Startup Funding

Menu
Subscribe
Search
Screening for the Win: How Great Investors Separate Noise from Signal

Screening for the Win: How Great Investors Separate Noise from Signal

•
Fundraising, Investing

Related Guides

    Search Startupfunding above or view our

    Screening for the Win: How Great Investors Separate Noise from Signal

    5 min read  Screening for the Win: How Great Investors Separate Noise from Signal Applying structured screening to early-stage deals—where hype is loud, data is thin, and discipline makes the difference. Every cycle produces noise. New sectors trend on social media. Valuations spike. Founders master pitch theater. Markets reward momentum—until they don’t. Professional investors don’t win by chasing excitement. They win by filtering it. The difference between average and exceptional investors isn’t access to deals. It’s a structured screening. Before deep diligence begins, great investors run opportunities through five disciplined filters: Market Timing Defensibility Economics Execution Governance These filters don’t predict outcomes. They clarify risk. They separate the signal from the narrative. Below is a practical screening framework used by experienced investors to quickly assess whether a deal deserves conviction—or polite decline. 1. Filter One: Market Timing → “Why Now?” Timing is the silent multiplier in venture outcomes. A great company in a premature market struggles. A solid company in a catalytic moment accelerates. The key question isn’t whether the market is large. It’s whether the inflection has arrived. Pressure-test: Has a structural shift occurred? (regulation, cost curve, behavior change, infrastructure maturity) Is adoption accelerating independently of this company? Are incumbents adapting—or still dismissing the category? Would this have failed five years ago? What changed? Strong timing signals look like: Cost reductions unlocking new use cases Policy or compliance forcing adoption Platform shifts creating new distribution rails Budget reallocation is already happening Red flag: “The market is huge” without evidence that buyers are ready. Markets don’t reward potential energy. They reward activation. 2. Filter Two: Defensibility → “If This Works, Can It Last?” Speed builds companies. Moats protect them. Early growth without defensibility invites competition. Professional investors ask whether success compounds—or attracts erosion. Assess structural advantage: Proprietary data or network effects Switching costs or workflow integration Regulatory approvals or compliance barriers Brand trust in risk-sensitive markets Cost advantages that scale Strong defensibility signals look like: Advantage strengthens with scale Competitors face rising marginal difficulty Customers embed the product deeply into their operations Red flag: Defensibility based purely on “first mover.” In modern markets, first rarely wins. Structural advantage does. 3. Filter Three: Economics → “Does the Model Actually Work?” Revenue growth can hide fragile economics. Professional investors look beyond topline momentum to economic logic. Pressure-test: Unit economics at scale—not just today Contribution margins after realistic cost assumptions Customer acquisition efficiency Payback timelines Capital intensity requirements The goal is not perfection. Its viability. Strong economic signals look like: Improving margins with scale Clear path to positive contribution margin Revenue quality (recurring, sticky, diversified) Sensible capital requirements relative to outcomes Red flag: “We’ll figure out monetization later.” Even disruptive models require economic coherence. Growth amplifies what’s underneath. If the foundation is weak, scale accelerates failure. 4. Filter Four: Execution → “Can This Team Actually Deliver?” Ideas are common. Execution is rare. Investors aren’t funding slides. They’re underwriting judgment under pressure. Evaluate: Founder decision-making history Speed of iteration Talent density Role clarity across leadership Evidence of learning from mistakes Strong execution signals look like: Clear prioritization under constraint Willingness to pivot based on evidence Transparent articulation of risks Thoughtful hiring strategy Red flag: Vision without operational depth. Great teams convert ambiguity into progress. Weak teams amplify chaos. 5. Filter Five: Governance → “Will This Scale Without Breaking?” Governance rarely excites investors—but it frequently determines outcomes. As companies grow, misaligned incentives and unclear authority create hidden risk. Pressure-test: Board composition and independence The founder’s openness to accountability Transparency in reporting Clean cap table structure Alignment between short-term decisions and long-term value Strong governance signals look like: Structured decision processes Clear communication cadence Professional financial discipline Long-term alignment among stakeholders Red flag: Founder defensiveness toward oversight. Capital scales opportunity—but it also scales dysfunction. How the Five Filters Work Together These filters are not independent. Strong market timing without defensibility creates churn. Strong economics without governance creates instability. Strong execution without timing creates frustration. Professional investors don’t look for perfection. They look for: One or two undeniable strengths No fatal weaknesses Clear understanding of risks Evidence that progress reduces uncertainty The goal of screening isn’t to eliminate risk. It’s to ensure risk is intentional. Why Structured Screening Beats Instinct Instinct matters. But instinct without structure drifts toward bias. Without filters: Charismatic founders overpower analysis Trend narratives override discipline FOMO replaces underwriting Decision thresholds move mid-process Structured screening prevents: Endless “maybe” deals Time sink diligence Emotional investing Inconsistent standards The best investors define their filters before the pitch—not after it. Final Thoughts Separating noise from signal is a discipline. Great investors don’t chase what’s loud. They: Anchor decisions in structural timing Demand durable advantage Underwrite economic logic Assess execution realism Insist on scalable governance They don’t eliminate uncertainty. They filter it. Over time, consistent filtering compounds. Conviction improves. Losses shrink. Capital allocates with purpose. Signal becomes clearer—not because the market changes, but because the lens does. Want access to structured screening templates, deal scoring frameworks, and investor decision matrices built around these five filters? Join our investor community for practical tools designed to help you separate noise from signal—screen smarter, underwrite better, and invest with discipline.

