The Pain-point: What Market Research Tells Us
90% of analysts still rebuild statements by hand in Excel, re-keying 10-K and 10-Q data, CapIQ, Bloomberg and FactSet, just to read them the same way.
| Share | What they said |
|---|---|
| 90% | still rebuild statements by hand in Excel just to read them the same way. |
| 1 in 2 | say the same line item is classified differently from one company to the next. |
| ~50% | cite calendarisation as a pain before any comparison can begin. |
Survey of 500+ finance professionals · PitchFit market research, 2026
We wanted to know how finance teams actually work - not how the software brochures say they do. So we asked. More than five hundred analysts, controllers and heads of FP&A, across banks, funds and corporates, answered one blunt question: when you need to compare two companies, what do you do first?
The answer, overwhelmingly, was a version of the same thing. Ninety percent still rebuild the statements by hand in Excel - re-keying figures from 10-K and 10-Q filings, CapIQ, Bloomberg and FactSet - not to model anything yet, but simply to read the numbers the same way.
Why do analysts get different numbers from the same filing?
Re-keying is tedious, but it is not the real problem. The real problem is what people do while they re-key: they quietly decide what each line means. One in two told us the same line item is classified differently from one company to the next - a lease here, a provision there, an item that sits above the operating line in one filing and below it in another.
Each of those decisions is defensible. Together they mean two analysts can pull the identical filing and still produce two different companies - before a single ratio is computed.
”Nobody we surveyed was short of data. They were short of a shared basis to read it on.
Half the work happens before the work
Roughly half cited calendarisation - aligning mismatched fiscal years and reporting periods - as a chore they have to finish before any comparison can even begin. Add currency, add restatements, add the slow detective work of finding which note explains which number, and the “analysis” has not started yet.
What does rebuilding statements by hand cost?
The cost is not mainly the hours, though the hours are real. It is that every rebuild is private. Each analyst standardizes in their own head, in their own sheet, and the assumptions never travel with the answer. So when two numbers disagree, no one can see why - and the debate moves to who is most senior rather than which basis is right.
That is the pain-point underneath the survey. It is not access to data; the data has never been more available. It is the absence of one defensible basis everyone reads from. PitchFit exists to supply exactly that - every statement standardized one way, every figure traced back to its source.
Frequently asked questions
How many analysts rebuild financial statements by hand?
Ninety percent of the 500+ finance professionals surveyed still rebuild the statements by hand in Excel, simply to read the numbers the same way.
Who took part in the survey?
More than five hundred analysts, controllers and heads of FP&A, across banks, funds and corporates.
Where do analysts get the figures from?
From 10-K and 10-Q filings, CapIQ, Bloomberg and FactSet, re-keyed by hand into Excel before anything is modelled.
What does the manual rebuild cost?
Not mainly the hours. Every rebuild is private, so the assumptions never travel with the answer, and when two numbers disagree no one can see why.
Is the problem access to data?
No. The data has never been more available; what is missing is one defensible basis everyone reads from.
Findings drawn from PitchFit's 2026 survey of 500+ analysts, controllers and heads of FP&A across banks, funds and corporates.
Restructuring
Financial ratios
Financial ratios
IFRS 18 Watch
IFRS 18 WatchRestructuringFinancial ratiosFinancial ratiosIFRS 18 WatchIFRS 18 Watch
