Real Estate Proforma: How to Build One That Works

You're about to make your first commercial real estate investment deal, and someone asks to see your pro forma. Your mind races. What exactly should this financial model include? How do you project net operating income, calculate cash flow, or determine whether the numbers actually work? A real estate proforma is the financial blueprint that separates successful investors from those who rely on guesswork. This guide will walk you through building a proforma that accurately forecasts property performance, evaluates investment returns, and gives you confidence in your underwriting process.

‍

Since creating accurate financial projections requires both knowledge and the right tools, Cactus commercial real estate underwriting software simplifies the entire process. Instead of wrestling with complex spreadsheets and formulas, you can focus on analyzing deals and understanding the assumptions that drive your investment thesis. Cactus helps you build reliable proformas faster, test different scenarios with ease, and present professional reports that lenders and partners trust.

Summary

Real estate proformas fail most often not because of bad math, but because they're built to persuade rather than protect. Offering memorandums present optimistic assumptions as baseline expectations, with top-of-market rents replacing actual in-place rates and vacancy assumptions trimmed below historical averages. Every input tends toward the most plausible outcome, producing projections that appear authoritative while masking significant downside risk.
Small changes in key variables can produce significant swings in returns that most buyers underestimate. A 50-basis-point increase in exit cap rate can reduce projected IRR and equity multiples by double digits, while modest adjustments to rent growth projections, compounded over five to seven years, can inflate terminal value well above what comparable properties actually command. Because most pro formas present a single scenario, they obscure this fragility and make returns appear more stable than they are.
Hidden costs often surface after the letter of intent, eroding cash flow projections that appeared sound on paper. Proformas routinely understate or exclude deferred maintenance, tenant improvement costs, leasing commissions, insurance increases, and property tax reassessments triggered by the sale. In assets with significant lease rollovers, tenant improvements, and downtime between leases, cash flow can be consumed faster than most buyers anticipate, yet these costs are often smoothed or minimized in marketing materials.
U.S. office vacancy rates reached roughly 19-20% nationally in 2023 and 2024, the highest on record, according to Moody's Analytics and CBRE, far above the single-digit levels many legacy models assumed. Even a modest increase in vacancy from 5% to 10% reduces effective gross income by about 5%, but because many costs don't scale proportionally, net operating income declines by a larger percentage. When sellers project stabilized vacancy at historical lows, they're betting current market conditions will persist indefinitely.
Manual data extraction from offering memorandums, rent rolls, and financial statements creates bottlenecks that cost investors both time and deals. Transcribing rent rolls line by line, reconciling conflicting data across documents, and rebuilding models from scratch can take hours or days per deal, especially for complex commercial assets. Industry audits routinely identify material errors in financial models, including broken formulas, incorrect cell references, and inconsistent assumptions across tabs.
Commercial real estate underwriting software addresses this by automating financial data extraction and rent roll analysis, eliminating manual steps where errors typically enter the model and enabling investors to move directly to scenario testing with validated data.

Why Most Real Estate Proformas Give False Confidence

Most real estate pro formas provide false confidence because they're built to sell, not to protect. They reflect optimistic assumptions wrapped in the visual authority of spreadsheets, creating an illusion of precision that masks significant downside risk.

Sellers Build Models to Win Deals, Not Stress-Test Them

Walk into any deal room, and you'll find a proforma that looks bulletproof. Clean formatting. Logical growth curves. Returns that clear your hurdle rate with room to spare.

‍

The problem isn't that these models lie outright. It's that they're engineered for persuasion. Offering memorandums is intended to maximize the sale price and create urgency. Every assumption leans toward the best plausible outcome rather than the most likely.

‍

Top-of-market rents replace actual in-place rents. Lease-up timelines assume tenants materialize on schedule with minimal concessions. Vacancy rates get trimmed below historical averages. Operating expenses reflect ideal efficiency, not real-world friction.

‍

None of this violates disclosure rules. But it does establish a baseline that treats favorable conditions as guaranteed rather than merely hoped for. When buyers anchor to these projections without rebuilding the analysis, they inherit optimism disguised as diligence.

Tiny Input Shifts Produce Massive Return Swings

Real estate returns hinge on a handful of variables. Small changes to any of them can transform an attractive deal into a mediocre one, or worse.

‍

Exit cap rate assumptions carry enormous weight. A 50-basis-point increase can slash projected IRR and equity multiples by double digits. Rent growth projections compounded over five or seven years can inflate terminal value far beyond what comparable properties actually command. Stabilized vacancy rates, interest rate assumptions, and capital expenditure timing all function as leverage points where modest adjustments ripple through the entire model.

‍

Because most proformas present a single scenario, they obscure this fragility. The numbers appear solid, but they rest on assumptions that may shift if market conditions change or lease negotiations stall.