    Read More »

    The Diligence Playbook for Frontier Innovation

    6 min read The Diligence Playbook for Frontier Innovation Applying structured diligence to emerging technologies—AI, climate tech, biotech—where conventional venture metrics don’t apply. Frontier innovation breaks the rules that traditional venture diligence relies on. There’s little revenue, no clean comps, uncertain regulatory paths, and timelines that don’t fit neatly into SaaS playbooks. Yet capital still has to decide—often earlier, with less signal, and higher consequence. The mistake investors make isn’t backing risky technology. It’s applying the wrong lens of diligence. Great frontier diligence doesn’t try to force certainty where none exists. It replaces standard metrics with structured proof, staged learning, and disciplined risk framing. The goal isn’t to predict outcomes—it’s to understand what must go right, what could break, and whether progress meaningfully reduces uncertainty over time. Below is a practical diligence framework designed specifically for AI, climate tech, biotech, and other frontier domains—where insight matters more than spreadsheets. 1. Frontier Diligence Is About Unknowns, Not Numbers Traditional diligence asks: How fast is this growing? Frontier diligence asks: What don’t we know yet—and how will we find out? These businesses are defined by: Long development cycles Non-linear value creation Technical, regulatory, or scientific risk Markets that may not fully exist yet The core diligence question becomes: Is this team systematically converting uncertainty into knowledge faster than alternatives? Your diligence framework should be built around learning velocity—not short-term performance. 2. Milestone 1: First-Principles Clarity → “Is the Thesis Sound?” Frontier investing starts with intellectual honesty. Objective: Validate that the company’s core insight holds up at a first-principles level. Pressure-test: Why this problem must be solved (not just could be) Why existing solutions fail structurally, not incrementally Why thdoes is approach works given known scientific, technical, or economic constraints Why is now meaningfully different than five years ago Proof looks like: Founders reasoning from fundamentals, not trend narratives Clear articulation of assumptions vs. facts Comfort saying “we don’t know yet” without hand-waving Red flag: Reliance on hype cycles, inevitability arguments, or analogies instead of logic. If the thesis doesn’t survive first principles, no amount of future data will save it. 3. Milestone 2: Technical or Scientific Credibility → “Can This Actually Work?” In frontier tech, feasibility is the first real gate. Objective: Assess whether the underlying technology is plausible—and whether progress is real. Validate through: Independent expert conversations Technical artifacts (models, data, lab results, benchmarks) Roadmaps that acknowledge known hard problems Clear distinction between prototype, proof-of-concept, and production readiness Proof looks like: Evidence of real experimentation, not just simulations Thoughtful tradeoffs (accuracy vs. cost, speed vs. safety, scale vs. reliability) Founders who understand failure modes as deeply as success cases Green flag: Teams that proactively explain what would falsify their approach. This stage isn’t about being right—it’s about being rigorous. 4. Milestone 3: Early Signal of Pull → “Does the World Want This?” Frontier startups often lack customers—but they shouldn’t lack signal. Objective: Identify real-world demand indicators before full product maturity. Signals may include: Pilots, LOIs, or research partnerships Regulatory engagement or early approvals Strategic interest from incumbents Willingness of partners to commit time, data, or resources Proof looks like: External parties taking non-trivial risk or effort Clear articulation of who cares first vs. later Understanding of adoption barriers, not just end-state value Red flag: “Everyone will want this eventually” with no prioritization. Early signal isn’t about revenue—it’s about commitment. 5. Milestone 4: Team Capability Under Ambiguity → “Can They Navigate the Unknown?” Frontier companies don’t execute roadmaps—they navigate fog. Objective: Evaluate whether the team can make high-stakes decisions with incomplete information. Assess: How decisions were made when data was missing How the team integrates new evidence and changes course Role clarity between technical, commercial, and operational leaders The founder’s ability to balance conviction with adaptability Proof looks like: Documented pivots driven by learning, not panic Clear prioritization despite competing uncertainties Leaders who can translate complexity for non-experts Red flag: Overconfidence masquerading as vision. In frontier innovation, judgment beats experience. 6. Milestone 5: Capital as a Learning Instrument → “Does Money Reduce Risk?” Capital should accelerate insight—not just extend runway. Objective: Ensure funding is tied to concrete de-risking milestones. Underwrite: How capital maps to specific unknowns being resolved Whether milestones create option value (more paths forward) Realistic timelines for technical, regulatory, or market inflection points Downside scenarios if assumptions fail Proof looks like: Milestone-driven use of funds Clear criteria for the next fundraising or strategic decisions Willingness to kill paths that don’t work Green flag: Founders who view capital as fuel for learning, not validation. 7. Define Decision Gates Up Front—Especially When Metrics Are Fuzzy Ambiguity without structure leads to endless diligence. Before engaging deeply, align on: What would invalidate the thesis? What evidence is sufficient for this stage? Which risks are acceptable now—and which are not? This prevents: Perpetual “one more question” cycles Moving conviction thresholds Founder exhaustion Frontier diligence must feel disciplined, even when outcomes aren’t. Final Thoughts Frontier investing isn’t about certainty—it’s about earned belief. The best investors don’t pretend to know the future. They: Identify the right unknowns Fund teams that learn faster than competitors Structure diligence to surface trthe uth early When done well: Complexity becomes navigable Risk becomes intentional Conviction becomes defensible Frontier innovation rewards those who replace metrics with judgment—and judgment with process. Want a diligence framework built for AI, climate tech, biotech, and other frontier domains? Join our investor community to access frontier-specific diligence playbooks, technical evaluation guides, and milestone-based decision templates—designed to help you underwrite uncertainty with clarity, discipline, and confidence.

