Reservoir control and financial risk management share strong similarities. The principal task in each is to reduce the risk of negative impacts from variable inflows (either hydrologic flows or cash flows), through the use of a buffer stock (either a reservoir or a reserve fund) that is filled in times of abundance and drawn down in times of scarcity (Figure 1). Other risk management tools may also be used to limit the impact of low-flow periods, but at a cost (e.g., water desalination or demand management for streamflow deficits, and borrowing or financial hedging for cash flow deficits). In both cases, the manager must make decisions under an array of uncertainties, and may need to navigate tradeoffs between conflicting objectives (e.g., flood control vs. water supply for reservoir control, risk vs. cost for financial risk management). And in both cases, as systems dynamically evolve, managers will have to adapt to new information as it becomes available. In other words, reservoir control and financial risk management can be formulated as very similar Markov Decision Processes (MDPs) (Bertsekas, 2019;Powell, 2019), whether managers attempt to solve this problem explicitly, using programmatic approaches such as stochastic dynamic programming, or implicitly, relying on expert specified rules. Additionally, reservoir control and financial risk management are strongly interdependent activities for water-reliant organizations in the Food-Energy-Water Nexus, such as hydropower producers, municipal water utilities, and irrigation districts (Cai et al., 2018;D'Odorico et al., 2018;Scanlon et al., 2017). Such organizations rely on water for the provision of services, and as a result, their revenues and/or costs can be highly dependent on hydrologic inflows (Blomfield & Plummer, 2014;Larson et al., 2012). This suggests that an understanding of complex water resource system dynamics can be used to better characterize and adaptively manage financial risks borne by water-reliant organizations.