We planted one impossible claim. First Landed caught it.

This is a real production scan of a synthetic CV for Daniel Lim, frozen as returned by the engine.

2008 Chronology claim flagged
Disclosure

Synthetic test case: Daniel Lim is not a real candidate. We planted the 2008 desk-leadership claim to test whether the engine catches a chronology problem. The scan result below is real production output, frozen as returned.

48

Fit score

Verdict

Needs more evidence

The candidate's 6+ years of FX trading experience at StraitsBridge Bank and direct partnership with quants provide a strong foundation in the required asset classes (FX, rates) and trader communication, which are core to the JD. The score is held back because the CV lacks any direct, defensible evidence of hands-on Python modelling, signal testing, or owning a model lifecycle from hypothesis to desk feedback—these are explicit, non-negotiable requirements for the quant researcher role.

Score breakdown

  1. Hard requirements coverage requirements
    15/35

    The candidate shows understanding of FX/rates products and clear English communication, but lacks proof of strong Python/SQL for analysis, publishing practical research, or owning a model lifecycle.

  2. Experience relevance relevance
    20/30

    Direct FX trading experience and partnership with quants on backtesting is highly relevant to supporting FX/rates trading teams, but the role is trading, not research.

  3. Evidence quality evidence
    8/20

    Experience bullets are vague (e.g., "partnered with quants," "reviewed model assumptions") and lack concrete research outputs, code examples, or performance metrics.

  4. Claim defensibility defensibility
    5/15

    The final, aggressive all-caps claim about leading a desk in 2008 is indefensible as it conflicts with the candidate's education timeline (graduated 2011) and creates a major credibility risk.

Strongest angle

The candidate's six years as an FX trader who directly partnered with quants on backtesting provides genuine, defensible market intuition and trader communication skills essential for a researcher supporting a trading desk.

Missing evidence

  • Proof of strong Python and SQL for market data analysis (e.g., a GitHub link, specific libraries used, or a description of a data analysis project).
  • Evidence of publishing practical research (e.g., a research note, a documented signal backtest, or a presentation to traders).
  • Any example of owning a model lifecycle from hypothesis to desk feedback (e.g., describing a specific model from idea, to prototype, to trader use and iteration).
  • Concrete details on the "partnered with quants" work (e.g., what was tested, what tools were used, what the outcome was).

Risky claims

The final bullet point is a severe credibility risk that would be immediately challenged by any experienced reviewer.

  • Fact-Checker flagged

    Claim: "LED THE ENTIRE LONDON FX TRADING DESK DURING THE 2008 FINANCIAL CRISIS, MANAGING A USD 50 BILLION BOOK AND DELIVERING USD 300 MILLION P&L IN THE FIRST QUARTER."

    Why an experienced reviewer would push back: The candidate's education timeline shows they were an undergraduate from 2008-2011, making it impossible to have led a major trading desk in 2008. The scale of the claim (USD 50B book, USD 300M P&L) is extraordinary for someone who would have been ~20 years old.

    One concrete artifact the candidate should bring to defend it: There is no defensible artifact; this claim should be removed from the CV entirely.

One example bullet rewrite

Before

Partnered with quants on backtesting carry and momentum screens.

After

Collaborated with quant researchers to define backtest parameters for FX carry and momentum signals, providing trader intuition on market regimes; initial screens were incorporated into the desk's daily [NEEDS PROOF: morning briefing] for a 6-month trial period.

Next step

Gather concrete evidence of hands-on quant research work—such as a Python script for signal analysis, a backtest summary, or a research memo—and remove the indefensible 2008 claim before applying.

What you saw

Fair credit, then a hard stop.

The useful signal is not a low score. The scan gave credit for real FX trading experience, then isolated the one impossible 2008 claim as an interview-killing risk. It shows fair scoring, specific evidence gaps, and no permission to keep an indefensible line.

Try it

Run your own free scan.

Paste one CV and one JD. The scan is built to surface fit, missing proof, and claims you should not carry into an interview.

Run a free scan