    Read More »

    From Pitch to Proof: Turning Diligence into Decision

    5 min read From Pitch to Proof: Turning Diligence into Decision How to structure diligence milestones that convert investor curiosity into conviction—and founders’ claims into evidence. Early-stage investing rarely fails because of a lack of interesting pitches. It fails because diligence drags, questions sprawl, and momentum dies in the face of ambiguity. Investors get curious, founders get hopeful—and then nothing happens. Great diligence isn’t about exhaustive analysis. It’s about structured progression. The best investors use clear diligence milestones to turn a compelling story into verifiable proof, and to move efficiently from “this is interesting” to “this is investable.” Diligence, done right, is both an art and a science. The science is in sequencing evidence, defining decision gates, and aligning on what “enough proof” actually means. The art is knowing which questions matter now, and which can wait. Below is a practical framework for designing diligence milestones that accelerate decisions, reduce friction, and increase conviction on both sides of the table. 1. Diligence as a Funnel, Not a Checklist The biggest mistake in diligence is treating it like a flat list of questions. Effective diligence is progressive; each stage earns the right to go deeper. Ask one guiding question at every phase: What must be true to move forward? Structure diligence into clear stages: Narrative validation Evidence confirmation Risk underwriting Decision readiness Each stage should narrow uncertainty—not expand it. 2. Milestone 1: Narrative Coherence → “Does the Story Hold?” This stage tests whether the pitch withstands scrutiny before data deep dives begin. Objective: Validate internal consistency, clarity, and logic. What to pressure-test: Problem definition vs. customer urgency Why this solution wins now Founder’s understanding of tradeoffs and constraints Alignment between vision, strategy, and near-term execution Proof looks like: Clear, repeatable articulation (not rehearsed buzzwords) Ability to explain the why, not just the what Consistent answers across conversations Red flag: The story evolves defensively instead of sharpening. Only narratives that hold together deserve deeper diligence. 3. Milestone 2: Evidence of Traction → “Is There Behavioral Proof?” This is where claims meet reality. Objective: Replace founder assertions with observable behavior. Validate through: Customer calls (listen for unprompted enthusiasm or frustration) Usage, retention, or engagement patterns Sales process reality vs. Slideware Why customers buy, don’t buy, or churn Proof looks like: Customers describing value in their own word Patterns across similar buyers Clear articulation of ICP and non-ICP Green flag: Founders openly discuss lost deals and weak signals. Traction diligence isn’t about scale—it’s about signal quality. 4. Milestone 3: Execution & Team Risk → “Can This Team Deliver?” Ideas don’t fail—execution does. Objective: Assess whether the team can translate momentum into outcomes. Focus on: Decision-making cadence Role clarity and ownership Ability to prioritize under constraints Learning velocity from mistakes Proof looks like: Evidence of shipping, iterating, and cutting scope Clear accountability (not consensus paralysis) Founders’ awareness of their own blind spots Red flag: Blaming externalities for execution gaps. Strong teams turn ambiguity into progress. 5. Milestone 4: Capital & Downside Underwriting → “Does the Risk Make Sense?” Only now does deep financial and structural diligence matter. Objective: Ensure capital is being used to reduce risk—not defer it. Underwrite: Burn relative to milestones achieved Use of funds tied to specific de-risking events Cap table cleanliness and incentive alignment Runway realism vs. fundraising optimism Proof looks like: Thoughtful capital planning Milestone-driven fundraising logic Governance readiness earlier than “necessary”. Early financial discipline predicts late-stage survivability. 6. Decision Gates: Define “Enough” in Advance The fastest investors don’t rush; they predefine conviction thresholds. Before diligence begins, clarify: What would cause a hard stop? What evidence is sufficient for a yes? What risks are acceptable at this stage? This prevents: Endless follow-up questions Moving goalposts Founder fatigue Diligence should feel directional, not infinite. 7. Founder Experience Matters (More Than You Think) How you run diligence is a signal. Founders infer: How you’ll behave in boardrooms How you’ll handle future tension Whether you decide—or drift Clear milestones create trust, even in the past. Best practice: Tell founders where they are in the process and what comes next. Final Thoughts Diligence is not about proving a company is perfect. It’s about proving that the risks are known, intentional, and worth taking. When structured well: Investor curiosity becomes conviction Founder narratives become evidence Decisions happen faster—with more confidence The best investors don’t just ask better questions. They design better paths to answers. Want to turn diligence into a competitive advantage? Join our investor community to access proven diligence milestone frameworks, evidence maps, and decision-gate templates—designed to help you move from pitch to proof faster, and say “yes” with clarity when it counts.

