Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add w95/awesome-claude-corporate-skills --skill comps-analysisgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/w95/awesome-claude-corporate-skillsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/w95/awesome-claude-corporate-skills/comps-analysis)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/w95/awesome-claude-corporate-skills/comps-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/w95/awesome-claude-corporate-skills/comps-analysis/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/w95/awesome-claude-corporate-skills/comps-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/w95/awesome-claude-corporate-skills/comps-analysis.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00127 | $0.06636 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00063 | $0.03318 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00025 | $0.01327 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00664 |
Grade A, and why
fsi-comps-analysis scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 11d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- fsi-comps-analysis — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 629 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Comparable Company Analysis
⚠️ CRITICAL: Data Source Priority (READ FIRST)
ALWAYS follow this data source hierarchy:
- FIRST: Check for MCP data sources - If S&P Kensho MCP, FactSet MCP, or Daloopa MCP are available, use them exclusively for financial and trading information
- DO NOT use web search if the above MCP data sources are available
- ONLY if MCPs are unavailable: Then use Bloomberg Terminal, SEC EDGAR filings, or other institutional sources
- NEVER use web search as a primary data source - it lacks the accuracy, audit trails, and reliability required for institutional-grade analysis
Why this matters: MCP sources provide verified, institutional-grade data with proper citations. Web search results can be outdated, inaccurate, or unreliable for financial analysis.
Overview
This skill teaches Claude to build institutional-grade comparable company analyses that combine operating metrics, valuation multiples, and statistical benchmarking. The output is a structured Excel/spreadsheet that enables informed investment decisions through peer comparison.
Reference Material & Contextualization:
An example comparable company analysis is provided in examples/comps_example.xlsx. When using this or other example files in this skill directory, use them intelligently:
DO use examples for:
- Understanding structural hierarchy (how sections flow)
- Grasping the level of rigor expected (statistical depth, documentation standards)
- Learning principles (clear headers, transparent formulas, audit trails)
DO NOT use examples for:
- Exact reproduction of format or metrics
- Copying layout without considering context
- Applying the same visual style regardless of audience
ALWAYS ask yourself first:
- "Do you have a preferred format or should I adapt the template style?"
- "Who is the audience?" (Investment committee, board presentation, quick reference, detailed memo)
- "What's the key question?" (Valuation, growth analysis, competitive positioning, efficiency)
- "What's the context?" (M&A evaluation, investment decision, sector benchmarking, performance review)
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 11d ago First seen · 629 lines · 127 tokens per session scan A 8c14f43d43d0
fsi-comps-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository w95/awesome-claude-corporate-skills (195 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 127 tokens to every session and 6,636 once invoked, about $0.0006 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
financial-expert
A financial research skill for China and Hong Kong securities, funds, company finances, economic indicators, research reports, announcements, news, and business-risk data. It returns data and neutral analysis rather than placing trades or recommending investments.
stock-analysis-lead
Orchestrate a US-stock investment analysis — classify sector archetype, fetch SEC filings, dispatch a tiered fan-out of six vertical equity-research agents (business model, earnings quality, balance sheet, management, industry, peer comparison) over a validated JSON findings contract, then synthesize a buy/hold/sell…
stock-business-review
Review a US-listed company's business model and revenue structure for an equity-research workup. Covers product/service mix, customer concentration, geographic exposure, industry position, revenue-growth decomposition (organic vs acquired vs price vs volume), and information-tier discipline (which numbers are facts vs…
stock-earnings-quality-review
Review a US-listed company's earnings quality, cash-flow integrity, and operating leverage for an equity-research workup. Covers operating cash flow vs net income drift, free cash flow trajectory, capex character (maintenance vs expansion), equity issuance / shareholder-return yield, revenue-quality signals…
stock-industry-review
Review a US-listed company's industry position and competitive moat for an equity-research workup. Covers Porter Five Forces scan, market-share trend (absolute and relative to industry growth), TAM size and trajectory, unit economics where disclosed (LTV/CAC, unit gross margin), moat classification (network / brand /…
stock-management-review
Review a US-listed company's management quality and capital-allocation track record for an equity-research workup. Covers 5-year capital-allocation history (buybacks vs dividends vs M&A vs capex vs debt), buyback timing, M&A return-on-investment, guidance-vs-actuals track record, comp-structure alignment, insider…