FP&A Expert

$80–90/hrrate as listed

Mercor is contracting senior FP&A practitioners to build evaluation scenarios, reference outputs, and grading rubrics for AI systems doing forecasting, variance analysis, and capital allocation work. Two tracks are open — US GAAP-based corporate finance and IFRS-based international finance — and observed pay for this listing runs $80–90/hr.

Summary, eligibility guidance and screening preparation are prepared by Sidequest from the platform's posting. Check the source listing before applying.

What the work involves

You write the test, not the answer key alone. A typical task starts with a scenario grounded in something you have actually run — a Q3 reforecast after a demand miss, a variance bridge that has to be explained to a business partner who disputes the allocation, a capital request competing against two others under a fixed envelope. You build the world around it: the company profile, the driver structure, the data the model is given, the ambiguity that makes the task non-trivial. Then you draft the reference output (a forecast deck, a variance report, a business case, a model tab) and author a rubric that separates real FP&A judgment from spreadsheet-template output.

The rubric is usually the hardest part and the most scrutinized. Reviewers want criteria that fail a plausible-sounding wrong answer — a forecast that ignores seasonality baked into the driver set, a variance analysis that stops at price/volume without touching mix, a NPV that quietly assumes terminal growth above the discount rate. Generic scoring language does not survive review.

What the platform screens for

Ownership, not exposure. Screens probe whether you personally owned a budgeting cycle, a rolling forecast, or a capital allocation process — headcount, revenue scope, who you presented to.
Depth under follow-up. Expect two or three layers of questioning on a single answer: name the method, then justify the assumption, then defend it against a stated objection.
Reporting-basis fluency. US track answers should reflect US GAAP conventions; International track answers should be IFRS-consistent. Claiming both invites questions on where they diverge in practice.
Tooling specificity. Anaplan, Adaptive Insights, Planful, Tableau, Power BI, and large-company ERP environments — what you built in them, not that you saw them.
Writing. Rubric authorship is technical writing. Vague criteria are the most common rejection reason.

Logistics

Fully remote and asynchronous. Contributors typically commit somewhere in the 10–20 hour/week range, though this varies by project phase and is set per engagement rather than fixed. Work is contract-based and paid hourly; the $80–90/hr band reflects rates observed on this listing and is not a guarantee. Onboarding usually includes a calibration task or two before volume opens up, and continued work depends on rubric quality scores from reviewers.

What they look for

5+ years in a senior FP&A role (FP&A lead, Director of FP&A, or CFO) at a large company
Direct ownership of budgeting cycles, forecasting models, or capital allocation decisions
Fluency in driver-based forecasting, variance analysis, and scenario/sensitivity modeling
Working knowledge of US GAAP or IFRS reporting conventions as applied in corporate planning
Hands-on experience with FP&A platforms (Anaplan, Adaptive Insights, Planful) and BI tools
CFA, CPA, or MBA, or prior rubric/training-content authorship (both a plus)

Before you apply

Would you pass this screen?

Drawn from what this listing actually requires. Answered in your browser — nothing is sent to us, and we do not store your answers.

Do you have at least 5 years of professional experience in FP&A, financial planning, or related financial management roles at a company with annual revenue of $100M or greater?
Years of FP&A leadership experience · required
Have you directly owned, designed, or led a company-wide budgeting cycle, forecasting model, or significant capital allocation process?
Direct forecasting or budgeting ownership · required
Do you have hands-on experience building or managing models in at least one FP&A platform (Anaplan, Adaptive Insights, Planful, similar) or BI tool (Tableau, Power BI)?
FP&A platform fluency · preferred
Have you worked directly with either US GAAP or IFRS financial reporting standards in a forecasting, budgeting, or financial planning context?
GAAP or IFRS reporting experience · preferred
Do you hold or are you a candidate for a CFA, MBA, or CPA credential?
Professional credential · preferred

0 of 5 answered

Included with this listing

Interview prep — 10 questions

Matched to what this platform's screening actually measures. Answer each out loud in 60–90 seconds: claim → concrete example → implication.

What it tests: Whether the candidate can articulate the judgment calls that separate a senior FP&A forecaster from someone who applies a template—driver selection, validation against historical behavior, and trade-offs between simplicity and accuracy.
A strong answer: The answer names 3–5 specific drivers tied to business unit or P&L line, explains *why* those drivers (not others) were chosen based on the company's economics or market dynamics, and describes testing or iteration to validate them against actual results.
Where people lose it: Reciting a generic driver-based forecasting framework (revenue = volume × price) without anchoring to an actual business context, or listing drivers without explaining the judgment about which ones matter most in that specific company or scenario.