    Read More »

    The 3×3 Framework for Predictable Startup Investing

    5 min read The 3×3 Framework for Predictable Startup Investing Early-stage investing is not about eliminating uncertainty; it’s about controlling duration, defining liquidity, and aligning incentives before risk compounds. While traditional venture models rely on long holding periods and binary outcomes, most returns or losses are determined far earlier than the exit slide suggests. The 3×3 Early Exit Framework was designed to address this structural mismatch. Instead of underwriting distant, hypothetical outcomes, it introduces clear time horizons, multiple liquidity paths, and systematic evaluation criteria that make early-stage investing more predictable and repeatable. Whether you’re an angel investor, family office, or disciplined venture fund, the 3×3 Framework offers a practical alternative to story-driven investing—one grounded in execution, capital efficiency, and realistic exit logic. Below is a structured, investor-ready breakdown of the 3×3 Early Exit model’s 3 pillars and 3 outcomes. 1. Time Discipline: Three Years, Not a Decade   a. Defined Investment Horizon Traditional venture investing assumes holding periods of 8–12 years. The 3×3 Framework instead evaluates whether a company can reach meaningful de-risking or liquidity within 36 months. Assess: Can the business reach revenue, profitability, or strategic relevance in three years? Are milestones tied to execution, not future fundraising? Is the company survivable without perfect market conditions? Shorter horizons reduce duration risk and force operational clarity. b. Milestone-Based Capital Deployment Capital is deployed with intent—not hope. Evaluate: What risks does each dollar retire? Are milestones technical, commercial, or regulatory—and measurable? Does progress increase exit optionality? Companies that can’t articulate near-term value creation are poor candidates for early liquidity. c. Optionality Over Dependency The model avoids companies that require multiple follow-on rounds to remain viable. Look for: Revenue paths independent of venture markets Controlled burn relative to progress Strategic relevance without scale-at-all-costs pressure Time discipline creates leverage—for both founders and investors. 2. Liquidity First: Three Realistic Exit Paths   a. Strategic Acquisition Readiness Instead of betting on unicorn outcomes, the 3×3 model underwrites who could buy this company—and why—within 24–36 months. Assess: Clear buyer profiles Metrics that matter to acquirers Strategic positioning inside industry workflows Exit readiness is not an afterthought—it’s a design constraint. b. Structured or Partial Liquidity Liquidity doesn’t have to mean a full sale. Evaluate: Secondary transactions Redemption or revenue-based structures Early return mechanisms tied to cash flow Partial liquidity improves capital recycling and reduces binary risk. c. Downside-Resilient Outcomes The framework assumes not every company exits perfectly. Look for: Capital preservation scenarios Businesses that can sustain modest outcomes Paths to return capital even without breakout success Defined liquidity beats theoretical upside. 3. Incentive Alignment: Execution Over Hype   a. Founder Incentives Aligned to Outcomes The 3×3 model favors founders who value: Capital efficiency Revenue clarity Sustainable growth Optionality over valuation chasing Founders are rewarded for building real businesses, not just raising rounds. b. Investor Discipline Over Narrative The framework replaces gut feel with structure. Assess companies based on: Execution readiness Capital-to-milestone efficiency Buyer relevance Operational maturity This enables consistent screening and comparability across deals. c. Systematic Evaluation The 3×3 Framework integrates cleanly with: First-pass filters Scoring matrices Diligence checklists Early Exit fit assessments Predictability improves when process replaces improvisation. Early-stage outcomes are never guaranteed—but they are rarely random. The same forces repeatedly determine success: time, liquidity, and alignment. The 3×3 Early Exit Framework brings those forces forward, making them explicit rather than implied. Great investors don’t rely on best-case scenarios.They design portfolios that perform across many futures. The 3×3 model doesn’t eliminate risk—it makes risk visible, measurable, and manageable.

