Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Agents for financial services and insurance

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 212 posts

Re: Agents for financial services and insurance

#71

Post by dakolli »

areoform wrote: post #70
tencentshill wrote: post #34

I don't trust these AI-only companies to be overnight experts in properly handling medical, financial and insurance data. They have no business providing these tools, unless they want to take all the risk too.

Claude's actually pretty great at this! I actually used to use Claude A LOT to answer interesting questions (which I'll be writing up on!) More generally, Claude is palpably different from most other agents. I'd recommend these models – especially Opus – without qualifications. But there's a process risk here based on their current practises. I'm hoping those practises change so that I can recommend Claude to everyon…

They aren't even close to a 1T company, they're valued at <400bb and that's at like a 20x-30x multiple. They can probably raise money at a higher valuation but its literally just value based on hype, not revenue.

Re: Agents for financial services and insurance

#72

Post by areoform »

dakolli wrote: post #71
areoform wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claude's actually pretty great at this! I actually used to use Claude A LOT to answer interesting questions (which I'll be writing up on!) More generally, Claude is palpably different from most other agents. I'd recommend these models – especially Opus – without qualifications. But there's a process risk here based on their current practises. I'm hoping those practises change so that I can recommend Claude to everyon…

They aren't even close to a 1T company, they're valued at <400bb and that's at like a 20x-30x multiple. They can probably raise money at a higher valuation but its literally just value based on hype, not revenue.

https://www.businessinsider.com/anthropic-trillion-dollar-va...

Re: Agents for financial services and insurance

#73

Post by ofjcihen »

infecto wrote: post #37
ofjcihen wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not saying your implementation is bad or anything but my visceral reaction to this was “I’m glad I’m not on the other side of that”

What is your point? This is pretty normal expense management in any company setting. I don’t know what is so bad about being on the other side of that. Hope I am not too inflammatory by asking what is the point but genuinely you pointed it out like it’s some archaic process flow but it’s part of almost every expense system.

I guess my current company’s processes may be easier to deal with than others. That or my position affords me some extra catering to.

The system is currently using a simple app to submit expenses and any issues gets a simple human chat request and a call if requested.

They try to avoid kicking anything back and if they do they make sure it’s reviewed first to make sure that it’s needed and to make sure the reason is understood.

Our company is also very large so I’m not sure how they manage but they do. People rave about the process instead of hating it.

Re: Agents for financial services and insurance

#74

Post by intended »

areoform wrote: post #70
tencentshill wrote: post #34

I don't trust these AI-only companies to be overnight experts in properly handling medical, financial and insurance data. They have no business providing these tools, unless they want to take all the risk too.

Claude's actually pretty great at this! I actually used to use Claude A LOT to answer interesting questions (which I'll be writing up on!) More generally, Claude is palpably different from most other agents. I'd recommend these models – especially Opus – without qualifications. But there's a process risk here based on their current practises. I'm hoping those practises change so that I can recommend Claude to everyon…

> and you won't get human support or Claude – even if you are an enterprise paying out of your nose. And there's 0 redressal unless you go viral on social media.

Sadly this sounds like par for the course when it comes to tech. Too many messages and requests for help depend on knowing someone in the right slack groups.

Re: Agents for financial services and insurance

#75

Post by motbus3 »

tencentshill wrote: post #34

I don't trust these AI-only companies to be overnight experts in properly handling medical, financial and insurance data. They have no business providing these tools, unless they want to take all the risk too.

The only reason they are doing it is because there are regulation for people but not for machines.

Re: Agents for financial services and insurance

#76

Post by areoform »

intended wrote: post #74
areoform wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claude's actually pretty great at this! I actually used to use Claude A LOT to answer interesting questions (which I'll be writing up on!) More generally, Claude is palpably different from most other agents. I'd recommend these models – especially Opus – without qualifications. But there's a process risk here based on their current practises. I'm hoping those practises change so that I can recommend Claude to everyon…

> and you won't get human support or Claude – even if you are an enterprise paying out of your nose. And there's 0 redressal unless you go viral on social media. Sadly this sounds like par for the course when it comes to tech. Too many messages and requests for help depend on knowing someone in the right slack groups.

Which is very confusing to me. If you have groundbreaking AI, you can offer groundbreaking support at scale.

Re: Agents for financial services and insurance

#77

Post by JamesSwift »

sholladay wrote: post #69
JamesSwift wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? It sounds exactly like the design I would hope for. It automates what I'm going to do already without needing to wait. And it allows you to bypass it entirely and just revert to the manual process (along with waiting).

That all sounds reasonable until you realize that the same logic is how we ended up with customer support systems that try to walk you through a phone tree and if you are lucky, you will be able to press 0 to speak to a human without answering a bunch of questions first and being referred to the online help articles. Do you enjoy using any of those systems? Do you want the world to be that way?

Maybe we are interpreting the GP differently. In this scenario, the phone tree is doing the same questions that the human agent is going to do but does it immediately when I call rather than "waiting for an operator" to ask me those questions. And as long as I can "press 0 to eject" (just like I can in the accounting scenario, then its completely kosher to me.

Re: Agents for financial services and insurance

#78

Post by infecto »

ofjcihen wrote: post #73
infecto wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your point? This is pretty normal expense management in any company setting. I don’t know what is so bad about being on the other side of that. Hope I am not too inflammatory by asking what is the point but genuinely you pointed it out like it’s some archaic process flow but it’s part of almost every expense system.

I guess my current company’s processes may be easier to deal with than others. That or my position affords me some extra catering to. The system is currently using a simple app to submit expenses and any issues gets a simple human chat request and a call if requested. They try to avoid kicking anything back and if they do they make sure it’s reviewed first to make sure that it’s needed and to make sure the reason is…

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. To add some color… most expense systems are setup so that the user has to input a couple fields like the category or GL code. Some of the fields might be auto populated. Some companies might not care about the classification but usually the intent is to capture things like travel or software etc. What was described earlier is really not painful for users most of the time but a LLM helps automate so much of it these days.

Re: Agents for financial services and insurance

#79

Post by Havoc »

infecto wrote: post #35
Havoc wrote: post #3

For those in the finance space, are you actually seeing any real AI tools being used? Like for actual operational tasks? I've really only seen it used for research / exploration thus far. Either for economic research slide deck or for exploring trading hypothesis

Yes. On the accounting side agents can handle a lot of the low value work like recons and other ledger activity pretty well. On the investment side I think like you pointed out it’s going to be a lot of research, industry, company, macro etc. Value in letting run on top of the data you have and put together ideas at a quicker pace than a human can. There is still a human in the loop but it can do a nice job of lining…

What does the integration look like on accounting? Is this a tool provided by the accounting software provider?

I'm in that space so naturally interested in what people are up to :)

Re: Agents for financial services and insurance

#80

Post by moregrist »

GCUMstlyHarmls wrote: post #45
wxw wrote: post #4

> We’re releasing ten ready-to-run agent templates for the most time-consuming work in financial services The templates being: pitch builder, meeting preparer, earnings reviewer, model builder, market researcher, valuation reviewer, general ledger reconciler, month-end closer, statement auditor, KYC (Know Your Customer) screener. Seems pretty scattershot. Reminds me of GPT Store.

I'll be honest, I thought the first few items on your list of time consuming work was sarcasm.

A recent episode of Matt Levine’s podcast (Money Stuff) covered this: apparently investment bankers spend a huge amount of time preparing pitch decks for companies that don’t want them. Apparently Claude is quite good at making a pitch deck that no one but your boss wants or cares about.

I feel like there’s a metaphor in there... maybe I’ll ask Claude about it.

Post reply on HN