In order to answer this question I would need additional information. They both have and advantage and disadvantage, you would have to pick which one has less risk for you. I think to answer I would need to know more background information such as the atmosphere of the company and of the project. If I know that there could be similar products being developed by other companies than it might be better to be ahead of schedule and a little over budget. If the people I report to for my project are more focused on saving money than I would rater my CV be positive and my SV be negative. Depending on what is more important for the project would dictate which I try to make negative or positive if I can't have them both be positive. I don't think that either of those situations are better than the other if I was ignoring all other factors and deadlines.

I think cdj24 makes a really good point to think about the company. When thinking of how to answer, I was leaning more towards the idea of having a negative CV and a positive SV, as I think it would be better to be slightly over budget, yet ahead of schedule. Not that you would want to cut back on future costs, but it at least gives you the option, right? Plus being a ahead of schedule lets you focus more on the project. I think that if you're behind schedule, you might make jumps or look for shortcuts.
However, considering cdj24's comment, if the business is focused on saving money, or rather a start up with little funds from the get go, then having a negative CV would not be a good idea (though I am disregarding the behind schedule part).
I think it would be best to keep them both positive so if one becomes negative then you should stop back and take a minute how to fix it as appropriately as possible.

Like cdj24 mentioned, it's hard to say which situation is better without knowing the context of the project and the company. Ideally, having a positive SV and CV is preferred but that's not always possible. If the schedule is flexible to allow some variance while keeping the project under budget, this is not the worst case scenario. If the budget is flexible to allow some variance while keeping the project ahead of schedule, this situation is also not too bad. So it depends on the nature of the project and where the PM has decided to allow room for variance in to determine the success of the overall project.

As the above posters have said, I agree with them. There can be instances where one or the other being positive can workout for the benefit of the company. However, making that choice without knowing company culture, project projection, the budgets, the timelines, what the product is, etc., can be a tough choice to make.
For instance, if I was in a large company that had a larger budget, I would rather have positive SV because their goals might be to have more products on time, even if they go slightly over-budget. On the other hand, let's saying that I am an aspiring entrepreneur, I might be okay with a negative SV because my budget might have no give at all. It really depends on what you're working with and what you are willing to sacrifice.

As mentioned before it is clearly necessary for more information to be given, but off the concept of the question it would matter more on the company. Larger companies would most likely be more concerned about the schedule variance as they most likely have a budget that could sustain additional cost. Smaller companies would most likely be more concerned about the cost variance. They are running on smaller funds and go over budget could sink a company before it even starts. Start ups do have to worry about meeting a schedule due to worry about market changes, but they most likely have smaller work forces and expect schedules to suffer a long a project. Obviously, these are all strong assumptions and would really depend more on the environment and ethics of the company.

This raises a good point. I agree with the above comments that it ultimately depends on the company. A small company can't afford to go over budget, so in that case a positive cost variance and negative schedule variance would be preferable. Another point that I believe is important that no one mentioned is how much variance we are talking about. Is the variance minor and won't have a large impact on the company? Or is it a major variance that can lead to the project being shut down? I think this is another factor that must be taken into account when deciding what type of variance (CV or SV) is preferable.

In project management there is a concept known as the triple constraint. The three constraints are cost, time, and scope. The idea being if you want to for example broaden the scope of the project, you would also need to increase cost or time so as not to sacrifice quality. If you wanted to shorten the timline of a project you would need to increase cost or decrease scope. When I look at the examples given above, neither is worse than the other but it depends on the priorities triple constraint held by the company who is responsible for the projects. If a company is very cost sensitive, going over budget would be worse that being behind schedule. If missing a launch date for a project will significantly impact it's success, then we would want to add resources (cost) to make sure it meets the deadline.

The way this question is stated isn’t clear and concise. The reason being is we have no information i.e(as mentioned before) about the project(s). We do not have an substantial information to qualitatively answer this question. However, I would take the second project because the cost variance is positive, a positive value means yours under budget meaning you have excess money which is great! And a negative schedule variance means yours not on the schedule. With this being said its unlikely to have negative SV and have a positive CV because if you're not on the schedule this could mean you will need to spend more money in order to keep the project going i.e( paying over time, need more materials, people are taking vacations).

SV and CV are two essential parameter in earned value management and helps to analyze the project. If both are positive means project is progressing well but if one of the variance is negative then some corrective action are needed to bring the project back on track. I would prefer the project with CV positive and SV negative because this means that the project is under budget . Exceeding the planned budget is bad for you and also for stakeholders. Organization are sensitive towards any deviation from cost baseline that can effect the project specially when contract is price fixed and they have to put more money to complete the project. Negative SV doesn't always means that project is behind the schedule in terms of target data at that moment. There are some delays and schedule have high probability of delay in future .Some activities are consuming the float of schedule and more activities tends to be critical. Sometime the project team is less efficient in utilizing the time allocated to project. To fix the problem effective risk management should be used . Sometime negative SV can be controlled by using critical path method.

In my opinion I think in a general sense it is better to have negative SV paired with a positive CV. My reasoning goes like this, if you are on a project that is behind schedule with a negative SV but for the work you've completed your CV is positive I think you are in a more favorable position. You can work harder to correct your scheduling issues and catch up while possibly holding on to your positive CV. It is much harder to "unspend" money than it is to plan and negotiate a better scheduling situation. In another case you can just spend more money trying to catch up, neutralizing your SV and CV at the same time. I do agree with the above statements about Risk vs. Reward and changing your focus based on your company's goals.

If I had to choose between the two possible cases I myself would go with scenario 2. It is better to be behind schedule but under budget, than ahead of schedule and over budget. I say this because you can always work harder or get more people to work on the project if you have the money to spare, rather than being behind schedule and over the amount you can afford for the project. However, there is always an aspect that your CV may increase in order to catch up to where you should be. In a way, CV and SV factor into one another. Either way though it always better not go over your budget, unless you know for a fact that this project will cover to expenses you made that caused you to go over budget.

I believe it depends on how negative the SV is, and how close the team is to completing the project. If a negative SV was calculated closer to the beginning of the project, there is still enough time to speed up the process and catch up. It will be concerning however, if the SV was very negative near the end of the project with the deadline quickly approaching. In the latter scenario where the team is almost finished, I would choose to have a positive SV over positive CV.
If the team isn't close to the deadline, I would rather have a positive CV to make sure the team isn't being wasteful and overspending. It will be difficult to try and garner more funding once the original budget is set in stone. If the company doesn't have any more money to funnel into this project, the team will need to convince stakeholders to invest more. This can lead them to lose interest and withdraw their involvement, causing the project to be dropped.

I believe that depending on the situation and how negative the values of SV and CV are it would be justified to select any of the situation. However, I would choose the option 2 where the SV is negative and the CV is positive. This is because having a Negative CV would mean going over budget as planned for the project. This can somehow be overcome in the initial phase by working extra hours on the project till it matches the deadline as set. Having a Negative CV would mean going over budget which would require a lot of process as it would mean increasing the budget of the project which means involving a lot of trouble. Like said above if the project is almost at its completion then having a negative SV would be a concern.

I'd disagree jb678. It really depends on how much it would cost. Being behind schedule costs money, just as being over budget. Being behind schedule might cost just as much if not more. As said before we would really need more information. Whichever saves more money is the best solution. Being over budget but ahead of schedule might give you gains that counteract the excess spending. Being behind schedule might be counteracted by being under budget. It all depends on the circumstances.