Hidden Costs Surface After the LOI

Projected expenses are where optimism does the most damage.

‍

Proformas routinely understate or exclude deferred maintenance, tenant improvement costs, leasing commissions, insurance increases, property tax reassessments triggered by the sale, capital reserves, and management costs at scale. In assets with significant lease rollovers, tenant improvements, and downtime between leases, cash flow can be consumed faster than most buyers anticipate. Yet these costs often appear smoothed or minimized in marketing materials.

‍

When real expenses emerge during due diligence or after closing, cash flow projections fall short. Returns that looked safe on paper become tight or negative in practice.

Spreadsheet Errors Hide in Plain Sight

Even when assumptions are reasonable, execution can fail.

‍

Commercial underwriting models are typically built in complex spreadsheets with linked tabs, manual inputs, and formulas copied across rows. Errors are common and difficult to detect, especially when teams are moving fast to meet deadlines.

‍

Industry audits across sectors routinely identify material errors in financial models, including broken formulas, incorrect cell references, and inconsistent assumptions across tabs. In real estate, where models evolve deal by deal and get passed between analysts, the risk compounds.

‍

Because outputs appear precise (down to the decimal point), users may trust results that are fundamentally flawed. Precision becomes a substitute for accuracy.

‍

Traditional Excel-based workflows magnify this risk. Manual data entry, formula replication, and version control issues create friction at every stage. Cactus commercial real estate underwriting software automates financial data extraction and rent roll analysis, eliminating manual steps where errors are most likely to occur. Instead of spending hours building spreadsheets from scratch, investors can upload documents and move directly to scenario testing, knowing the underlying data has been validated against real-time market comps.

The Real Problem Is Structural, Not Accidental

A polished proforma communicates confidence through structure and detail. Rows align. Growth rates follow logical patterns. The final page shows returns that justify the effort.

‍

But precision is not the same as reliability. When optimistic assumptions, incomplete cost projections, and potential modeling errors combine, the result is a document that feels authoritative while masking uncertainty.

‍

The deeper issue is that most investors treat seller proformas as conclusions rather than starting points. They review the numbers, adjust a few inputs, and move forward. They don't rebuild the analysis from verified data. They don't stress-test assumptions against downside scenarios. They don't question whether the model's architecture aligns with their risk tolerance or investment thesis.

‍

This isn't negligence. It's a workflow problem. Rebuilding a proforma from scratch takes time, and time is scarce when deals move fast. So investors rely on the version they received, trusting that the numbers are close enough.

‍

But close enough isn't good enough when returns depend on assumptions that may not hold.

‍

What exactly should a pro forma do, and where do most of them fall short?

What a Real Estate Proforma Is And Isn't

A real estate proforma is a forward-looking financial model that projects property performance over time. It estimates income, expenses, financing costs, and eventual sale value to help investors decide whether a deal meets their return targets. What it is not: a guarantee. It describes a hypothetical future based on assumptions, some grounded in data, others rooted in judgment about markets, operations, and timing.

‍

If those assumptions shift, projected results can change dramatically.

Projected Income: Where the Revenue Is Supposed to Come From

Income projections begin with base rent from tenants, then add reimbursements for operating costs (common in commercial leases), percentage rent or escalation clauses, and other revenue streams such as parking, storage, signage, or service fees.

‍

The critical risk surfaces in the gap between in-place income and pro forma income. In-place income reflects what tenants currently pay. Pro forma income reflects what the model assumes they will pay after renewals, repositioning, or lease-up. That gap can be wide, especially in properties requiring significant capital investment or market repositioning. When sellers project stabilized rents at top-of-market rates, they're betting on lease-up velocity and tenant demand that may not materialize on schedule.

‍

Assuming rent growth over five or seven years can inflate terminal value far beyond what comparable properties actually command. A 3% annual rent escalation may seem modest, but over a decade it compounds to a 34% increase. If the market doesn't support that growth, the exit valuation collapses.

Vacancy and Credit Loss Assumptions

No property operates at 100% economic occupancy indefinitely. Pro forma estimates physical vacancy (empty space) and economic vacancy (concessions, downtime, nonpayment), as well as credit losses from tenant defaults.

‍

Even small changes here materially affect cash flow. A property underwritten at 5% vacancy that stabilizes at 8% vacancy loses 3 percentage points of gross income each year. Over a five-year hold, that compounds into significant cash flow erosion and lower returns. Overly optimistic vacancy assumptions are a common source of inflated projections, particularly in markets where tenant demand is cyclical or lease rollover is high.

‍

Stabilized vacancy rates often reflect best-case conditions rather than historical averages. When market absorption slows or tenant credit weakens, those assumptions unravel quickly.

