How to analyze a real estate contract
The Task: Analyze a real estate contract quickly
One of the coolest uses of AI is the ability to analyze a contract.
In fact the very concept of ChatGPT and the reason that it is called 'chat' is that you can actually have a conversation with it i.e. chat with it.
Taking that a step further, you can also upload contracts and chat with them.
This means that when you upload a contract to whatever tool you are using, you can then communicate with it and ask it questions: i.e. chat with it.
In the AI world today there are two basic ecosystems in which you can analyze a contract: one is the world of LLM's, and the other is the world of what are called 'wrappers' that use LLM's as the engine for what it is they do, but that create their own user interface i.e. the way their website looks, to make it easier for users to use.
How we did it
To find the best way to analyse a contract, we took a 95 page, 40,000 word Private Placement Memorandum (PPM) with pitch deck attached, and ran it through a bunch of LLM's and some of these specialized wrappers, designed to analyze contracts.
The biggest mistake that people make when they are using these tools is to think that all you need to do is to enter a Google like search query.
However, to get really good results out of any of these tools requires what are called 'prompts' not search queries.
A good prompt has to be 'engineered' and so we engineered a prompt to give us the best possible results.
That prompt we used is copied below so that you can use it to analyze any type of contract you want.
LLM's and Wrappers we tested
We evaluated a range of AI tools, including:
- ChatGPT4 (https://chat.openai.com)
- ChatGPT4o (https://chat.openai.com/chat)
- Google Gemini (https://gemini.google.com)
- Llama Groq (https://llama-2.ai/llama-3-on-groq/)
- Poe (https://www.quora.com/poe)
- And all other major LLMs currently open for public use
We also tested several customer-facing LLM wrappers that offer document analysis services:
- Klik.ai (membership required)
- Juro (demo required)
- Kira (demo required)
- Thoughtriver (demo required)
- Zuva (not user friendly for non-techies)
- Google Cloud Document AI (requires console access and demo)
- Docanalyzer.ai (could not get a decent output)
- Petal.ai (unimpressive results)
- Sharly.ai (could not get a decent output)
- AIPDFS (constant code errors)
- Docu.review (constant input errors)
- Chatpdf.so (errors and unimpressive results)
Results
Running our 93-page, 40,000-word sample PPM and accompanying deck to ask each LLM/wrapper to:
- Summarize key deal terms
- Assess fee structures and risks
- Evaluate investor rights and protections
- Judge overall deal fairness
Most of the LLM's provided generic, surface-level responses that missed critical details.
Some of the wrappers had technical issues or required extensive setup.
However, one LLM stood head and shoulders above the rest:
Claude Opus 3 from Anthropic (https://www.anthropic.com)
Claude's full analysis
Based on my review of the Private Placement Memorandum (PPM) for the DEAL offering, here is a summary of the key terms and my assessment:
Asset Being Purchased:
The SPONSOR intends to use the proceeds from this offering to acquire the HIGH STREET Apartments, a 240-unit apartment community located in Main Town, America.
Projected Hold Period:
The projected hold period is approximately 3-5 years, subject to market conditions.
Upon sale of the property, the Manager may offer investors the opportunity to reinvest proceeds into another property through a 1031 exchange.
Equity Being Raised:
The offering is seeking to raise up to $25,000,000 through the sale of up to 25,000 Class A Units, Class B Units and Class C Units combined at $1,000 per Unit.
Investor Returns:
Class A Units (min $100K, max $200K): 10% per annum simple return paid quarterly. Full return of capital upon a capital event before the Manager receives any profits.
Class B Units ($250K+) and Class C Units (<$250K): After payment of Class A return and capital, Class B and C receive 100% until they get a 16% and 12% per annum simple return respectively. Then 50/50 split of remaining profits with the Manager.
Preferred Return:
Class A Units get a 10% per annum simple return preferred return paid quarterly. Class B and C get a 16% and 12% per annum simple return preferred return respectively before profit split.
Profit Split:
After preferred returns, Class B and C Units split profits 50/50 with the Manager. Class A Units do not participate in profits beyond their preferred return.
Fees:
- 3% Acquisition Fee on purchase price.
- 1.5% Annual Asset Management Fee on gross revenue.
- 3% Property Management Fee on gross receipts.
- 1% Disposition Fee on sale price.
The fees seem generally in-line with the market, though on the higher end.
The Acquisition and Disposition Fees are one-time while the Asset Management and Property Management Fees are recurring.
Risks:
Key risks include: Lack of operating history for the company, illiquid investment with no defined exit date, reliance on the Manager, and various real estate related risks like vacancies, competition, rising costs, debt risks etc.
The risks appear typical for this asset class without any unusually high concerns.
Investor Rights & Reporting:
Investors have limited voting rights on major items like removing the Manager for cause, dissolution, and certain amendments.