    Read More »

    The Art and Science of Screening a Deal

    7 min read The Art and Science of Screening a Deal: How investors can use first-pass filters, scoring matrices, and data-driven checklists to identify high-potential startups faster.   Early-stage investing isn’t about finding certainty—it’s about filtering signal from noise efficiently. With inbound deal flow at all-time highs, the real bottleneck for angels, family offices, and funds is no longer access to opportunities, but decision velocity with discipline. The best investors don’t evaluate every deck equally; they apply structured screening systems that surface the few opportunities worth deeper diligence. Screening is both an art and a science. The science lives in repeatable filters, scoring models, and objective criteria. The art lies in judgment—knowing when a company breaks the rules for the right reasons. Below is a practical, investor-ready framework for building a strong first-pass screening process that saves time, reduces bias, and improves outcomes. 1. First-Pass Filters: Decide What Doesn’t Belong Before scoring, eliminate misalignment early. First-pass filters should answer one question quickly: Is this deal even worth time? a. Stage & Check Size Fit Most deals fail here. Clarify upfront: Revenue or traction stage (pre-seed, seed, growth Typical check size and ownership targets Ability to follow on If the company doesn’t fit your mandate, pass fast and clean. b. Sector & Thesis Alignment Avoid “interesting but off-strategy” traps. Screen for: Core sectors, you understand Problems you believe matter Markets where you have pattern recognition Thesis discipline compounds over time. c. Geography & Jurisdiction Regulatory and operational friction varies widely. Filter based on: Geographic focus Regulatory exposure ,you’re comfortable underwriting Ability to support the company post-investment First-pass filters protect focus and bandwidth. 2. Scoring Matrices: Bring Structure to Subjectivity Once a deal clears initial filters, apply a simple scoring matrix to compare opportunities consistently. a. Core Dimensions to Score Limit scores to what actually predicts outcomes: Founder–market fit Traction quality Market clarity Capital efficiency Execution readiness Avoid over-scoring vision or TAM in isolation. b. Use Relative, Not Absolute Scores Scores matter most across your own deal set, not in isolation. Ask: Is this stronger or weaker than other deals this month? Where does it rank in the top 10–20%? This sharpens prioritization. c. Weight What You Value Not all factors are equal. For example: Early-stage angels may weigh founders higher Family offices may weigh downside protection and governance Funds may weigh scalability and exit paths Scoring systems should reflect your capital’s objectives. 3. Data-Driven Checklists: Reduce Bias, Increase Speed Checklists ensure you ask the same questions every time—especially under time pressure. a. Founder & Team Checklist Look for: Clear role ownership Evidence of execution together Coachability and learning velocity Gaps the team acknowledges (not denies) Red flag: defensiveness over curiosity. b. Traction & Market Checklist Validate: Who is paying (or piloting) and why Repeatability across similar customers Clear ICP definition Sales cycle realism Green flag: founders can explain why deals don’t close. c. Financial & Capital Checklist Screen for: Burn vs. milestones achieved Clean cap table Use-of-funds clarity Runway awareness Early financial hygiene predicts later governance quality. 4. Pattern Recognition: Compare to Known Outcomes Great screeners constantly ask: What does this remind me of? a. Positive Patterns Look for signals you’ve seen before: Second-time founders correcting past mistakes Early customers behaving like reference buyers Clear narrowing of focus over time b. Risk Patterns Watch for recurring failure modes: “Too many use cases.” Revenue driven by one non-repeatable customer Fundraising as the strategy Pattern recognition improves with documentation—write down why you passed. 5. Decision Buckets: Triage, Don’t Debate Every screened deal should land in one of three buckets: Advance → deeper diligence Monitor → stay close, request updates Pass → clear, respectful decline The goal is not perfection; it’s momentum with clarity. Strong investors don’t win by seeing more deals; they win by screening better. First-pass filters protect focus. Scoring matrices create consistency. Checklists reduce bias. Together, they allow investors to move faster without sacrificing rigor. Screening is not about saying “no” more often; it’s about saying “yes” with conviction when it matters. The best deals don’t always look perfect at first glance, but the best investors know exactly why they’re leaning in. Want to professionalize your deal screening process? Join our investor community to access proven screening templates, scoring matrices, and diligence frameworks designed to help you identify high-potential startups faster—before the rest of the market catches on.

    Read More »