Operating Expenses

Operating expenses are the ongoing costs of operating the property, excluding financing and major capital improvements. Typical categories include property management, maintenance and repairs, utilities, insurance, property taxes, administrative costs, and contract services.

‍

Expense projections often assume efficiencies or stable costs. In reality, these can increase due to inflation, asset aging, regulatory changes, or tightening in the insurance market. Property tax reassessments triggered by the sale can increase annual expenses by double-digit percentages. Insurance premiums in high-risk regions have risen 30% to 50% in recent years, yet many pro formas assume flat or minimal increases.

‍

Maintenance costs tend to rise as properties age, especially if deferred maintenance wasn't fully captured during due diligence. When actual expenses exceed projections, net operating income falls, and so do returns.

Net Operating Income (NOI)

NOI measures the property's income-producing ability before debt and capital costs. The formula is simple: Effective Gross Income minus Operating Expenses. Lenders, investors, and appraisers rely heavily on NOI because it underpins valuation and debt sizing.

‍

A property's value is often calculated by dividing stabilized NOI by the market capitalization rate. If NOI is overstated by 10%, the property's estimated value inflates by the same percentage. That overvaluation cascades through the entire deal structure, affecting loan sizing, equity requirements, and projected returns.

‍

Because NOI drives many downstream calculations, small errors in income or expense assumptions can have outsized effects on deal viability.

Capital Expenditures and Reserves

Capital expenditures are major investments that extend the life or value of the property, distinct from routine operating costs. Examples include roof replacement, HVAC systems, structural repairs, major renovations, and tenant improvements.

‍

Proformas may also include reserves, funds set aside annually to cover future capital needs. Underestimating CapEx can significantly overstate long-term returns. In assets with significant lease rollovers, tenant improvements, and downtime between leases, cash flow can be consumed faster than most buyers anticipate. Yet these costs often appear smoothed or minimized in marketing materials.

‍

When real capital needs surface after closing, cash flow projections fall short. Returns that looked safe on paper become tight or negative in practice.

Financing Assumptions

Most commercial real estate deals involve leverage, making debt terms a critical component of the model. Key financing inputs include loan amount and loan-to-value ratio, interest rate and type (fixed or floating), amortization schedule, interest-only periods, fees and closing costs, and refinancing assumptions if applicable.

‍

Changes in interest rates or loan terms materially affect cash flow and equity returns. A 100-basis-point increase in interest rates can reduce cash-on-cash returns by several percentage points, especially in highly leveraged deals. Floating-rate debt introduces additional risk if rates rise during the hold period.

‍

Refinancing assumptions often presume favorable market conditions at exit. If credit markets tighten or property performance lags, refinancing may not be available on projected terms, forcing a sale at an inopportune time or requiring additional equity.

Exit Assumptions and Valuation

Because many deals are underwritten with a planned sale in mind, the pro forma typically projects the property's exit value. This projection typically depends on the stabilized NOI at the time of sale, the exit capitalization rate, selling costs, and the remaining loan balance.

‍

Exit assumptions are among the most sensitive and uncertain inputs. Small changes in cap rate produce large swings in projected value. A 25-basis-point increase in exit cap rate can reduce terminal value by 5% or more. If the property hasn't stabilized as expected, or if market cap rates have expanded, the exit valuation can fall well below projections.

‍

Selling costs, including brokerage fees, legal expenses, and transfer taxes, typically range from 2% to 4% of the sale price. When these aren't fully accounted for, net proceeds at exit fall short of expectations.

The Critical Distinction: Model vs. Reality

A proforma is a decision-making tool, not a prediction carved in stone. Its usefulness depends entirely on the quality of the inputs: accurate historical data, realistic market assumptions, conservative expense estimates, sound financing projections, and thoughtful risk assessment.

‍

When these elements are grounded, the proforma can guide disciplined investment decisions. When they are optimistic or incomplete, the model may project outcomes that never materialize. The challenge lies in determining how plausible those assumptions are and whether they reflect the most likely or the most favorable scenario.

‍

Traditional Excel-based workflows compound this challenge. Manual data entry, formula replication, and version control issues create friction at every stage. Cactus commercial real estate underwriting software automates financial data extraction and rent roll analysis, eliminating manual steps that are prone to error. Instead of spending hours building spreadsheets from scratch, investors can upload documents and move directly to scenario testing, knowing the underlying data has been validated against real-time market comps. Speed and accuracy are no longer trade-offs when the grunt work is automated.

What It Ultimately Represents

At its core, a real estate proforma is a structured way to answer a single question: "If the future unfolds roughly as assumed, what will this investment deliver?"

‍

The challenge, and the risk, lies in determining how plausible those assumptions really are.

‍

But understanding what a proforma should contain is only half the equation. The other half is knowing where those inputs come from, and why they're so often wrong.

