Five real runs, start to finish
What went in, what came back and what it changed for the desk. Each one is a run on a real address or a real package: our own benchmarks and sample files, with names removed where a package came from someone else.
01 · Investment firms
A 1925 Miami Beach multifamily, from the address alone
- The question
- No seller package yet. Is the building worth a model, and what should the model start from?
- What we were given
- The address.
- What came back
- Year 1 NOI of $171,703, a 4.29% going-in cap rate at the last recorded sale, and a 12-sheet workbook with live formulas.
- What it changed
- The model starts from dated figures, and the desk goes into the first seller call with four questions already written: the unit count (21 or 26), the lien flag, the zoning letter and the recertification.
- RecordTwo records disagree21 or 26units on record
- Underwrite$171,703Year 1 NOI
- CheckNeeds review4red flags
Underwriting
Ready for your model
- Year 1 NOI
- $171,703
- Going-in cap rate
- 4.29%
- Last recorded sale
- $4,000,000
- Units on record
- 21 or 26
- Workbook
- 12 sheets
4 red flags for your reviewOpen the workbook →
about 58 minutes · median of 44 production runs, 30 days to 18 October 2026Run on 4 October 2026 on a real address, as a benchmark. Not a client deal.See the worked example →
02 · Lenders
A 50-unit loft conversion: which part of the NOI the file supports
- The question
- The broker’s in-place NOI looked rich. Credit needed to know how much of the lift the seller’s own documents support.
- What we were given
- The broker OM, the January rent roll and the trailing twelve months.
- What came back
- A lender NOI of $517,544 against the broker’s $614,475, line by line, each figure with its page or cell.
- What it changed
- The $147,595 a year between the broker’s in-place NOI and the trailing actual is laid out line by line: insurance, maintenance and contract services are cuts the T-12 does not support. How much of it a loan carries stays the credit team’s call.
- Tie outAgree
- CompareGap+$147,595a year
- Underwrite$517,544a year
Bottom line for credit
The gap is in the pro forma
- T-12 actual NOI
- $466.9k
- Titleman lender NOI
- $517,544
- Broker in-place NOI
- $614,475
Insurance, maintenance and contract services cuts not supported by the T-12Open the sample file →
about 58 minutes · median of 44 production runs, 30 days to 18 October 2026From a real loan package. Names removed, every money figure scaled by one factor; ratios unchanged.Open the sample file →
03 · Developers
A fire-damaged retail lot: what may be built, and how much fits
- The question
- What may legally be built on the lot under today’s rules, and does a redevelopment pencil?
- What we were given
- The address.
- What came back
- Floor area ratio binds at 31,500 SF on a 21,000 SF lot; height and setbacks alone would allow 82,000 SF. A test scheme of 26 homes over shops, and a workbook in which the land value moves when an input changes.
- What it changed
- Capacity is set by floor area, not height: a scheme drawn to the height limit would be about 2.6 times too large (82,000 ÷ 31,500).
- Height82,000SF
- FARBinds31,500SF binds
- Scheme26homes over shops
Feasibility
Floor area binds, not height
- Lot
- 21,000 SF
- Buildable, FAR binds
- 31,500 SF
- Height would allow
- 82,000 SF
- Test scheme
- 26 homes
A demolition permit is applied for and not issuedOpen the sample file →
about 27 minutes · median of 76 production runs, 30 days to 18 October 2026From a real lot. Street and owners removed; depth and money scaled, areas and ratios unchanged.Open the sample file →
04 · Deal Review
Six files on their way to committee, every item checked
- The question
- A development package was going to the investment committee. Do the OM, the model and the memo agree with each other and with the market?
- What we were given
- Six files: the OM, the feasibility model, the memo and three more.
- What came back
- 1,788 figures, formulas and statements checked, 876 formulas recomputed by code, 14 cross-file checks: 6 red flags and 46 items to review, marked on a copy of the files, in about 78 minutes.
- What it changed
- The memo says 74 units per acre, the model says 100. That is caught before committee, together with every figure built on the wrong one.
- Recompute876recomputed
- Tie out14checks
- FlagCan change the decision6red flags
Deal Review
Nothing left unchecked
- Checked
- 1,788
- Formulas recomputed
- 876
- To review
- 46
- Red flags
- 6
Density is 74 u/ac in the memo and 100 u/ac in the modelOpen the marked copy →
Delivered in about 78 minutes, end to endOur test case: a six-file development package reviewed in October 2026.How Deal Review works →
05 · Signals
Texas loans coming due: a refinancing list for a brokerage
- The question
- Which commercial loans in Texas mature in the next 24 months, and on which buildings, before anyone else calls the owner?
- What we were given
- The territory and the window.
- What came back
- 260 loans maturing in 24 months, 76 of them in Houston, $4.5 billion coming due.
- What it changed
- A call list with the property, the balance, the maturity date and the owner on every row, refreshed every week.
- Scan260loans
- Metro76loans
- Balance$4.5Bin 24 months
Signals
Your refinancing list
- Loans maturing
- 260
- In Houston
- 76
- Coming due
- $4.5B
Each row: the property, the balance, the maturity date and the ownerOpen the list →
Client deals are published only with the client’s written permission.
Bring the next deal on your desk
On a demo we run one of your own deals, the kind your desk sees every week, and walk through what comes back.
Request a demo