Skip to main content

ADR-001: Use Agentic AI for Market Sentiment Analysis

Status: Accepted Date: 2025-09-15 Deciders: Nick Spiers, Michael Woodard


Context and Problem Statement

Traditional commercial real estate appraisals rely heavily on appraiser subjectivity for market sentiment adjustments. We need a systematic, repeatable approach to determining market sentiment that:

  • Reduces individual appraiser bias
  • Provides consistent methodology across all valuations
  • Can learn and improve from historical outcomes
  • Is defensible to regulators and investors

Key Question: What type of AI should power CREstimate.ai's sentiment analysis?


Decision Drivers

  • Objectivity: Need for consistent, repeatable sentiment scoring
  • Learning Capability: Ability to improve from historical valuation outcomes
  • Scalability: Handle multiple property types and geographic markets
  • Investor Confidence: Technical approach that differentiates from commodity AI
  • Regulatory Defensibility: Explainable methodology for compliance review
  • Competitive Moat: Defensible technical approach vs easily replicated solutions

Considered Options

  1. Generative AI (LLM-based narrative generation like ChatGPT)
  2. Agentic AI (Goal-directed autonomous agent) ← CHOSEN
  3. Traditional Statistical Models (Regression, time-series analysis)
  4. Human Expert Panel (Consensus from multiple appraisers)

Decision Outcome

Chosen Option: Agentic AI (Smitty - CRESI agent)

Rationale

Agentic AI provides goal-directed autonomous behavior where the AI:

  • Takes actions to accomplish the goal (accurate sentiment scoring)
  • Learns from outcomes (actual market results vs predictions)
  • Self-corrects by adjusting future analysis based on feedback
  • Operates independently without constant human oversight

Unlike generative AI which creates text, agentic AI makes decisions and learns—exactly what's needed for systematic sentiment analysis.

Implementation

Smitty is our agentic AI economist that:

  1. Analyzes 6 sentiment data layers autonomously
  2. Calculates asset-specific weighted sentiment scores
  3. Stores outcomes in Memory Bank
  4. Adjusts future weighting based on historical accuracy
  5. Operates continuously without human intervention per valuation

Consequences

Positive

  • Consistent Methodology: Every valuation uses the same systematic approach
  • Continuous Improvement: Each valuation makes the system smarter
  • Competitive Differentiation: Technical moat vs commodity generative AI
  • Regulatory Defensibility: Transparent, auditable decision-making process
  • Scalability: Handles unlimited valuations without human bottleneck
  • Explainability: Can trace exactly how sentiment score was calculated

Negative

  • Higher Complexity: More sophisticated than simple LLM text generation
  • Development Time: Agentic systems require more engineering than prompt-based AI
  • Education Needed: Investors/users may not understand agentic vs generative distinction
  • Initial Training: Requires historical data to establish baseline accuracy

Pros and Cons of Options

Option 1: Generative AI (e.g., ChatGPT-style LLM)

Pros:

  • ✅ Faster to implement (prompt engineering vs building agent)
  • ✅ Easier to explain (familiar "ChatGPT-like" mental model)
  • ✅ Good at generating appraisal narratives and reports
  • ✅ Large pre-trained models available

Cons:

  • Doesn't take actions - only generates text
  • No goal-directed behavior - responds to prompts, doesn't autonomously analyze
  • Limited learning - no built-in feedback loop from outcomes
  • Easily replicated - any competitor can use ChatGPT API
  • Not optimized for numerical analysis - better at text than scoring

Why Rejected: CREstimate.ai needs autonomous analysis and learning, not text generation


Option 2: Agentic AI (CHOSEN)

Pros:

  • Goal-directed autonomous behavior - analyzes sentiment to achieve accuracy goal
  • Self-correcting via feedback loops from actual outcomes
  • Can optimize for valuation accuracy over time
  • Memory bank enables continuous learning
  • Competitive differentiation - defensible technical approach
  • Handles complex multi-factor analysis better than generative models

Cons:

  • ❌ More complex to build than prompt-based generative AI
  • ❌ Requires domain expertise to design feedback loops
  • ❌ Longer development timeline
  • ❌ Need to educate stakeholders on agentic vs generative difference

Why Chosen: Perfect fit for autonomous sentiment analysis with continuous learning


Option 3: Traditional Statistical Models

Pros:

  • ✅ Well-understood by appraisers and regulators
  • ✅ Mathematically transparent (regression equations, coefficients)
  • ✅ No "black box" AI concerns
  • ✅ Fast to run, low computational cost

Cons:

  • Doesn't adapt to new market conditions without manual re-tuning
  • Still requires subjective weight tuning by humans
  • Can't capture complex non-linear relationships in market sentiment
  • No competitive differentiation - standard approach anyone can copy
  • Brittle - breaks when market conditions change (e.g., 2008 crisis, COVID)

Why Rejected: Lacks adaptability and learning capabilities needed for dynamic markets


Option 4: Human Expert Panel

Pros:

  • ✅ High trust from traditional appraisers
  • ✅ Incorporates deep domain expertise
  • ✅ Can handle novel situations with human judgment
  • ✅ No AI "black box" concerns

Cons:

  • Doesn't scale - limited by human availability
  • Introduces same subjectivity problem we're trying to solve
  • Expensive - requires paying multiple experts per valuation
  • Slow - human consensus takes time
  • Inconsistent - different panels may disagree

Why Rejected: Reintroduces the subjective, non-scalable problems we're solving



Notes

Agentic AI Definition: An AI system that autonomously takes actions to accomplish goals and learns from the results of those actions, as opposed to generative AI which creates content in response to prompts.

Smitty: Our agentic AI economist, named after CRESI (Commercial Real Estate Sentiment Index). The personification emphasizes its autonomous, intelligent behavior.


Last updated: 2025-10-01 · Version 1.0.0