Where Proforma Inputs Come From And Why They’re Often Wrong

A real estate pro forma doesn't start with clean data. It's assembled from multiple documents created for different purposes (marketing, accounting, leasing, or research) and then stitched into a single forecast. That patchwork is why projections often look precise but rest on shaky foundations.

Offering Memorandums: Marketing Dressed as Analysis

Offering memorandums exists to generate buyer interest and maximize the sale price. They typically include projected income, expenses, and growth assumptions, often presented in the most favorable light.

‍

The problem isn't that OMs lie. It's that they're optimized for persuasion, not accuracy. Best-case scenarios get presented as baseline expectations. Comparables get cherry-picked to support higher valuations. Calculations lack transparency, making it difficult to verify how projections were derived. Data may be months old by the time buyers see it, yet still treated as current.

‍

When you anchor your underwriting to an OM without rebuilding the analysis from verified sources, you're inheriting someone else's optimism.

Rent Rolls: Messy Data Hiding in Plain Sight

Rent rolls provide tenant-level income details, but they're frequently outdated or inaccurate. Lease terms get recorded incorrectly. Square footage doesn't match the actual space. Concessions that reduce effective rent never appear in the spreadsheet. Pending move-outs aren't captured because the landlord only learned yesterday.

‍

Even small inaccuracies compound when aggregated across dozens of tenants. A rent roll showing $500,000 in annual income might actually deliver $465,000 once you account for the three tenants paying below-market rates due to renewal concessions and the two spaces sitting vacant longer than anticipated.

‍

Most buyers scan rent rolls for major red flags but don't verify every line item against lease abstracts. That's where revenue projections start to drift from reality.

Trailing Financials: History That Needs Translation

Historical operating statements show past performance, but they rarely reflect future operations without adjustment. One-time expenses (such as a major repair or legal settlement) are included in ongoing costs, inflating projected expenses. Deferred maintenance makes historical costs appear artificially low because problems were ignored rather than resolved. Owner-specific costs (such as above-market management fees paid to a related entity) won't transfer to the new buyer, but they still appear in the financials.

‍

According to Financial Models Lab, a 15% increase in raw material costs can significantly impact construction or renovation budgets, yet many trailing financials don't capture these recent market shifts. Accounting timing distortions (such as prepaid expenses or deferred revenue) introduce additional noise that must be normalized.

‍

Professional appraisal standards emphasize adjusting financials to reflect stabilized operations, not raw historical data. But most buyers don't have time to reconstruct a full year of expenses line by line, so they accept trailing financials with minor tweaks and move forward.

Market Comparables: Imperfect Proxies

Comps help estimate achievable rents and exit value, but no property is perfectly comparable. Differences in location (even a few blocks), quality, tenant mix, or lease structure make direct comparisons difficult. Undisclosed concessions mean reported rents overstate what tenants actually pay. Time lags in reported data mean you're using six-month-old transactions to predict today's market. Thin transaction markets (especially in secondary or tertiary locations) mean you're working with limited data points.

‍

Real estate markets are highly local and heterogeneous. A comparable property may have secured higher rents due to better access, newer systems, or a landlord willing to invest heavily in tenant improvements. When you assume your property will command the same rents without accounting for these differences, you're building in unearned upside.

Broker Estimates and Growth Assumptions

Forward projections about lease-up velocity, rent growth, or repositioning success are often based on judgment rather than contracts. Brokers may reflect genuine market knowledge, or they may reflect optimism designed to keep deals moving. Growth assumptions depend on flawless execution: tenants renewing on time, capital improvements finishing on schedule, and no unexpected vacancies.

‍

Financial Models Lab notes that interest rate assumptions, such as projecting 5.5% rates through Q4 2025, can shift significantly with Federal Reserve policy changes. When financing costs rise unexpectedly, cash flow projections built on lower rates fall apart.

‍

These projections aren't guarantees. They're scenarios that assume everything goes according to plan. When markets slow, tenants negotiate harder, or construction timelines slip, those assumptions unravel quickly.

‍

Traditional Excel-based workflows compound these input problems. Manual data entry from multiple sources introduces transcription errors. Formula replication across tabs can introduce hidden calculation errors. Version control issues mean you're never quite sure if you're working from the latest rent roll or last week's draft. Cactus commercial real estate underwriting software automates financial data extraction and rent roll analysis, eliminating the manual steps where input errors typically enter the model. Instead of copying data from PDFs and reconciling discrepancies across documents, investors upload files and move directly to scenario testing, knowing the underlying data has been validated against real-time market comps.

The Bottom Line: Garbage In, Garbage Out

When inconsistent documents, missing data, and optimistic assumptions feed into a model, the output may appear authoritative but remain unreliable. The spreadsheet doesn't know that the rent roll is three months old, that trailing expenses exclude deferred maintenance, or that comps reflect undisclosed concessions.

