How to Answer “What is circularity in a three-statement model, and how do you solve it?” in Investment Banking Interviews
In investment banking interview prep, “What is circularity in a three-statement model, and how do you solve it?” is a common modelling question because it shows whether you understand how the statements truly link.
Circularity in a three-statement model happens when an output (like interest expense) feeds back through the income statement → cash flow statement → balance sheet and then affects itself again, so the model can’t be solved cleanly in a single calculation pass without a deliberate approach.
What Interviewers Test in Investment Banking Technical Questions
In investment banking technical questions, interviewers use circularity to test whether you can trace cause-and-effect across the full three-statement loop, not just define the term. They want you to identify the usual sources (interest expense, revolver draw/paydown, cash sweep, minimum cash) and explain why the dependency chain creates a calculation problem.
They also test modelling judgement. Some circularity is economically real (interest depends on debt during the period, debt depends on cash flow, cash flow depends on interest). Other circularity is accidental (inconsistent timing, double-counted cash movement, using ending balances where you should use averages). A strong answer distinguishes the two and proposes a clean fix.
Finally, they’re assessing communication: can you give a clear three-statement model explanation that an associate can follow, including how you’d QA the result once you’ve solved it.
Step-by-Step Guide: Solving Circularity in Financial Models
- 1
Step 1: Define the circularity concept in finance and describe the feedback loop
Circularity is a feedback loop where a line item ultimately depends on itself through linked schedules, creating a circular reference. In a three-statement build, you’ll usually see it when the income statement affects cash generation, cash affects debt balances, and debt balances affect the income statement again.
Say the loop in plain English rather than cell references. The classic loop is: interest expense reduces pre-tax income → lower net income changes cash flow → cash flow drives revolver draws/paydowns (cash sweep) → ending/average debt changes → interest expense changes.
Before you “solve” it, confirm it’s intentional and that timing is consistent (e.g., if interest is based on average debt, make sure the debt schedule is built in a way that supports an in-period average rather than mixing beginning/ending logic arbitrarily).
- 2
Step 2: Use the revolver + interest expense example (the analyst-standard circularity)
The most recognisable circularity in investment banking modelling is a revolver linked to cash flow. You forecast interest using a rate times average or ending debt, but the revolver balance itself is determined by whether there’s excess cash to repay debt (sweep) or a deficit that forces a draw.
That means the model is solving two unknowns simultaneously in the same period: the revolver balance and the interest expense. Because interest affects net income and cash flow, it changes the amount available for repayment, which changes debt, which changes interest.
You can mention adjacent loops to show depth without rambling: commitment fees on undrawn amounts, taxes shifting with pre-tax income (changed by interest), and minimum cash constraints that change how much debt can be repaid. This signals you understand understanding circularity in financial modeling beyond one formula.
- 3
Step 3: Solve method A — controlled Excel iteration for true economic circularity
When the loop reflects real economics (especially interest based on in-period debt), the clean solution is to enable Excel’s iterative calculation so the model recalculates the loop until it converges.
In interview terms, explain the mechanics simply: Excel starts with an initial guess, repeatedly recalculates the dependent cells, and stops when changes fall below a tolerance or it hits a max iteration count. In practice, you keep the circularity isolated to the financing block (revolver/interest/cash sweep) so you don’t create unstable circular references across unrelated schedules.
Then emphasise QA: confirm the balance sheet balances, cash rolls forward correctly, the revolver respects constraints (no negative balance; minimum cash enforced), and results converge (no oscillating debt/interest values). This is the “professional” part of how to solve circularity in three-statement models.
- 4
Step 4: Solve method B — break the loop with a transparent timing convention
If iteration is discouraged (reviewability, audit preference, or speed) or the circularity is caused by design rather than economics, you can break the loop with a clear assumption.
Common approaches:
- Interest on beginning-of-period debt (or prior-period average debt). This removes the current-period dependency at the cost of some precision.
- Manual iteration / interest plug: assume interest, run the cash sweep and debt schedule, update interest once or twice until it stabilises.
- Schedule restructuring: ensure the ordering is consistent (operating cash flow → financing cash flows / sweep → ending debt used for next period), which often removes “accidental” circularity.
State the trade-off explicitly: you’re choosing transparency and stability over capturing within-period debt movements perfectly—an acceptable modelling convention when documented.
