Financial Model Review
Problem
A model can look polished and still be dangerous. This skill reviews whether the assumptions, structure, scenarios, and logic are strong enough to support a real decision.
Audience
- Primary: investors, diligence teams, and finance-heavy reviewers
- Secondary: operators reviewing planning or fundraising models
When to Use
- Reviewing a startup, deal, or operating model before using it in a memo or decision
- Stress testing growth, margin, burn, or pricing assumptions
- Looking for missing scenarios, broken logic, or false precision
- Translating a spreadsheet into a model review memo with clear verdicts
When Not to Use
- Building a model from scratch
- Market or competitor research without a model artifact
- Drafting the final memo when the model review is only one input: use
deal-memo-drafting - Synthesizing many mixed source documents: use
research-synthesis
Required Context
Gather or confirm:
- the model itself, or a faithful export of its assumptions and outputs
- what decision the model supports
- the business model and revenue engine
- the main value drivers or operating levers
- the time horizon
- whether the user wants an investor or operator framing
Useful but optional:
- prior versions, management guidance, or historical notes from Open Brain
Process
- Frame the review.
- State the decision the model is being used for.
- State whether the standard is investor-grade, board-grade, or internal planning.
- Identify the model shape.
- Revenue model, cost structure, cash runway, valuation, scenario design, and outputs.
- Review assumptions.
- Look for unsupported growth, margin leaps, pricing optimism, CAC efficiency, churn stability, and timing shortcuts.
- Review structure and logic.
- Flag missing drivers, circular reasoning, hidden hard-codes, inconsistent periods, or unsupported roll-forwards.
- Review scenarios.
- Check whether the model includes downside cases, key sensitivities, and break conditions.
- Convert the review into judgment.
- Distinguish fatal issues, caution flags, and acceptable simplifications.
- Optionally use Open Brain.
- Search for prior model assumptions, earlier reviews, or management claims.
- Capture the final review memo or most important flags after completion.
Evidence and Judgment Rules
- Prefer model evidence, historicals, source data, and management guidance over opinion.
- Do not pretend to verify formulas you cannot see. Say what is visible and what is not.
- Label unsupported assumptions as unsupported, not wrong by default.
- Call out where a model is useful for direction but not defensible for high-stakes precision.
- Always note missing scenarios if the downside case is absent or weak.
- Separate structural risk from business risk.
Output
Default output:
- review objective and overall verdict
- key assumptions under pressure
- structural and scenario red flags
- what the model is good enough for
- what must change before the model supports a stronger decision
Works Well With
competitive-analysiswhen market benchmarks should inform assumption realismresearch-synthesiswhen the review needs source-backed contradiction handlingdeal-memo-draftingwhen the final deliverable needs an economics or risk section
Notes
- This skill reviews what exists. It should not quietly turn into model building.
- The best outcome is a more decision-useful model, not a longer spreadsheet critique.