‍

In commercial real estate underwriting, the biggest risk isn't complex math. It's trusting inputs that were never designed for rigorous analysis.

‍

But even with perfect inputs, some assumptions carry more weight than others.

The Assumptions That Matter Most to Returns

Real estate proformas can include dozens of inputs, but only a handful truly drive outcomes. Change these variables even slightly, and projected IRR, equity multiple, and cash flow can move dramatically. Professional underwriters focus less on the volume of assumptions and more on the few that dominate risk.

Vacancy Rates

A vacancy directly reduces effective income, while most expenses remain fixed. In U.S. office markets, vacancy reached roughly 19-20% nationally in 2023 and 2024, the highest on record, according to Moody's Analytics and CBRE. That's far above the single-digit levels many legacy models assumed.

‍

Even a modest change matters. Moving from 5% to 10% vacancy cuts effective gross income by about 5%. But because many costs don't fall proportionally (property taxes, insurance, base-building utilities), NOI drops by a larger percentage. A property generating $1 million in NOI at 5% vacancy might produce only $900,000 at 10% vacancy, even though gross income declined by less.

‍

When sellers project stabilized vacancy at historical lows, they're betting that current market conditions will persist indefinitely. If absorption slows or tenant credit weakens, that assumption unravels quickly.

Rent Growth

Small differences in assumed rent growth compound over time. A model assuming 4% annual growth versus 2% can produce materially different exit NOI after five to ten years, and therefore very different valuations.

‍

The Federal Reserve's commercial property price index shows that CRE values are highly sensitive to income growth expectations. From 2020 to 2022, strong rent growth drove significant price increases, followed by declines as expectations weakened. That swing wasn't driven by changes in current income. It reflected shifting beliefs about future growth rates.

‍

Over a seven-year hold, a property starting with $500,000 in NOI grows to $658,000 at 4% annual growth, but only $575,000 at 2% growth. That $83,000 difference translates directly into exit value. At a 6% cap rate, the higher-growth scenario produces a property worth $1.4 million more.

Expense Inflation

Operating costs rarely stay flat. Insurance, utilities, labor, and property taxes have risen sharply in recent years. Research from CNBC shows that consumer prices increased about 20% cumulatively from 2020 to 2024, illustrating how quickly expenses can escalate.

‍

If expenses grow faster than rents, margins compress. A property with $300,000 in annual expenses that inflates at 5% while rents grow at 3% will see NOI shrink over time, even with full occupancy. That margin compression is often underrepresented in optimistic proformas that assume expenses will track revenue growth or remain stable as a percentage of income.

‍

Insurance markets have tightened particularly hard in coastal and climate-risk regions. Premiums that were $30,000 annually five years ago now exceed $50,000. When those increases weren't modeled, cash flow projections fell short from day one.

Capital Expenditures (CapEx)

Major repairs and upgrades can materially affect long-term returns. The Urban Land Institute notes that aging building systems, sustainability upgrades, and tenant expectations are driving rising capital needs across property types.

‍

Underestimating CapEx can inflate cash flow projections early while creating large future funding requirements that reduce investor returns. A property that appears to deliver 8% cash-on-cash returns may actually yield 5% after accounting for roof replacement, HVAC overhaul, parking lot resurfacing, and modernization.

‍

Sellers often present CapEx as a flat annual rate (e.g., $0.50 per square foot). Reality is lumpier. Systems fail on their own schedule, not according to a spreadsheet's timeline. When three major systems need replacement in year four, rather than being spread across years three through seven, cash flow is concentrated in a single period.

Exit Cap Rate

Few assumptions have more leverage over projected value. Because property value is typically estimated as Value = NOI ÷ Cap Rate, a small increase in the cap rate can sharply reduce valuation.

‍

Increasing the exit cap rate from 6% to 7% lowers value by roughly 14%, assuming constant NOI. This effect alone can wipe out a significant portion of projected equity gains. If you underwrote a deal expecting to sell at a 6% cap and the market clears at 6.5%, your exit proceeds drop by about 8%. That's the difference between hitting your 18% IRR target and delivering 13%.

‍

Cap rates move with interest rates, risk perception, and capital availability. When credit tightens or investors demand higher returns, cap rates expand. A pro forma built in a low-rate environment, assuming cap rate compression or stability, can produce wildly optimistic exit values if market conditions shift.

‍

Most teams manage cap rate risk through Excel-based sensitivity tables, manually adjusting exit assumptions across dozens of scenarios. Cactus commercial real estate underwriting software automates scenario testing, letting investors instantly model multiple exit cap rates, hold periods, and refinancing options without rebuilding formulas. Instead of spending hours copying tabs and checking for broken links, teams can stress-test assumptions in real time and move directly to investment decisions.