- 5
Step 5: Validate and explain your decision rule (what you’d do on a live model)
Close your framework with a repeatable decision rule and a quick validation checklist. Decision rule: If the circularity is economically real (interest/debt/cash sweep), I use controlled iteration and check convergence; if it’s reviewer-driven or timing-driven, I break it with a lagged interest convention or a documented plug.
Validation checks an interviewer will recognise:
- Balance sheet balances each period and cash ties beginning to ending cash.
- Revolver logic behaves (no negative revolver; draws only when needed; sweep only when excess cash exists).
- Directionality makes sense: more debt → more interest; stronger cash flow → lower revolver usage.
This turns a definition into a practical, step-by-step guide to circularity in financial models—exactly what analyst interviews look for.
Model Answer: Circularity in a Three-Statement Model
Circularity in a three-statement model is when a line item depends on itself through the links between the income statement, cash flow statement, and balance sheet, so Excel can’t fully solve the model in one calculation pass. The classic example is interest expense: interest reduces pre-tax income and net income, net income drives cash flow, cash flow determines revolver draws or paydowns via a cash sweep, and the resulting debt balance then feeds back into the interest calculation.
To solve it, I first confirm it’s “true” circularity and that the timing is consistent—typically a revolver where interest is based on average debt. If it’s economically real, I enable Excel iterative calculation and keep the circularity isolated to the financing block. Then I check that the results converge and that the model still passes basic QA: the balance sheet balances, cash rolls forward correctly, and constraints like minimum cash and non-negative revolver balances behave as expected.
If iteration isn’t preferred or the loop is caused by modelling design, I break the circularity with a clear convention—most commonly calculating interest on beginning-of-period or prior-period debt, or using an interest plug and reconciling. The key is to be explicit about the trade-off: you gain transparency and auditability, but you may lose some within-period accuracy. In interviews, circularity is a feedback loop (often interest and debt), and you solve it either with controlled iteration or by breaking the loop with a documented timing assumption and solid checks.
- Lead with the definition plus the interest/debt feedback loop—this is the most standard analyst example.
- Give two solve paths (iteration vs. break-the-loop) and state when you’d choose each.
- Mention convergence and QA (BS balance, cash roll-forward, revolver constraints) to show modelling discipline.
- Call out that accidental circularity often comes from inconsistent timing or cash sweep ordering.
Common Pitfalls in Three-Statement Model Explanation
- Defining circularity vaguely without walking through a concrete three-statement loop (interest → NI → cash flow → debt → interest).
- Saying “turn on iteration” but skipping how you control it (isolating the circular block) and how you verify convergence.
- Breaking circularity with a lagged interest assumption without acknowledging the accuracy vs. transparency trade-off.
- Creating circularity accidentally through inconsistent timing (mixing beginning/ending balances, applying the sweep before cash is calculated).
- Letting circular references spread across multiple schedules, making the model unstable and hard to review.
- Forgetting post-fix checks: balance sheet balance, cash tie-out, and revolver/minimum cash constraints.
Follow-Ups Seen in Circularity Concept in Finance Discussions
Where does circularity most commonly show up in a three-statement model?
Most often in the debt schedule: interest expense depends on debt balances, while debt draws/paydowns depend on cash flow that is affected by interest.
If you enable iterative calculation, what do you check afterwards?
That the model converges, the balance sheet still balances, cash rolls forward correctly, and only the intended financing section is circular.
How can you avoid iteration while still keeping the model reasonable?
Use a timing convention like interest on beginning-of-period or prior-period debt, or use an interest plug and manually reconcile until it stabilises.
Why does using average debt tend to create circularity?
Average debt depends on current-period draws/paydowns, which depend on cash flow, which depends on interest—so the period feeds back into itself.
When is circularity a red flag rather than a feature?
When it comes from modelling errors like double-counting cash movements, inconsistent sign conventions, or applying the cash sweep in the wrong order.
Practice Plan for Investment Banking Interview Prep
- Practise a 60–90 second explanation that includes (1) the interest/revolver loop and (2) two solve options.
- Build a small revolver block in Excel and rehearse tracing the loop out loud (interest → NI → cash flow → debt → interest).
- Rehearse a decision rule: iterate for true economic circularity; break the loop with a documented timing convention when iteration isn’t desired.
- Add a QA line to your answer: balance sheet balances, cash ties, and revolver/minimum cash constraints behave.
- On AceTheRound, run a focused mock on investment banking technical questions and ask for feedback on clarity, structure, and whether your explanation sounds “live-model ready.”
Ready to practice with AceTheRound?
Create an account to unlock AI mock interviews, feedback, and the full prep library.