Remote | Senior Investment Banking Evaluation Consultant — $145–$215/hour

24-Mag•New York, NY

1d•$145 - $215•Remote

About The Position

We are sharing a specialised part-time consulting opportunity for experienced investment banking professionals skilled in financial modeling, valuation, transaction analysis, deal materials, capital markets, and rigorous review of bank-quality work products. This role supports current and upcoming remote consulting opportunities focused on evaluating complex investment banking deliverables and defining clear standards for high-quality execution. Selected professionals will develop task-specific assessment criteria, review financial and transaction materials, score completed work, and provide detailed written justifications grounded in real-world banking practices.

Requirements

At least 2 years of professional investment banking experience at associate level or above
Professional exposure to M&A, industry coverage, leveraged finance, equity capital markets, debt capital markets, or related areas
Strong command of financial modeling, valuation, transaction analysis, and deal-process materials
Deep familiarity with the accuracy, formatting, and presentation standards expected in bank-quality work
Exceptional written communication and the ability to explain analytical judgments clearly
Strong attention to detail and comfort having evaluation decisions reviewed and calibrated
A degree in finance, economics, accounting, business, mathematics, or a related analytical field is helpful
Professional investment banking experience will carry significant weight
Equivalent hands-on experience producing and reviewing transaction materials is highly relevant

Nice To Haves

Experience at a leading global investment bank, elite advisory boutique, or comparable transaction-focused environment
Qualifications such as an MBA, CFA, ACA, CPA, or equivalent financial training may be valuable
Experience across buy-side, sell-side, financing, restructuring, or strategic advisory transactions
Strong proficiency in Excel-based financial modeling and PowerPoint-based banking materials
Experience reviewing work produced by analysts, associates, or transaction teams
Familiarity with investment committee, board, fairness, or senior-management materials
Previous involvement in AI evaluation, technical benchmarking, structured review, or human-data projects
Experience developing grading rubrics, training materials, or quality-assurance frameworks

Responsibilities

Investment Banking Work Product Evaluation: Review financial models, valuation analyses, pitch books, confidential information memoranda, deal memos, and board materials. Assess work for technical accuracy, completeness, presentation quality, and alignment with professional banking standards. Identify modeling errors, unsupported assumptions, formatting issues, and weaknesses in transaction reasoning. Determine whether completed materials meet the expected standard for client-ready or committee-level work.
Evaluation Criteria & Rubric Development: Design precise, task-specific grading criteria for investment banking deliverables. Define measurable standards covering financial accuracy, valuation judgment, analytical rigor, structure, and presentation. Ensure evaluation criteria reflect realistic expectations across M&A, coverage, and capital markets workflows. Refine rubrics based on reviewer feedback and calibration outcomes.
Financial Modeling & Valuation Review: Evaluate three-statement models, discounted cash flow analyses, leveraged buyout models, comparable-company analyses, and precedent transactions. Review merger models, accretion and dilution calculations, transaction assumptions, and financing structures. Assess valuation conclusions for consistency, commercial judgment, and appropriate use of supporting evidence. Identify calculation errors, sensitivity issues, and inconsistencies across financial outputs.
Scoring & Written Justification: Score AI-generated and human-created work samples against structured evaluation criteria. Provide detailed written explanations supporting each score. Apply consistent and evidence-based judgment across different tasks and deliverable types. Incorporate feedback from senior reviewers and adjust evaluation approaches efficiently.