Lease Rollover Risk (Commercial Assets)

Commercial properties face concentrated income risk when major leases expire. According to research cited by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, office leases typically run 5 to 10 years, meaning large portions of income can reset at once under different market conditions.

‍

If rollover occurs during a weak market, landlords may face vacancy downtime, tenant improvement costs, leasing commissions, and lower renewal rents. A property with 40% of its income rolling in year three could see NOI drop by 15% or more if those tenants negotiate below-market renewals or vacate entirely.

‍

This risk is often smoothed over in projections. Sellers assume tenants renew at market rates with minimal downtime. Reality is messier. Tenants negotiate. Markets soften. Spaces sit vacant longer than anticipated. When three leases expire simultaneously, and two tenants leave, the property's cash flow can collapse for 12 to 18 months while new tenants are secured and spaces are built out.

Why Sensitivity Matters

Each of these variables compounds over time and interacts with the others. A slightly higher vacancy rate, combined with slower rent growth and higher expenses, can significantly reduce NOI, thereby lowering both annual cash flow and exit value.

‍

That's why sophisticated investors run scenario analyses rather than relying on a single "base case." They test what happens if vacancy runs 200 basis points higher, rent growth lags by 1% annually, or expenses outpace revenue growth. Those downside cases reveal how much margin for error exists in the deal.

‍

When a deal only works if everything goes according to plan, it's not a deal. It's a bet.

‍

The key takeaway? In real estate underwriting, precision in minor inputs matters far less than realism in major ones. A proforma can include hundreds of cells, but outcomes are largely determined by a small set of assumptions about income durability, cost growth, and market conditions.

‍

But knowing which assumptions matter most is only half the battle. The other half is knowing how to test them before you wire the money.

How Professionals Stress-Test a Proforma Before Trusting It

‍

Experienced investors rarely accept a seller's pro forma at face value. Before committing time or capital, they rebuild and pressure-test the numbers to see how the deal performs under realistic conditions and unfavorable scenarios. This disciplined process is less about perfect forecasting and more about identifying hidden risks early, before they become costly mistakes.

Normalize Historical Financials

Raw trailing statements often include noise that distorts true performance. Professionals adjust for one-time expenses like legal fees or major repairs, deferred maintenance that artificially lowers past costs, owner-specific items that won't transfer, and temporary revenue spikes or concessions. The goal is a "stabilized" baseline: what the property would earn and cost under typical operations, not what appeared on last year's tax return.

‍

When you skip this step, you're anchoring to numbers that may reflect the previous owner's operational quirks rather than the asset's true earning potential. That can lead to overestimating cash flow or underestimating the capital needed to bring the property to market standards.

Rebuild Projections From Actual Data

Rather than tweaking the seller's model, analysts frequently rebuild the proforma from the ground up using verified inputs. They start with the current rent roll, not summary figures. They review lease terms and expirations individually. They analyze historical expense trends line by line. They map out realistic lease-up timelines based on comparable absorption rates, not best-case assumptions.

‍

This process often uncovers inconsistencies between marketing materials and underlying documents. A property marketed as "90% occupied" might show three tenants on month-to-month leases and two spaces listed as occupied but paying zero rent. Those details don't surface until you rebuild the model from source documents.

Apply Conservative Assumptions

Professional underwriting typically leans cautious, not optimistic. Common conservative adjustments include higher-than-marketed vacancies, slower rent growth, higher operating costs, larger capital reserves, and more conservative exit cap rates. The aim is to determine whether the deal still works even with imperfect execution.

‍

If a property pencils at only 5% vacancy, 4% annual rent growth, and a 5.5% exit cap, it's fragile. If it still delivers acceptable returns at 8% vacancy, 2% rent growth, and a 6.5% exit cap, it has margin for error. That margin is what separates a resilient investment from a bet on flawless conditions.

Run Downside Scenarios

Instead of relying on a single "base case," professionals test multiple scenarios. What happens during a recession or demand shock? How does the deal perform if lease-up takes twice as long as projected? What if interest rates rise another 100 basis points before refinancing? What if the largest tenant leaves at renewal? What if exit market cap rates expand by 50 basis points?

‍

According to the European Banking Authority, 196 banks participated in the 2025 EU-wide stress test, reflecting how financial institutions systematically evaluate portfolio resilience under adverse conditions. Commercial real estate investors apply similar rigor when testing proformas against downside scenarios. If returns collapse under plausible stress conditions, the deal may be too fragile.

‍

Most teams manage downside testing through Excel-based sensitivity tables, manually adjusting variables across dozens of tabs. A single formula error or a broken cell reference can invalidate the entire analysis. Cactus commercial real estate underwriting software automates scenario testing, enabling investors to instantly model multiple downside scenarios without rebuilding formulas or copying tabs. Teams can stress-test vacancy, rent growth, and exit cap rates in real time, then move directly to investment decisions knowing the analysis is validated against real-time market data.

