You get the OM, skim the pro forma, and something feels off. Rents look a touch high, expenses a bit too clean, but proving it means rebuilding the whole thing against the T12. That rebuild eats time. You map line items, normalize categories, calculate variances, then write up what is aggressive versus reasonable. It is repetitive work and it still has to be right. Underwriting ~5 min to run Compare T12 vs. Broker Pro Forma Vic prompt Use Vic to compare this broker pro forma against the T12 for the 185,000 sf industrial asset in Phoenix. Purpose Replaces 75 minutes of manual scrubbing with a 5-minute output that surfaces unsupported income or expense projections before they reach the investment memo. Inputs Offering Memorandum Required T12 Statement Optional Outputs An Excel workbook with mapped line items, variance columns, flags, and notes, plus an IC-quality chat summary of the most aggressive broker assumptions. Time saved Replaces about 75 minutes of manual scrubbing with a roughly 5 minute output. How it works Give Vic the offering memorandum and, if you have it, the trailing T12. The task maps both to a common chart of accounts so you are not comparing mismatched categories or buried line items. Then it builds an Excel workbook that puts the two views side by side with dollar and percent variances for each line. Run it with a simple command: "Use Vic to compare this broker pro forma against the T12 for the 185,000 sf industrial asset in Phoenix." The output is built for underwriting, not for show. Each line includes the broker's stated justification pulled from the OM where available, plus a flag: Reasonable, Aggressive, Conservative, or Unsupported. You also get an opex ratio summary so you can see whether the expense story holds together at the property level, not just line by line. The Excel matters because you can audit it. Mapped line items, clean CRE number formatting, and consistent categories mean you can trace any variance back to the source. If something looks off, you are not guessing where it came from. The chat summary is a quick read for IC. It calls out where the broker is stretching, especially on income and expenses that move the story. Instead of rewriting your own notes, you start with a tight list of the biggest gaps between pro forma and actuals. What this catches in practice Income lines that jump without support in the OM, flagged as Unsupported instead of sliding through. Expense cuts that look neat in aggregate but break once mapped to a standard chart, flagged as Aggressive. Items where the broker is conservative relative to the T12, useful when you need to defend a deal. Category mismatches that hide variance, fixed through consistent mapping before comparison. This does not replace judgment. It gets you to the point where judgment matters faster. You still decide whether an aggressive assumption is defensible for your plan. The task makes sure you see it clearly and early. If you have been doing this in a scratch Excel with manual mapping, the difference shows up right away. The first pass comes back in about five minutes with a structure you can trust. From there, you spend time on the call, not on cleanup.