What the work involves

You are grading and repairing financial reasoning, not writing memos. A typical block of work puts an AI model's response in front of you — a DCF walkthrough, an LBO returns bridge, a read on a comp set, a view on how a credit event should flow through a capital structure — and asks you to say precisely where it holds up and where it breaks. Errors are rarely arithmetic; they are unrealistic exit multiples, a WACC assembled from mismatched inputs, working-capital assumptions that no operator would sign off on, or a confident answer to a question that a practitioner would have pushed back on. You will also author prompts and reference answers of your own, drawn from deals and positions you actually worked, so the lab has ground truth written by someone who has defended these numbers to a committee.

What the platform screens for

micro1's screen is AI-led and conversational, and it drills. Expect it to take a claim on your résumé — a sector, a deal type, a strategy — and follow up two or three layers down: which line items you built, what the sensitivities were, why the buyer paid that number. Generalities collapse quickly. It is also testing evaluation judgment, which is a different muscle from doing the work: can you distinguish an answer that is wrong from one that is defensible-but-not-what-you-would-have-done, and can you write the difference down clearly enough that a non-finance reviewer can act on it. Written English is assessed directly, because feedback that reads ambiguously is worthless to a training pipeline.

Logistics

  • Fully remote, contractor engagement, no fixed schedule
  • Asynchronous task queues; most contributors work in blocks of a few hours rather than full days
  • Volume fluctuates with lab demand — treat this as supplemental, not a salary replacement
  • Preference for candidates based in English-speaking countries; strong written English is non-negotiable
  • Pay in the $245–280/hr band has been observed on this listing; actual rates depend on specialization, screening outcome, and task type

The strongest contributors here tend to be people one to seven years out of a buy-side or sell-side seat who still remember the mechanics in detail and can explain why a shortcut was taken, not just that it was.