You know the drill. A broker pro forma lands with a tidy story, and the T12 shows up in a different format with different line names. You start mapping, reconciling, and checking the math just to get to a clean variance view. The drag is not the thinking, it is the setup. By the time the accounts line up and the deltas are calculated, most of your time has gone to mechanics instead of judgment. Underwriting ~5 min to run Compare Broker Pro Forma to T12 Vic prompt Use Vic to compare this broker pro forma against the T12 for the 185,000 sf suburban office asset in Reston. Purpose Reveals unsupported income or expense items before they reach the investment memo. Replaces roughly 75 minutes of manual cross-checking with a 5-minute review. Inputs Offering Memorandum Required T12 Statement Optional Outputs An Excel workbook with mapped lines, variances, flags, notes, and opex ratios, plus a concise in-chat summary of the most aggressive broker assumptions. Time saved Replaces roughly 75 minutes of manual cross-checking with a 5-minute review. How it works Upload the offering memorandum and the T12. The task maps both statements to a common chart of accounts, then calculates dollar and percent variances by line. Each line gets a flag: Reasonable, Aggressive, Conservative, or Unsupported, with short notes that explain the call. Run it with: Use Vic to compare this broker pro forma against the T12 for the 185,000 sf suburban office asset in Reston. You get an Excel workbook that is ready to send around. It includes mapped lines, variance columns, flags, and notes, plus an operating expense ratio summary. In chat, you also get a tight readout of the most aggressive broker assumptions so you can focus your follow ups. What changes in practice First, you get a clean comparison without hand mapping. Brokers label the same concept ten different ways. The task standardizes revenue, reimbursements, and operating expenses so you can compare like to like. That alone cuts a lot of noise. Second, the flags force a view. Instead of a wall of numbers, you see where the projection stretches versus the trailing twelve months. Big positive rent or other income deltas are called out. Expense cuts that drive margin expansion are surfaced with context. If a line has no support in the T12, it is marked Unsupported so it does not slip into your base case. Third, the opex ratio summary gives a quick check on the shape of the deal. If the pro forma assumes a lower expense load than the property has shown, you will see it right away. That is often where optimistic underwriting hides. Where it fits in your process Use it right after first pass screening and before you draft the investment memo. It also helps ahead of calls with the broker. The in chat summary points to the assumptions worth pressing on, so you can spend time on explanations instead of hunting for variances. For investment committee prep, the workbook is clean enough to attach or pull exhibits from. The flags and notes read like analyst comments, not raw formulas, which helps non modelers follow the logic. What to watch This compares to the T12. It is not a forward looking market study. A line flagged Aggressive is a prompt to investigate, not a verdict. Lease up, mark to market rent, and known expense resets can justify gaps. The value is that the gaps are explicit and documented. If the T12 is incomplete or messy, upload what you have and note the gaps. The mapping still brings structure, and Unsupported flags show where you need backup. The net effect is simple. You spend your time on judgment and questions, not on building a bridge between two spreadsheets. The bridge shows up ready to use.