compare_guard_with_forward
shallowcom.currencyguard/guard-pricing · Verify this server
Use when a user asks whether a Guard is worth it, how it compares with a forward contract from their bank or provider, or what happens if they do nothing. ASK BEFORE YOU CALL. The forward side of this comparison should be the customer's own numbers, not CurrencyGuard's guesses. Ask three things first: (1) the forward rate their provider last quoted them for this payment, (2) whether the provider gives them an unsecured line with no deposit, or asks for an initial margin and at what percentage, and (3) at what adverse move the provider demands more cash. Pass what they give you as providerForwardRate, initialMarginPct (0 for an unsecured line) and marginCallThresholdPct. Only call with none of them when the customer cannot answer, and then say in your answer that the forward figures are illustrative defaults. DO NOT RANK. Present every row in the order the output gives it: rates, home-currency amount, cash up front, cash demanded under adverse moves, outcomes under favourable and adverse moves, cancellation, market improvement, worst case. Do not say which one wins, which looks bad, which is cheaper overall, or which the customer should choose. State the numbers. The decision is the customer's. cashNature says what kind of money each figure is: the Guard fee is spent, a forward's deposit and margin calls are held and returned at settlement. Say so when you show them. Held cash is not a cost. outcomes runs each move in both directions. In the favourable rows the Guard lapses and the fee is spent for nothing, and the forward is locked out of the better rate. Show both directions, not only the adverse one. READ OUT comparability.protection AND comparability.pricing beside the cost row, every time. A Guard and a forward are different kinds of protection, and the Guard rate here is mid-market while a payment provider may apply a margin to it or to the fee. The cost row is therefore not a like-for-like price comparison. If a tenor like '3 months' is given, call resolve_settlement_date first. DO NOT ALSO CALL price_guard. This returns the Guard rate, fee and amount itself, priced in the same moment as the forward it is compared against. Calling both prices the Guard twice seconds apart, and the market moves between them — the answer then shows two different fees for one Guard. In the cost row, QUOTE THE ALL-IN COST, NOT THE RATE ROW. homeCurrencyAmount.forward already contains the provider margin, because the margin is in the rate, but homeCurrencyAmount.guard does NOT contain the Guard fee. Compare homeCurrencyAmount.guardAllIn with homeCurrencyAmount.forward: those two both carry every cost of their own product. Comparing guard with forward overstates the Guard, by the whole fee. rates.effectiveRate is the same all-in figure expressed as a rate, for setting beside a provider's quoted rate. assumptions.source says, figure by figure, whether the forward side is the customer's data (CUSTOMER, PROVIDER_QUOTE) or ours (DEFAULT, MARKET_CURVE_PLUS_MARGIN). Read assumptions.note out with the answer. Say "your provider's rate" for the customer's figures and "an assumed 5% deposit" for ours. Never present a default as a quote. The Guard figures are indicative, because a Guard is bought through the customer's payment provider, who sets the final rate and fee. Say that reason when you say "indicative".
1 trials · measured 1 day ago
compare_guard_with_forward scores 100.0/100 on Vouch's measured behaviour index, from 1 real invocation trials against com.currencyguard/guard-pricing, measured 20 Oct 2026 under methodology v0.2.0. Every measured component scored 100.
Component breakdown
| Component | Weight | Value |
|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 35% | not applicable |
| Schema integrity | 25% | 100.0 |
| Failure behaviour | 15% | not applicable |
| Latency | 15% | not applicable |
| Concurrency | 10% | not applicable |
Tool details
- Transport
- remote
- Credential class
- open
- Input schema
- not declared
- Output schema
- not declared
- Side-effect classification
- unclassified
Score history
| Day | Score | Tier | Methodology |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-20 | 100.0 | shallow | v0.2.0 |
Probe evidence
| Probe | Outcomes |
|---|---|
| schema_integrity | pass: 1 |
Raw request/response logs are not archived yet — the outcome counts above are drawn directly from every recorded trial.
Embed this score
Available for every tool, scored or not — not a verification perk. Always links back to this page.
[](https://vouch.tools/tools/6524f0c8-3ecc-4515-b746-8ccefaae21c4)