cash-starve its developer for the final two quarters.
The model has to show this stretch explicitly: the equity locked in the project, the week-by-week funding of cost-to-complete beyond facility coverage, the realistic settlement curve (not "all 14 units settle in week one of registration"; somewhere between 60% and 85% settle inside the first month in a normal market, with the tail running for months), and the sensitivity of all of it to a one-quarter settlement delay. Developers who have lived through one valuation shortfall round at settlement do not need convincing; the model exists so the founder sees the squeeze two quarters before it arrives rather than two weeks.
Small to mid-scale developers in 2026 are funded across a spectrum from major banks to private credit, and the covenant structures differ, but the standing requirements rhyme: presale debt cover, loan-to-cost and loan-to-value limits, cost-to-complete certifications, interest cover on the back end. Two finance disciplines decide whether the facility is an asset or an ambush.
First, covenant headroom modelled forward, not checked in arrears. The model should show projected covenant positions monthly through to settlement under base and downside cases, so a looming breach is a negotiation held early from a position of preparation rather than a default event managed late.
Second, financier-grade reporting. A developer who delivers a clean monthly pack, cost report against feasibility, sales and settlement status, covenant positions, cash position, gets pricing, extensions, and flexibility a developer with a shoebox does not. This is the developer's version of the board reporting pack: the few numbers that decide things, produced reliably, with the detail in appendix. Where the work is credentialed matters; ours is led by a Chartered Accountant (CA ANZ), which financiers and their valuers notice.
Revenue recognition deserves one technical note. Under AASB 15, most Australian residential developers selling completed lots recognise revenue at settlement, not progressively, so the P&L tells the founder almost nothing for the life of the project and then everything at once. This is precisely why developer finance runs on the cashflow model and the feasibility bridge rather than the income statement, and why an accountant-only finance function leaves a developer flying blind between settlements.
Most Australian virtual CFO providers would put a developer on a monthly retainer. We are one of the few project-based virtual CFOs in Australia, and development is the industry where the fixed-scope structure fits most naturally, because the work itself is project-shaped. The 90-Day Number is $17,850 plus GST, fixed fee, with one named deliverable on day 90. For developers it is typically the project cashflow model with the feasibility-versus-actuals bridge built in, structured so your team updates it monthly without us. The financier reporting pack is the usual second engagement, or something your team builds off the first.
On day 90 you have the number: the live margin, the cash trough, the covenant headroom, week by week to settlement. Where the engagement sits against retainers and a full-time hire is covered in the cost of a virtual CFO in Australia; past three or four concurrent projects or roughly $25M of standing revenue, the full-time hire question is the better one to ask, and we will say so.
What does a virtual CFO do for a property developer?
Builds and maintains the instruments a feasibility cannot provide once the project is live: the feasibility-versus-actuals bridge, the project cashflow model through to settlement, forward covenant monitoring, and financier-grade reporting.
How is developer finance different from builder finance?
Builders manage progress claims, retention, and WIP on contracted revenue. Developers manage capital through time: equity, facility draws, holding costs, and a revenue event concentrated at settlement. Different instruments, different risks.
Why does my P&L look empty until settlement?
Under AASB 15, most residential developers recognise revenue at settlement rather than progressively. The income statement is structurally silent through the project, which is why the cashflow model and the feasibility bridge carry the decision load.
Do presales solve the cash problem?
They support the facility, not your cash. Between exchange and settlement the developer still funds the gap between facility coverage and total cost, while settlement timing carries registration, valuation, and purchaser finance risk. The model has to show that stretch explicitly.
What should a developer report to their financier monthly?
Cost against feasibility with variances explained, sales and settlement status, projected covenant positions, and the cash position. Clean monthly reporting is worth real money in pricing and flexibility over the life of a facility.
What does the 90-Day Number deliver for a developer?
One named deliverable at $17,850 plus GST, typically the project cashflow model with the feasibility-versus-actuals bridge, documented and handed over so your team runs it monthly. Fixed scope, day 90, led by a Chartered Accountant (CA ANZ).
At what scale does a developer need a full-time CFO?
Typically past three or four concurrent projects or roughly $25M of continuing revenue, or wherever capital activity becomes constant. Below that, project-based CFO work plus a disciplined internal bookkeeping function is the standard structure.
Can you work alongside our development manager and quantity surveyor?
Yes, and the model depends on it. The QS cost report and the DM's program feed the actuals side of the bridge; the finance layer turns them into margin, cash, and covenant positions the founder and financier can act on.
Sydney Virtual CFO is a Sydney-based virtual CFO service for founders running $3M to $15M businesses across SaaS, ecommerce, professional services, construction, and other low-volume, high-value industries. We deliver fixed-scope CFO engagements with a named deliverable on day 90: a 13-week cashflow forecast, a fundraise-ready financial model, a unit economics build, or a board reporting pack you can run on your own.
Our front-door product, the 90-Day Number, is fixed scope at $17,850 plus GST. We are one of the few project-based virtual CFOs in Australia, in a market built almost entirely on monthly retainers. No retainers without a deliverable. No 80-page reports. No theatre.
Visit Sydney Virtual CFO | The 90-Day Number | Book a Call
This content is general information only, written for Australian founders running businesses in the $3M to $15M revenue range. It does not constitute tax, financial product, investment, or legal advice and should not be relied on as such. The work referenced is led by a Chartered Accountant (CA ANZ), but Sydney Virtual CFO is not a licensed tax agent, not a licensed financial adviser, and not authorised to provide personal financial advice. Tax obligations, accounting treatments, fundraise terms, and statutory requirements depend on your individual circumstances. For advice specific to your business, contact the team directly or consult a registered tax agent, licensed financial adviser, or qualified lawyer. Information was current at the time of publication and may change without notice. We review and update guides periodically.