    Critical Success Factors in Early-Stage Diligence

    5 min read Critical Success Factors in Early-Stage Diligence: The Five Attributes That Consistently Predict Startup Success Early-stage investing is not about eliminating risk; it’s about understanding which risks matter and which signals actually correlate with outcomes. While pitch decks highlight vision, market size, and upside, long-term success is far more consistently driven by a small set of fundamentals that recur across winning companies. Whether you’re an angel investor, family office, strategic, or venture fund, diligence on early-stage companies requires a disciplined lens focused on execution, capital behavior, and clarity—not hype. Below is a structured, investor-ready framework outlining the five critical success factors that most reliably predict early-stage startup success. 1. Founder–Market Fit   a. Domain Insight & Lived Experience Founder–market fit goes beyond credentials. It reflects whether founders deeply understand the customer problem because they’ve lived it. Evaluate: Prior industry experience or operator background Direct exposure to the customer pain point Nuanced understanding of buyer behavior and constraints Strong founder–market fit often shows up in how founders talk about edge cases, objections, and tradeoffs, not just the headline problem. b. Credibility with Customers & Stakeholders Ask whether the founder can earn trust quickly. Look for: Early customer champions Warm intros to buyers or partners Advisory relationships rooted in the market Founders with real market credibility shorten sales cycles and reduce go-to-market risk. c. Learning Velocity Markets change. Strong founders adapt. Assess: How assumptions have evolved over time Willingness to admit what didn’t work Speed of iteration based on customer feedback Founder–market fit is dynamic; it strengthens through learning, not stubbornness. 2. Repeatable Traction (Not Vanity Metrics)   a. Evidence of Pull, Not Push Early traction should demonstrate customer pull, not founder-driven hustle alone. Validate: Repeat customers or expansions Conversion consistency across similar customer profiles Willingness to pay—not just pilot participation Traction that repeats is far more predictive than one-off wins. b. Sales Motion Clarity Understand how the company wins customers. Ask: Is the sales process repeatable or bespoke? Are cycle times shortening or lengthening? Is founder involvement decreasing over time? Repeatable traction signals that growth can scale beyond the founding team. c. Cohort Behavior Dig into cohort data where possible. Look for: Retention trends Usage depth over time Expansion or upsell behavior Strong cohorts often matter more than top-line growth at early stages. 3. Capital Efficiency & Discipline   a. Burn vs. Learning Capital efficiency is not about spending less; it’s about spending with intent. Evaluate: Burn relative to milestones achieved Whether spending is tied to risk reduction Headcount growth aligned with revenue or learning Efficient teams buy time and optionality. b. Milestone-Based Planning Strong teams know exactly what the next dollar unlocks. Ask: What milestones justify the next raise? What risks are reduced with the current capital? What happens if fundraising takes longer than expected? Capital discipline often separates survivors from casualties. c. Downside Awareness Founders who understand downside are more investable. Look for: Runway scenarios Clear cost controls Willingness to slow growth to preserve optionality Optimism without contingency is a red flag. 4. Defensible IP or Structural Moats   a. Nature of Defensibility Defensibility doesn’t have to mean patents—but it must exist. Assess: Intellectual property (patents, trade secrets) Data advantages Switching costs Workflow or ecosystem lock-in Ask whether differentiation widens or narrows as the company grows. b. Replication Risk Pressure-test how easy it would be to copy the product. Consider: Time to replicate core functionality Capital required to compete Customer switching friction If incumbents can replicate quickly, speed and distribution must compensate. c. Strategic Relevance Defensibility increases when the company sits at a strategic choke point. Look for: Integration into core workflows Control over critical data or insights Alignment with long-term industry shifts Moats compound over time—but only if designed intentionally. 5. Cash-Flow Clarity & Financial Transparency   a. Revenue Quality Understand where revenue really comes from. Evaluate: Recurring vs. one-time revenue Contract length and renewal behavior Revenue concentration risk Predictable revenue reduces financing risk. b. Unit Economics Visibility Even pre-revenue companies should understand their economics. Ask: What does profitability look like at scale? Where do margins expand or compress? What assumptions matter most? Clarity matters more than perfection. c. Financial Hygiene Transparency builds trust. Look for: Clean cap tables Clear use-of-funds plans Consistent financial reporting Messy finances early often signal deeper execution issues later. Final Thoughts Early-stage success is rarely random. While outcomes are never guaranteed, the same attributes recur in companies that scale, survive, and return capital. By focusing diligence on founder–market fit, repeatable traction, capital efficiency, defensible moats, and cash-flow clarity, investors dramatically improve their odds of backing teams that can navigate uncertainty and compound value over time. Great investors don’t chase stories—they evaluate fundamentals with discipline.  

    Read More »

