logoalt Hacker News

intendedtoday at 5:33 AM2 repliesview on HN

How’s that been in practice ? From what I’ve been following - Claude in finance results in models with errors that an analyst won’t make.

You get models that are formatted and structured and which balance - but there are errors introduced which an analyst / human wouldn’t make.

Stuff like hard coded values, or incorrect cell logic which guarantees the model balances.


Replies

balderdashtoday at 11:29 AM

Just my experience, it’s not a solution but rather a productivity tool. I mostly use it for tasks I can do myself but it would probably take 20-30min to dial in - now Claude can do it in 2-3min. (E.g. in a data table - add a new column that checks column a if the data is a, do x, if the data is b, do y, if the data is c, do z - then combine that with the word after the hyphen in column b —- or another example —- create a new sheet that is the same format as sheet one but show calculates the difference between column a and b bot for sheets 1-12 in a summary)

I don’t get good results when I just have Claude build things on its own - but for these types of specific productivity tasks I can save a couple of hours here and there.

mukmuktoday at 9:52 AM

From my experience, LLM performance in these areas is being massively oversold. I have repeatedly tried using Claude to modify a range of models typical of investment banking / private equity / sellside research contexts, and the results have been generally disastrous. On multiple occasions, the xlsx would no longer open.