SECTION 1 - INVESTMENT BANKING

Banking

For: IB coverage / M&A / capital markets analysts & associates

Precedent-transactions screen + adjusted-multiples framing

You need a defensible set of precedent M&A deals for a target and a clean read on what buyers actually paid.

Copy & paste into your own LLM · open in archive →

You are an M&A associate building a precedent-transactions analysis for a target I describe: [TARGET, sector, size, geography]. Produce:
1. A TABLE of candidate precedent deals (columns: acquirer, target, announced date, deal value, EV/Revenue, EV/EBITDA, % premium, strategic vs financial buyer, rationale). Include only deals you can name a real basis for; where a figure is not provided to you, write "verify".
2. A short note on which deals are the TIGHTEST comparables and why (size, business model, cycle timing).
3. A CLEAN-vs-ADJUSTED flag per multiple: which are distorted by synergies, control premia, or one-time items and should be normalized.
4. The 2-3 questions to resolve before quoting any multiple to a client.

Rules: Do not invent, estimate, or extrapolate any figure — if a number is not in what I give you, write "not provided" and flag it. Mark every claim I should verify externally before relying on it. Never use, infer, or request material non-public information (MNPI) or client-confidential data.

Why it works: Precedent screens live or die on comparability and on separating clean multiples from control/synergy noise — this forces both, plus a verification step so no headline multiple is quoted blind.

Useful? 👍 Yes👎 No

SECTION 2 - SALES & TRADING

Sales & Trading

For: S&T desk (color / flow / risk) + client-facing sales

Morning desk-color note from overnight moves

You need a tight, client-ready morning color note synthesizing overnight action for your coverage.

Copy & paste into your own LLM · open in archive →

You are a sales-trader writing a MORNING desk-color note for [asset class / coverage]. I will paste overnight moves, headlines, and levels. Produce:
1. A 2-3 sentence TL;DR of the overnight setup and the one thing that matters most today.
2. A bulleted MOVES section (what moved, by how much, and the likely why — label speculation as speculation).
3. A WHAT-TO-WATCH list (data, events, levels) with times where relevant.
4. A short positioning/flow read framed as observation, not advice.
Keep it desk-voice: concise, specific, no filler. Do not fabricate a level, a print, or a flow — if I did not give it to you, leave it out.

Rules: Do not invent, estimate, or extrapolate any figure — if a number is not in what I give you, write "not provided" and flag it. Mark every claim I should verify externally before relying on it. Never use, infer, or request material non-public information (MNPI) or client-confidential data.

Why it works: Desk color is judged on signal-per-word and honesty about what is fact vs read; this enforces a tight structure and labels speculation, so the note is credible and fast to skim.

Useful? 👍 Yes👎 No

SECTION 3 - INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT

Investment Management

For: Buy-side analysts & PMs (research / theses / portfolio)

Earnings-call transcript signal map

You have a transcript and want the buy-side signal — tone shifts, what changed, what was dodged.

Copy & paste into your own LLM · open in archive →

You are a buy-side analyst extracting SIGNAL from an earnings-call transcript. I will paste it. Produce:
1. WHAT CHANGED vs prior guidance/tone (3-5 specific items, with the quoted line as evidence).
2. WHAT WAS UNSAID or dodged: questions deflected, metrics no longer disclosed, hedged language — quote the source line.
3. A TABLE of the KPIs that matter for this name: prior vs current vs your read.
4. The 3 things to VERIFY in the filing before you trust the narrative.
5. Net SO-WHAT for the thesis in 2 sentences.
Quote the transcript for every claim. Do not infer a number that wasn't stated; write "not disclosed" instead.

Rules: Do not invent, estimate, or extrapolate any figure — if a number is not in what I give you, write "not provided" and flag it. Mark every claim I should verify externally before relying on it. Never use, infer, or request material non-public information (MNPI) or client-confidential data.

Why it works: Buy-side edge on calls is in the delta and the dodge, not the summary; forcing quoted evidence and a 'what to verify' step keeps the read honest and thesis-relevant instead of a bland recap.

Useful? 👍 Yes👎 No

SECTION 4 - CROSS-CUTTING

Financial Analysis & Modeling

For: All roles — IB modeling, IM valuation, S&T scenario work

DCF assumption interrogation + sensitivity map

You have a DCF and want the assumptions stress-tested before you trust the output.

Copy & paste into your own LLM · open in archive →

You are a skeptical senior analyst reviewing a DCF for [COMPANY]. I will paste the key assumptions (revenue growth, margins, capex, working capital, tax, terminal growth, WACC, horizon). Do this:
1. Interrogate each assumption in a TABLE: is it internally consistent, consistent with history, and consistent with the industry? Flag any that look aggressive or conservative and why.
2. Identify the 2-3 assumptions the valuation is MOST sensitive to (the value drivers) and estimate the direction/size of the swing.
3. Sanity-check the terminal value as a % of enterprise value and flag if it dominates.
4. Recreate the exact questions a PM/MD would ask, with your suggested answer.
Use only the numbers I provide; where an input is missing, request it rather than assuming.

Rules: Do not invent, estimate, or extrapolate any figure — if a number is not in what I give you, write "not provided" and flag it. Mark every claim I should verify externally before relying on it. Never use, infer, or request material non-public information (MNPI) or client-confidential data.

Why it works: A DCF's answer lives in 2-3 assumptions and its terminal value; forcing a consistency check plus a sensitivity ranking exposes where the valuation is really being made and pre-empts the review questions.

Useful? 👍 Yes👎 No

SECTION 5 - CROSS-CUTTING

Pitch & Presentation

For: All roles — IB pitchbooks/IC memos, IM idea write-ups, S&T client notes

Pitchbook page narrative + exhibit plan

You have a message for a pitchbook page and need the storyline plus the right exhibits to prove it.

Copy & paste into your own LLM · open in archive →

You are an IB associate designing a pitchbook PAGE. The message I want to land is: [state the single takeaway]. Context: [deal/client]. Produce:
1. An ACTION TITLE for the page that states the conclusion, not the topic (<15 words).
2. The 2-3 supporting POINTS that prove the title, in logical order.
3. An EXHIBIT plan TABLE: for each point, the chart/table that proves it, the data it needs, and the source to verify.
4. What to CUT — anything that doesn't serve the one takeaway.
Do not invent data for the exhibits; mark every figure as a fill-in to verify.

Rules: Do not invent, estimate, or extrapolate any figure — if a number is not in what I give you, write "not provided" and flag it. Mark every claim I should verify externally before relying on it. Never use, infer, or request material non-public information (MNPI) or client-confidential data.

Why it works: A pitch page should make one argument with an action title and exhibits that prove it; forcing the takeaway-first structure and an exhibit-to-point mapping is exactly how MDs want pages built.

Useful? 👍 Yes👎 No

Which section is most useful to you this week?

One tap — it shapes which prompt leads next week.

What would you like to see more of?

Prompt of the Week (Pro)

This week's bonus: a 'comps table builder' that turns a peer set into a formatted trading-comps grid with the multiples flagged as clean vs adjusted. Pro members get the full prompt in the archive.

Your searchable archive

Every prompt we’ve shipped, organized by section and task.