    How to Diligence a Deal Beyond the Deck

    10 min read How to Diligence a Deal Beyond the Deck A practical framework for investors to go deeper than the pitch—focusing on risk domains, capital discipline, and founder transparency. Pitch decks are designed to persuade, not to fully inform. They highlight upside, compress complexity, and often gloss over risk. For investors, relying on the deck alone is one of the fastest ways to misprice risk and overestimate execution. Whether you’re an angel investor, family office, strategic, or venture fund, diligence on a deal beyond the deck requires a structured, skeptical, and evidence-driven approach. The goal isn’t to kill deals to build conviction by understanding where things can break and whether the team has the discipline to navigate those risks. Below is a practical framework to go deeper than the pitch and evaluate a company across its true risk domains. 1. Business Model Clarity & Unit Economics   a. How the Company Actually Makes Money Start by stress-testing the revenue model—not the TAM slide. Ask: Is revenue transactional, recurring, usage-based, or contract-driven? Who is the buyer vs. the end user? What triggers revenue recognition? Break down cost drivers: COGS or service delivery costs Sales commissions and customer success Infrastructure, tooling, or third-party dependencies Look for: Clear margin expansion logic Evidence that costs decline with scale, not just assumptions If unit economics don’t work at a small scale, they rarely work later. b. LTV, CAC, and Payback Reality Founders often present optimistic LTV/CAC ratios. Your job is to pressure-test them. Validate: CAC by channel (not blended averages) Sales cycle length by customer segment Retention, expansion, and churn assumptions Ask: How long does it take to recover CAC on a cash basis? What happens to CAC as the company scales? Are early customers representative—or exceptions? c. Pricing Power & Market Sensitivity Understand whether pricing is: Cost-plus Value-based Competitive or commoditized Test: What happens if prices drop 20%? Can customers easily switch? Is pricing driven by ROI, urgency, or convenience? Real businesses survive pricing pressure. Fragile ones don’t. 2. Risk Domains: Where the Business Can Break Great diligence maps risk before upside. Key risk domains to assess: Market risk (is the problem real and urgent?) Product risk (does it work as claimed?) Execution risk (can the team deliver?) Financial risk (capital sufficiency and burn discipline) Regulatory or compliance risk (if applicable) Dependency risk (customers, vendors, platforms) Ask founders directly: “What are the top three things that could kill this company?” How they answer matters as much as what they say. 3. Product Reality vs. Product Narrative   a. Product-Market Fit Evidence Look for proof—not promises. Validate through: Customer usage data Retention and engagement metrics Pilot-to-paid conversion rates Reference calls with real users Red flags: Heavy roadmap focus with light customer evidence Features driving excitement but not retention “Design partners” that never convert b. Roadmap Discipline A strong roadmap is prioritized, resourced, and sequenced. Ask: What gets built next—and why? What’s customer-driven vs. founder-driven? What milestones unlock revenue or margin? Avoid teams chasing breadth before depth. 4. Go-to-Market Execution   a. Sales Motion Fit Evaluate whether the GTM motion aligns with the product and the buyer. Assess: Self-serve vs. sales-led vs. enterprise Founder-led sales dependency Channel vs. direct strategy Red flags: Long enterprise cycles without a capital runway Complex sales motions with junior teams No clear ICP definition b. Pipeline Quality Inspect pipeline health—not just top-line numbers. Look for: Stage conversion rates Deal slippage patterns Customer concentration risk One “logo” does not equal traction. 5. Founder Transparency & Integrity This is where diligence moves from analytical to judgment-based. Strong founders: Share bad news early Acknowledge weaknesses Provide clean, consistent data Don’t over-defend assumptions Watch for: Shifting answers across meetings Overly polished responses to hard questions Resistance to data requests Trust is built through consistency under pressure. 6. Team & Execution Capacity   a. Role Coverage Evaluate whether critical functions are owned: Product Sales Operations Finance Early-stage teams don’t need depth everywhere—but they need awareness of gaps. b. Execution Track Record Ask: What milestones were hit late—and why? Where has the team over- or under-estimated? How do they course-correct? Past execution is the best predictor of future execution. 7. Financial Discipline & Capital Strategy   a. Burn vs. Learning Healthy burn drives learning and de-risking—not just growth optics. Assess: Monthly burn vs. milestone progress Headcount growth vs. productivity Spend aligned to key risks   b. Capital Plan Reality Understand: How long does the current capital last What milestones justify the next raise Downside survival scenarios Ask: “If fundraising takes 6 months longer than expected, what happens?” 8. Cap Table & Incentive Alignment Review: Ownership distribution SAFEs, notes, and preference stacks Employee option pool health Red flags: Overcrowded early cap tables Misaligned investor rights Founder dilution that kills motivation 9. Market Context & Competitive Positioning Map: Direct competitors Indirect substitutes Incumbent responses Assess: Switching costs Differentiation durability Speed of competitive response Winning often depends on timing, not just product quality. 10. Exit Logic & Investor Fit   a. Plausible Exit Paths Ask: Who buys companies like this? At what scale? On what metrics? Hope is not a strategy, exits follow patterns. b. Alignment Check Finally, assess: Time horizon fit Risk tolerance alignment Strategic vs. financial expectations A good deal for someone else can be a bad deal for you. Final Thoughts Diligencing a deal beyond the deck is about discipline, curiosity, and humility. It means resisting the story long enough to examine the structure underneath—and deciding whether the risks are known, manageable, and worth taking. By applying a structured framework, grounded in unit economics, risk domains, founder transparency, and capital discipline, you move from guessing to conviction. The best investors don’t avoid risk. They understand it better than anyone else in the room.   Hall T. Martin is the founder and CEO of the TEN Capital Network. TEN Capital has been connecting startups with investors for over ten years. You can connect with Hall about fundraising, business growth, and emerging technologies via LinkedIn or email: hallmartin@tencapital.group

    Read More »

