Investment Banking and Finance Skills with a 100% Placement Guarantee

Fictional case: A fictional company reports revenue of INR 100 crore and a 12% operating margin. Forecast 10% revenue growth with the same margin. Compare enterprise values at illustrative multiples of 8 and 10 times forecast operating profit. No cash-flow statement or peer evidence is supplied.

1. Calculate forecast revenue and operating profit; show formulas and units.
2. Compare both illustrative enterprise values and explain the sensitivity.
3. Write a provisional research note separating supplied facts from assumptions and missing evidence.

Sample review: Revenue: INR 110 crore. Operating profit: INR 13.2 crore. Illustrative enterprise values: INR 105.6 crore and INR 132 crore. These are invented multiples, not a market valuation or investment recommendation.

Self-review rubric: Calculation accuracy 40; assumptions and sensitivity 25; research evidence and limitations 20; written explanation 15. Total: 100.

AI verification: If you use AI for a draft, independently recalculate every figure and remove invented peer multiples, sources and recommendations. Retain your changes.

Fictional case: In a fictional business onboarding file, the application names Signatory Role C while the submitted mandate names Signatory Role D. A credit request has no supporting cash-flow statement. No authorised resolution or credit approval has been provided.

1. List the conflicting signatory records and the missing credit evidence.
2. Keep observed facts, open questions and next actions in separate columns.
3. Draft a handoff asking the authorised reviewer to resolve the conflict and confirm the required evidence.

Sample review: The signatory conflict remains unresolved. Request an authorised mandate clarification and the missing financial evidence. Do not approve onboarding or credit, classify a customer as suspicious, or treat an AI draft as a decision.

Self-review rubric: Evidence and completeness 35; conflict identification 25; escalation and authority 25; written handoff 15. Total: 100.

AI verification: Use only synthetic records. Check any draft against each source; remove unsupported risk labels, compliance conclusions and approval language.

Fictional case: Two fictional payment records contain these reference/amount pairs (INR): gateway P101/1000, P102/2500, P103/900; ledger P101/1000, P102/2000, P104/700. These are separate comparison records, not instructions to post an adjustment.

1. Compare reference and amount in Excel. Check row counts, totals and unmatched references.
2. Record each exception, its evidence, an owner to confirm and the next check.
3. Prepare an MIS summary and explain why the net difference does not resolve the individual exceptions.

Sample review: P101 matches. P102 has an INR 500 amount difference; P103 appears only in the gateway and P104 only in the ledger. Totals are INR 4400 and INR 3700: a net INR 700 difference with three exceptions. Preserve the originals and escalate; do not net away or silently adjust the breaks.

Self-review rubric: Matching and completeness 35; exception evidence 30; control judgement 20; MIS and communication 15. Total: 100.

AI verification: Verify AI-generated formulas against a manual match and control totals. An AI explanation must not invent a settlement status or resolve an unverified break.