Identify Red Flags Before Deep Diligence

Early underwriting focuses on screening, not perfection. Analysts look for signals that justify further investigation or immediate rejection. Large gaps between in-place and projected rents suggest aggressive repositioning assumptions. Heavy near-term lease rollover creates concentrated income risk. Unusually low expenses may indicate deferred maintenance or incomplete cost projections. Dependence on a single tenant introduces default risk. Significant deferred maintenance signals future capital needs that aren't reflected in the pro forma.

‍

Catching these issues early prevents costly diligence on weak opportunities. Better to walk away after two hours of analysis than after two weeks and $50,000 in professional fees.

Compare Against Market Benchmarks

Finally, projections are tested against external reality. Are rents aligned with comparable properties? Are vacancy assumptions consistent with market data? Do expense ratios match similar assets? Is the exit cap rate plausible given current transactions?

‍

If a model only works under assumptions that are far better than those in the market, it signals higher risk. A multifamily property projecting $2.50 per square foot rents when comps are achieving $2.20 needs a compelling story about why it will outperform. Without that story, the proforma is built on hope, not evidence.

‍

The Hidden Cost: Time

This level of analysis is labor-intensive. Extracting data from offering memorandums, rent rolls, and financial statements, cleaning inconsistencies, rebuilding models, and running scenarios can take hours or even days per deal, especially for complex commercial assets. That time cost limits how many opportunities investors can evaluate thoroughly, which is why efficient screening and disciplined underwriting processes are critical.

‍

When you're evaluating ten deals to find one worth pursuing, spending twelve hours on each means 120 hours before you write a letter of intent. That's why speed and accuracy can't remain trade-offs. The firms that can stress-test deals faster without sacrificing rigor see more opportunities and move faster when they find the right one.

‍

A pro forma becomes trustworthy not when it looks polished, but when it withstands scrutiny under realistic, unfavorable conditions.

‍

But knowing how to stress-test assumptions is only useful if you can extract clean data from messy documents fast enough to act on it.

How to Turn Messy Deal Documents Into a Reliable Proforma Fast

‍

The bottleneck in commercial underwriting isn't analysis. It's the hours spent extracting numbers from PDFs, reconciling conflicting data across documents, and rebuilding rent rolls before you can evaluate anything. Speed comes from eliminating that manual cleanup entirely.

‍

Most investors lose deals not because their underwriting was wrong, but because they moved too slowly. While you're still transcribing rent rolls and cross-checking trailing statements against broker summaries, someone else has already submitted an LOI. The winner isn't always the smartest buyer. It's often the fastest one who can still trust their numbers.

Upload Everything at Once

The traditional workflow treats each document as a separate task. You open the offering memorandum, manually type key metrics into Excel, then switch to the rent roll PDF and copy tenant data line by line. Next comes the trailing twelve-month statement, which requires reformatting because the seller's accountant used different expense categories than your model expects. By the time you've assembled a baseline, two hours have disappeared.

‍

A better system accepts all source documents simultaneously. Offering memos, rent rolls, operating statements, property tax bills, insurance certificates, and lease abstracts get processed together rather than sequentially. The platform extracts data from each file, identifies relationships between documents (e.g., matching tenants across the rent roll and lease summaries), and automatically flags inconsistencies.

‍

This parallel processing cuts hours into minutes because you're not waiting for one document to finish before starting the next.

Let Structure Emerge From Chaos

Raw deal documents arrive in dozens of formats. One seller's rent roll lists tenants alphabetically. Another group by floor. A third shows lease expirations but omits square footage. Trailing financials might use cash accounting, while your model expects an accrual basis. Property tax assessments reference parcel numbers that don't match the legal description in the purchase agreement.

‍

Manual reconciliation means building lookup tables, adjusting formulas, and hoping you caught every mismatch. Automated extraction handles this differently. It identifies data types (tenant names, lease dates, dollar amounts, square footage) regardless of where they appear in the document, then organizes them into a consistent schema. When the rent roll says "ABC Corp" and the lease abstract says "ABC Corporation," the system recognizes them as the same tenant and consolidates the records.

‍

You get clean, normalized data without spending an afternoon reformatting spreadsheets or hunting for discrepancies across files.

Surface Conflicts Before You Build Assumptions

Inconsistencies between documents often signal deeper problems. The rent roll shows 95% occupancy, but the trailing income statement reflects revenue consistent with 88% occupancy. The broker's pro forma projects $2.80 per square foot rents, but the actual lease abstracts show $2.55 with concessions that drop effective rents to $2.35. Property taxes in the operating statement are $47,000, but the most recent tax bill shows $52,000 after reassessment.

