Marvin clears the reading off your desk and tells you what to ignore. The hours you save go to the work that compounds: management calls, channel checks, primary research, conversations with other investors.
Built for
Analysts at asset managers, hedge funds, pension funds, and sovereign wealth funds.
Reading isn't the bottleneck. Time is.
Buy-side analysts don't get paid to read filings. They get paid to form views that the rest of the market hasn't formed yet. Most of that view-forming work happens off the page: a thirty-minute call with management where they let something slip, a channel check that contradicts the company's narrative, a conversation with a portfolio manager at another firm who's seen a pattern in a different sector. None of that work fits into a quiet afternoon of reading 10-Qs.
But the reading still has to happen. The 10-Q has to be parsed before you know which question to ask management. The earnings call has to be heard before you know what to channel-check. So the high-value work waits, and the mechanical work fills the day.
Marvin compresses the mechanical layer so the high-value work can run earlier and more often.
Telling you what's worth your attention, and what isn't
The other half of the job is filtering. Most earnings calls don't move a thesis. Most press releases are reformatted versions of things you already knew. Most investor day decks are the same strategic story management told you last year. Reading them is not just a time cost. It's the cognitive overhead of figuring out, for each one, that there's nothing new there.
Marvin reads the new disclosure against the Common Ground it maintains for each company: a structured model of everything the company has previously asserted, with each fact tagged to source and date. The output of every release is classified into one of three buckets.
The earnings call that had nothing distinguishable in it lands in the first bucket and clears in seconds. The 20th iteration of the same strategy presentation gets flagged as the 20th iteration. Your attention goes to the three lines that actually changed the picture.
This is what most AI research tools miss. They produce a summary of every release, regardless of whether the release matters. The judgment about whether to read the summary at all is left to the analyst. Marvin makes that judgment first.
Validating a thesis directly against primary sources
When something does move a thesis, the question stops being "what did they say" and becomes "is this consistent with everything they've said before". AI Analyst Chat answers that as a query against the Common Ground rather than a re-read of the document. "Has management's framing of capital allocation changed across the last six calls" is a structured question with a structured answer, cited to the specific passage. The same citation lands intact when the thesis goes to a PM, a CIO, or a compliance reviewer. The provenance is in the document, not in your memory of which paragraph you read it in.
That is what lets the AI step out of the conversation. Walking into a PM meeting with a thesis that traces back to a filing is a different read than walking in with one that traces back to "what the AI told me".
Start your free evaluation
Analyze 15 leading companies immediately. No registration, no credit card, no sales call.
What the saved hours actually become
If every buy-side analyst is using tools like this, doesn't the marginal edge from reading a 10-Q evaporate? Most of the edge was never in who read the filing first. It was in who talked to management on Tuesday, who ran the channel check on the supplier, who picked up the phone to a portfolio manager at the firm down the road. Compressing the reading phase does not level that. It frees up the hours the work actually requires.
The off-page work the saved hours go toward:
- Management calls. When the synthesis on a name is already done, the half-hour with IR starts from a sharper question than "walk me through the quarter".
- Channel checks and primary research. Picking up the phone, visiting a customer, reading something nobody else has read. The work that does not fit a calendar already eaten by reading.
- Conversations with other investors. Most edges are a half-step ahead, not a full step. Conversations with people on the same names produce that half-step.
The remaining hours go where the desk needs them most: deeper work on the names already covered, or wider coverage when the team is expanding. The product does not decide which. It clears the desk and lets the analyst put back what matters.
Built for one analyst, scales when ready
The product is single-player by default. One analyst on one desk gets the full experience, with no dependency on the rest of the firm. No CTO sign-off, no firm-wide license, no procurement cycle. This is the canonical way the product is used, not a preview of a "real" team deployment.
When colleagues want in, they get invited. When the desk wants the broader team on the same coverage, that scales too. Neither is a precondition for the analyst who started.
