




If you're heads-down building a product, talking to users, and just trying to keep the lights on, you have almost zero mental bandwidth left to decipher what investors actually want.
In my work scouting and consulting founders on execution and capital raising, I spend a massive chunk of my day reviewing decks. The same issue happens over and over: founders miss the core aspects investors are actively looking for.
That’s why most pitches end in a generic "We appreciate your time, but..." email. It’s the ATS-resume debacle, but for startups. You get rejected, and you have no idea why.
A while ago, I posted the exact evaluation framework used to judge execution and capital readiness. The response from this sub was overwhelming. But knowing the general framework isn't enough if you're still guessing how your specific startup scores before you pitch.
So, I spent the last few weeks turning that framework into a platform. I've attached a few screenshots of what the UI and scoring engine look like now.
It breaks down your venture into 4 core buckets:
- Founder Evaluation: Vision, execution, problem-solving, and team cohesion.
- Market & Defensibility: TAM/SAM/SOM, scalability, and Porter’s 5 Forces.
- Business Model: Unit economics, runway, and revenue streams.
- Product & Traction: CAC/LTV, early wins, and your moat.
Note on the scoring: How you are graded is entirely stage-contextual. If you’re pre-seed, the engine indexes heavily on founder-market fit. Post-revenue? It’s all about unit economics and PMF.
Right now, I am running these evaluations manually to ensure the actionable insights are brutally honest and perfectly dialled in before the engine is fully automated for instant intake (via deck upload, LinkedIn profile, or elevator pitch).
If you are tired of the fundraising black box and want to see exactly where your startup stands, I'm taking a small, limited batch of founders through the beta right now. Feel free to reach out.
I’d love to get your thoughts on the new visual breakdown and the metrics.