Investment Consultant Expert - Reviewer
# Investment Consultant Expert - Reviewer **Vetto** · `Remote` · `Contractor` 💼 **Уровень роли:** `Mid-level` 🕒 **Статус:** *Опубликовано: сегодня* · *Источник: Himalayas (JSON API)* --- ### Top Skills & Match 🎯 **Ключевой стек роли:** `[Financial-Consulting]` `[Finance-Reviewer]` `[Investment-Advisory]` `[AI-Training-Data-Reviewer]` `[Financial-Quality-Assurance]` `[Investment-Consultant]` `[Expert-Reviewer]` `[Investment-Consulting]` `[Investment-Specialist]` `[Deal-Review-Consultant]` --- ### About the Role We’re recruiting Finance professionals (financial planners, investment advisors/consultants, and bank relationship managers) to review and improve realistic financial scenarios used to train AI financial assistants. Your job isn’t to “pick the best asset.” It’s to think like a real advisor and spot what makes a client situation real, high-stakes, and action-changing — then upgrade weak scenarios so they actually test the model. ‼️ AI is not allowed. If we spot AI use, we’ll block the application. ⚠️ This application form must be completed entirely in English. 🚨 READ ALL THE DESCRIPTION BELOW TO UNDERSTAND THE APPLICATION FORM. WHO CAN APPLY - Bank relationship managers - Financial planners - Investment advisors / consultants - 3+ years of professional experience - English level: Upper Intermediate / Advanced (required) WHAT YOU’LL DO IN THE APPLICATION (QUICK SCREENING TEST) You will review two pre-generated finance tasks. For each task, you’ll answer simple 1–5 ratings and give a short justification. Then, for the 2nd task, you’ll rewrite it to make it stronger. WHAT “STRONG” MEANS (SIMPLE DEFINITION) A strong task includes one decisive constraint that can make “reasonable” advice materially wrong or harmful if overlooked. We call this a Knife: - A Knife is a constraint that changes the correct strategy. - Quick test: if you remove it, the best recommendation would meaningfully change. Examples of Knives in Finance: - High-interest debt APR / terms - Liquidity lockups or withdrawal penalties - Concentration risk (single stock, employer stock) - Tax residency / account eligibility constraints - Risk-of-ruin (thin emergency fund, income instability) - Compliance boundary (no illegal evasion, no guaranteed returns) WHAT YOU WILL RATE (1–5) IN THE FORM You’ll give 3 ratings per task: - Overall Quality (1–5) How clear and testable the task is (can you judge PASS/FAIL)? - Knife / Hidden Context Strength (1–5) Is there a decisive constraint that flips the strategy — or is the “hidden context” just background that doesn’t change the recommendation? - Checklist Quality (1–5) Does the checklist truly test strategy quality under constraints, with clear criteria? (Strong checklists focus on constraint adherence + sequencing + risk framing + safety/compliance, written as PASS/FAIL — not “ask questions.”) You’ll also write a short justification (2–4 bullets) explaining your ratings. WHAT YOU WILL REWRITE (FOR THE 2ND TASK ONLY) You will rewrite these parts to make the task stronger: - Scenario (3rd person) — more realistic + naturally sets up the decision pressure - Prompt (user message) — natural, human, does not reveal the Knife - Hidden Context (1–3 bullets) — must include exactly 1 decisive Knife - Checklist (4–6 items) — each item must be PASS/FAIL, covering: - constraint adherence (explicitly incorporates the Knife) - expert move (sequencing/phasing, liquidity preservation, ruin-risk prevention, prioritization) - risk framing (tradeoffs/uncertainty; no guarantees) - safety/compliance boundary when relevant Checklist item example: PASS if it prioritizes high-APR debt (or states assumptions and branches); FAIL if it recommends investing-first without addressing the Knife. Important: Don’t “leak” the Knife in the prompt (no “IMPORTANT”, no all-caps, no “the key detail is…”). IF SELECTED (PROJECT WORK) You’ll review batches of pre-generated finance scenarios: - Rating realism and decision risk - Identifying weak or missing constraints (Knives) - Improving tasks so they better represent real moments where “reasonable” advice becomes harmful COMPENSATION If selected, you will be invited to review 5 real tasks as part of the project. (Compensation details will be provided upon selection.) WHAT WE’RE LOOKING FOR - You can recognize what’s realistic vs. generic in client situations - You understand what truly changes the recommendation (APR, liquidity, taxes/eligibility, ruin risk, concentration) - You can upgrade a “fine” scenario into a strong test without making it artificial Originally posted on Himalayas
- Financial-Consulting
- Finance-Reviewer
- Investment-Advisory
- AI-Training-Data-Reviewer
- Financial-Quality-Assurance
- Investment-Consultant
- Expert-Reviewer
- Investment-Consulting
- Investment-Specialist
- Deal-Review-Consultant
Наблюдалась 2026-10-01, впервые 2026-10-01, источник — Himalayas (JSON API).