Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

financial-comparison-glossary-ignacio-adrian-lerer

Use when a calculator, financial model, investor memo, due diligence report, risk review, dashboard, or client-facing explanation needs clear distinctions between accounting and finance concepts such as cash flow vs profit, EBIT vs EBITDA, CapEx vs OpEx, debt vs equity, market value vs book value, ROI vs ROE, assets vs liabilities, and accounting vs finance.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Files included (2)

  • SKILL.md4.1 KB
  • README.md360 B

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Financial Comparison Glossary

Use this skill to prevent conceptual confusion in financial tools, due diligence reports, risk screens, calculators, and client explanations. It is a public/portable glossary layer, not a substitute for a full financial model audit.

This file is self-contained for loaders that read only SKILL.md. If calculator/model integrity skills are available, use them too when building or verifying numbers; otherwise apply the checks below directly.

Core Rule

Do not let a polished interface or memo blur financial categories. If two concepts are different, label them differently and make the model/report show the difference.

Concepts To Distinguish

  • Cash flow vs Profit: cash flow is timing of cash in/out; profit is accounting result after expenses. A profitable model can have cash stress; positive cash flow is not automatically approved dividends.
  • EBIT vs EBITDA: EBIT includes depreciation/amortization impact; EBITDA excludes interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization. EBITDA is not free cash flow.
  • CapEx vs OpEx: CapEx purchases long-term assets and affects cash at purchase; OpEx supports ongoing operations and affects current-period operating result.
  • Debt vs Equity: debt has repayment/interest obligations; equity shares ownership/risk/upside and usually has no fixed repayment obligation.
  • Market value vs Book value: market value reflects perceived/current value; book value reflects accounting carrying value.
  • Assets vs Liabilities: assets generate or preserve value; liabilities require future settlement.
  • ROI vs ROE: ROI measures return on an investment/project; ROE measures return generated on shareholder equity.
  • Accounting vs Finance: accounting records and reports past/current transactions; finance models decisions, risk, capital allocation, and future value.

Calculator And Dashboard Checks

When reviewing a model or dashboard, ask:

  • Is EBITDA being presented as cash available, dividends, or value without bridge? If yes, relabel or add bridge.
  • Is RF/debt being treated like equity proceeds? If yes, show interest, maturity, repayment/provision, and risk.
  • Are CapEx/assets treated as expenses without useful life or exit? If yes, define purchase, operating start, and exit/residual.
  • Are dividends/distributions shown before legal, tax, debt, reserve, and cash constraints? If yes, label as economic simulation, not approved dividend.
  • Are nominal values mixed with discounted values? If yes, show both and label WACC/discount rate.
  • Are gross third-party revenues shown as company revenue when only commission/take-rate belongs to the company? If yes, correct to net commission.
  • Are accounting provisions, reserves, and actual cash payments conflated? If yes, separate retained/reserved cash, accounting provision, and cash outflow.

Client-Facing Explanation Pattern

Use this structure:

  1. Define the term in one sentence.
  2. State what it is not.
  3. Explain why the distinction matters for the decision.
  4. Point to the model row/control where it appears.

Example:

EBITDA is operating performance before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. It is not cash available for distribution, because debt service, reserves, reinvestment and taxes may still reduce cash. In this calculator, EBITDA is an operating metric; cash available and distributions are separate outputs.

Reliance Boundary

This skill is safe for public explanations and generic client deliverables. It must not include confidential facts, client-specific negotiation strategy, or final accounting, tax, legal, or investment advice.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Public-safe preliminary screen for challenges to the impartiality of an AI evaluator, LLM-as-a-judge, decision-support agent, or adjudicative system based on prior outputs, suspected bias, unstable reasoning, or self-reinforcing memory. Use when asked whether an AI should be recused, disqualified, replaced, audited, or escalated. Does not decide real cases or claim that human judicial-recusal doctrine automatically applies.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills894Updated Oct 20, 2026

Creates an Agent Authority Charter for enterprise or regulated AI agents before deployment. Use this Skill when a user needs to define what an AI agent is allowed to do, who delegated authority to it, what actions are permitted or prohibited, when human approval is required, what evidence must be preserved, and how the agent can be suspended, revoked, or escalated.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills894Updated Oct 20, 2026

EU AI Act Knowledge Engine — authoritative regulatory Q&A grounded in 70 official EU source documents (including the 2026 Commission draft guidelines on Art. 6 high-risk classification — general principles, Annex I, Annex III). Answers any question about the AI Act with article-level citations from the full regulation text, Commission guidelines, EDPB/EDPS opinions, codes of practice, harmonised standards, FRIA guides, incident templates, and sector-specific guidance. This skill should be used when the user asks about the "EU AI Act", "AI Act regulation", "Regulation 2024/1689", "KI-Verordnung", asks to "explain an AI Act article", "what does Article X say", "AI Act requirements", "AI Act penalties", "AI Act timeline", "GPAI obligations", "high-risk AI", "prohibited AI practices", "AI Act and GDPR", "fundamental rights impact assessment", "AI Act standards", "AI Act national implementation", "AI literacy", "serious incident reporting", "Digital Omnibus", "AI regulatory sandbox", or any question about EU artificial intelligence regulation. Also triggers on German terms: "KI-Gesetz", "KI-Verordnung", "Hochrisiko-KI", "KI-Kompetenz", "Grundrechte-Folgenabschaetzung", "GPAI-Verhaltenskodex". For assessment workflows that produce a classification decision rather than a knowledge answer, offer to run a structured risk-tier classification in-session.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills894Updated Oct 20, 2026

This skill builds a structured audit trail of an AI-assisted task: what the tool was asked to do, what materials it was given, what it produced, how the output was verified, and what was ultimately relied upon. It documents the workflow for supervision and later review without ruling on privilege or disclosure, so the record stays accurate rather than self-serving.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills894Updated Oct 20, 2026

Use this skill when the user wants an AI governance, legal-risk, privacy, compliance, procurement, or vendor-risk review of an internal AI use case, an AI product feature, an LLM workflow, or a third-party AI vendor. The skill asks intake and clarifying questions first when facts or evidence are missing, identifies required documentation and missing evidence, maps the use case to AI governance frameworks and applicable legal domains, and produces a preliminary or final governance review with scorecards, findings, owners, remediation actions, and follow-up questions.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills894Updated Oct 20, 2026

Turn an interpretive-ambiguity audit of a legal text — contract, statute, regulation, or judicial opinion — into a polished deliverable. Produces a multi-page website (default), a single-page interactive site, a Microsoft Word document, a PowerPoint deck, or a LaTeX/PDF. Use whenever a user has a stress-test result, ambiguity audit, or "where will this be litigated" scenarios and wants to publish, present, or share them. Triggers on "publish the audit," "make a report from this," "turn this into a website / deck / brief / Word doc," "make a Netlify site," "build slides of these ambiguities," "render the scenarios," "package this stress test," "produce a LaTeX version," and similar. Pairs with the ambiguity-stress-test skill (the underlying analysis) but works on any structured or semi-structured ambiguity analysis. Visual design is opinionated but the user can override colors, fonts, and brand label. Most formats need Python and a writable filesystem; single-file HTML works where the host has neither.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills894Updated Oct 20, 2026

See all skills by lawve-ai

Report a problem with this skill