The Manager has broad authority to make most decisions. Investors receive monthly financial reports, which is a positive.
The Manager can be removed only for an uncured "cause" event initiated by a super-majority of investors.
Transfer Restrictions:
Transfers are restricted and require Manager approval to avoid violating securities and tax laws. No public market exists.
This is very common for private placements to avoid becoming a publicly reporting company.
Overall Assessment:
The Class A Units seem attractive for investors seeking a simple preferred return without upside participation, almost like a debt instrument.
The Class B and C Units offer attractive returns if targets are met, but carry more risk if things go poorly.
Overall, the PPM terms appear relatively standard and fair to investors for this type of value-add real estate syndication.
The strong preferred returns, detailed monthly reporting, and reasonable fees are positives.
The main drawbacks are the limited investor control, broad Manager authority, and lack of liquidity - however these are common features of real estate private equity.
The ultimate fairness depends on one's alignment and trust in the Manager's capabilities, track record and integrity to execute the business plan.
Compared to peers, I did not identify any materially concerning or unfair terms.
As always, investors must assess their own risk tolerance and suitability for a private, illiquid investment.
In summary, for investors comfortable with the inherent risks of these offerings, the DEAL appears to contain customary terms and reasonable investor protections based on prevailing market practices.
The strong preferred returns and conservative underwriting are compelling positives in the current environment.
Why We Chose Claude's Opus 3 LLM
While Claude does require a $20 monthly subscription, the value it provides far outweighs the cost.
The time and effort saved on due diligence alone makes it a worthwhile investment for any serious real estate investor.
It's important to note that no LLM is perfect, and Claude's insights should complement, not replace, your own judgment and professional advice.
But as a tool for quickly identifying key deal points and red flags, Claude is in a league of its own.
So, how can you put Claude to work for your own investments? Here's a step-by-step guide:
- Sign up for a Claude account at https://www.anthropic.com. The $20/month subscription is a small price to pay for the value it provides.
- When you have a PPM or other investment document you want to analyze, simply upload it to Claude and provide the following prompt:
The Prompt
Upload your own contract to Claude and copy and paste the following prompt, replacing the terms [in square brackets] depending on the type of contract you want to analyze:
Act like an experienced real estate investment advisor and securities attorney who has been analyzing [private placement memorandums (PPMs) for real estate syndications] for over 20 years.
You have a deep understanding of what makes a strong [PPM that protects investors while allowing syndicators to operate effectively].
Your expertise allows you to quickly identify red flags as well as favorable terms [for investors].
I am going to upload a [private placement memorandum for a real estate syndication].
My objective is to thoroughly understand the key terms of this [PPM] and determine if the [deal structure and legal provisions] are beneficial and protective for [prospective investors].
Please analyze the [PPM] document I provide and address the following:
- Provide a concise summary of the key terms of the deal, including:
- [The asset being purchased
- The projected hold period
- The amount of equity being raised
- The targeted investor returns
- Any preferred return for investors
- The split of profits between investors and syndicators]
Then take a step by step approach to the analyzing the following:
- [Describe the fee structure, including any acquisition fees, asset management fees, construction management fees, or other fees paid to the syndicator. Assess whether the fees seem reasonable for this type of deal.
- Outline the major risk factors disclosed in the PPM. Highlight any risks that seem unusually high compared to a typical real estate syndication.
- Summarize the rights of investors regarding major decisions, financial reporting, and their ability to remove the syndicator. Analyze whether investors have sufficient control and visibility.
- Describe any restrictions on the transfer or sale of ownership interests by investors. Note if there are mechanisms for investors to exit the deal if needed.
- Provide your overall assessment of whether the terms of this PPM are fair and beneficial to investors based on current market standards. Justify your conclusion and cite specific examples from the document.]
When I upload the PPM file, please thoroughly analyze it and provide a detailed response addressing each of the steps outlined above.
Let me know if you need any clarification or have additional questions.
Conclusion
We found that Claude's response stood out for its depth and specificity.
It directly addressed every element of the prompt, pulling relevant details and even quotes from the dense PPM text.
In contrast, other LLM's tended to get lost in the PPM's details, failing to extract and synthesize the most salient points.
They required more human guidance and interpretation to get a clear, actionable assessment.
To be fair, Claude's analysis wasn't perfect.
It occasionally missed a small point or made a small error.
And its output was long - perhaps more depth than a quick preliminary assessment needs.
But overall, Claude set the bar for thoroughness, clarity, and insight. It came closest to an expert human analyst's work.
Downside of using Claude
The main drawback is that Claude sits behind a paywall, while other tested LLM's are free or cheaper.
However, as the volume and complexity of investment information grows, high-quality AI analysis tools will become increasingly vital.
Follow up
What other similar applications have you come across that you'd like us to test?
Are there any specific use cases you are interested in exploring?
Let us know in the comments below or email us at [email protected] and we'll get back to you with some solutions.