‍

Catching these conflicts manually requires cross-referencing multiple files and remembering what you saw in a previous document. By the time you notice the discrepancy, you've already built formulas around incorrect assumptions.

‍

Automated systems flag conflicts immediately. When projected income doesn't match lease-level data, or when expenses in the trailing statement diverge from recent invoices, you see warnings before proceeding. This prevents you from anchoring to flawed numbers and forces you to resolve data quality issues upfront rather than discovering them during final diligence.

Apply Your Underwriting Rules, Not Theirs

Once the data is clean and structured, you can quickly overlay your investment criteria. Your vacancy assumption replaces the seller's. Your expense growth rate, not theirs. Your capital reserve policy. Your financing terms. Your exit cap rate.

‍

Because the baseline data is validated and consistent, changes propagate reliably. Adjust one variable, and all dependent calculations update instantly without breaking formulas or requiring manual fixes. You can test ten scenarios in the time it used to take to build one.

‍

This is where speed becomes an asset. You're not rushing through analysis. You're eliminating the grunt work that used to consume 80% of your time, so you can spend that time stress-testing assumptions instead.

‍

Most teams still manage this through Excel macros and linked workbooks, manually copying tabs for each sensitivity case. Cactus commercial real estate underwriting software automates the entire workflow from document upload to scenario modeling. Upload an offering memorandum and rent roll, and the platform extracts tenant data, reconciles income against trailing statements, validates rents against live market comps, and builds a baseline proforma in minutes. You move directly to testing your assumptions, knowing the foundation is accurate because the system cross-checks every input against multiple sources.

Generate Decision-Ready Metrics Instantly

Screening deals requires answering a handful of critical questions fast. Does this property meet our minimum return threshold? Are there obvious red flags that disqualify it immediately? What are the two or three biggest risks, and can we mitigate them?

‍

Traditional underwriting buries these answers in complex spreadsheets. You build the model, run the calculations, and then interpret the outputs. Decision-makers receive a PDF summary days later, often after the seller has already accepted another offer.

‍

Streamlined systems surface key metrics as soon as data is processed. NOI, cash-on-cash return, IRR, and equity multiple appear instantly. Sensitivity tables show how returns change across different vacancy, growth, and exit cap rate scenarios. Risk flags highlight heavy lease rollover, below-market rents, or expense ratios outside the property type's normal range.

‍

You can decide whether to pursue the deal in twenty minutes, rather than waiting two days for an analyst to finish building the model.

Reduce Errors by Eliminating Manual Steps

Spreadsheet mistakes happen in predictable places. Formulas get copied incorrectly, leaving some rows calculating properly while others reference the wrong cells. Someone updates the rent roll but forgets to adjust the income projection tab. A percentage is entered as a decimal (5% becomes 0.05 in one place and 5 in another), which throws off downstream calculations.

‍

These errors are nearly impossible to catch by inspection because the spreadsheet still produces numbers that look reasonable. You don't realize NOI is overstated by $80,000 until you're in contract, when the lender's third-party review identifies the mistake.

‍

Automation eliminates most error sources. Data gets extracted once and used consistently across all calculations. Formulas are templated and tested, not rebuilt for each deal. Updates to source documents automatically trigger recalculation, keeping projections synchronized with inputs.

‍

You still need judgment about assumptions. But you're not introducing calculation errors that undermine even good assumptions.

Scale Your Deal Flow Without Adding Headcount

The real constraint in most investment shops isn't capital. It's analytical capacity. Each deal requires hours of data work before decision-makers can evaluate it. That limits the number of opportunities you can seriously consider.

‍

When you can process documents in minutes instead of hours, you evaluate more deals without hiring more analysts. A team that used to review fifteen opportunities per quarter can now review forty. That doesn't just increase volume. It improves selection quality by allowing you to choose from a larger pool of vetted options.

‍

The firms moving fastest aren't cutting corners. They've eliminated the steps that never added value in the first place.

‍

But speed only matters if the people using these tools trust what they see.

Try Cactus Today －Trusted by 1,500+ Investors

Trust in underwriting doesn't come from checking every cell twice. It comes from knowing your process eliminates the steps where errors hide. When data extraction is automated, when rent rolls reconcile against lease abstracts without manual cross-checking, and when market comps validate assumptions in real time rather than three days later, you stop second-guessing and start deciding.

‍

Over 1,500 investors already work this way. They're not taking shortcuts. They've removed the friction that used to separate speed from accuracy. If you want to evaluate more deals with fewer manual errors and faster turnaround, try Cactus's commercial real estate underwriting software or book a demo to see it applied to a real opportunity. The firms winning deals aren't the ones with bigger teams. They're the ones who stopped treating pro formas like homework and started treating them as intelligence.

‍