    How to Diligence a Cleantech Firm

    7 min read How to Diligence a Cleantech Firm Diligence for a cleantech firm requires a different lens than for traditional software, CPG, or marketplace investing. Whether you’re an angel investor, family office, strategic, or VC, evaluating a cleantech business means examining technology readiness, regulatory compliance, unit economics, carbon impact, capital intensity, and infrastructure dependencies. Here’s a structured, risk-aware playbook to diligence a cleantech company with confidence. 1. Understand the Business Model & Unit Economics   a. Revenue Model & Cost Structure Determine whether the company generates revenue through hardware sales, SaaS layers, project development, installation contracts, or long-term service agreements (e.g., O&M or energy-as-a-service). Break down COGS: components, engineering labor, installation, freight, commissioning, and warranty obligations. Ask how margins improve with volume: Are hardware components commoditized or proprietary? Do economies of scale significantly reduce manufacturing costs? Are service contracts profitable over their lifecycle? b. Lifetime Value (LTV) & Customer Acquisition Costs (CAC) For enterprise or municipal customers: What is the expected contract term? How often do customers expand deployments? What is the churn for service agreements? For residential solutions (e.g., solar installers, battery providers): Evaluate gross profit per project. Compare customer lifetime profit to CAC and installation labor costs. c. Pricing Strategy How price-sensitive is the market? Does the company compete on cost savings, performance, or sustainability ROI? How do market incentives (tax credits, grants, utility rebates) affect pricing? Ensure the pricing model remains viable even if subsidies decrease or competition intensifies. 2. Technology Readiness & Scalability Risks   a. Technology Validation (TRL Levels) Assess technology readiness: Has it been lab-validated, pilot-tested, or commercially deployed? Request: Independent validation reports Performance data Warranty or reliability metrics Identify any unproven assumptions that could hinder commercialization. b. Manufacturing & Supply Chain Where and how is the product manufactured? In-house, outsourced, or contract manufacturing? Are critical components single-source (e.g., rare earth metals, lithium cells)? Evaluate supply-chain resiliency: Lead times Supplier diversification Exposure to geopolitical risk c. Scalability Constraints Does scaling require: Large capex investment? Specialized labor? Utility interconnection approval? Local permitting or environmental assessments? Assess whether physical constraints—not just demand—could limit growth. 3. Market & Go-to-Market Strategy   a. Target Market & Adoption Curve Who are the customers—utilities, industrials, municipalities, real estate developers, corporates, or consumers? Analyze: Market size Market fragmentation Regulatory tailwinds (e.g., IRA incentives, net metering policy) Determine if the market is ready for the solution or if customer education will slow sales cycles. b. Sales Model & Distribution Is the company using direct sales, channel partners, installers, EPCs, or distributors? For enterprise or government sales: Review sales cycle length Contract structure RFP dependency Proof of traction with anchor customers c. Customer Proof & Brand Positioning Evaluate customer testimonials, commercial pilots, and measurable outcomes (e.g., kWh reduction, CO₂ saved, O&M savings). Assess whether the company’s differentiation—performance, sustainability, cost savings, or reliability—is real and defensible. 4. Regulatory, Policy & Compliance Considerations   a. Certifications & Safety Request certification documents such as: UL, CE, ISO standards Grid interconnection compliance (e.g., IEEE standards) Environmental or emissions certifications Check whether the product has undergone third-party testing. b. Policy Dependencies Many cleantech firms depend on incentives. Understand: How the business performs with and without subsidies Risks from policy changes Exposure to tariffs, import duties, or trade restrictions c. Permitting, Interconnection & Local Regulations For grid-dependent products: Interconnection timelines Utility approval processes Permitting risks For environmental tech: EPA, state-level environmental regulation Potential liabilities (e.g., waste handling, emissions compliance) 5. Product & Innovation Pipeline   a. Product-Market Fit Review pilot results, customer feedback, reliability metrics, uptime rates, and warranty claims. Evaluate whether early adopters are becoming long-term customers, and whether the product delivers measurable ROI. b. R&D Roadmap Ask for: Pipeline of next-gen technology Development timelines Budget allocation between R&D and commercialization Intellectual property strategy (patents, trade secrets) Request evidence of technical milestones, not just conceptual roadmaps. c. Competitive Moats Assess whether the company’s innovation is defensible through: Patents Proprietary materials or algorithms Exclusive supply agreements Data advantages High switching costs 6. Team & Operational Execution   a. Founding Team & Technical Expertise Do founders have expertise in energy, engineering, sustainability, hardware, or manufacturing? Have they brought physical technology to market before? b. Organizational Strength Examine structure across engineering, operations, sales, installation, and regulatory functions. Evaluate whether the company has: Solid program/project management Scalable operational processes Strong supply chain and field operations teams c. Execution Metrics Request KPIs such as: Deployment timelines Installation costs Uptime and reliability metrics Warranty claim rates On-time delivery and backlog status Look for signs of operational discipline like documented SOPs and audited processes. 7. Financials & Capital Structure   a. Historical Financials Request: 2–3 years of financial statements Cash flow breakdown (critical for capex-heavy firms) Gross margin trends Equipment and installation cost data Assess whether the company’s growth justifies its burn rate. b. Financial Model & Scenarios Review projections with a focus on: Unit economics under scale Sensitivity to commodity prices Capex requirements for growth Working capital needs (especially for hardware) Installation labor availability Model downside cases: What if incentives drop, cost of materials rises, or deployment slows? c. Cap Table & Funding Requirements Request a detailed cap table including SAFEs, notes, and options. Understand: Existing investor rights Liquidity preferences Future capital needs and dilution risk Dependency on project financing or credit facilities 8. Customer Validation & Market Risk   a. Customer References Speak with customers in pilot or commercial deployments. Ask: Did the technology meet expectations? Was the installation smooth? Did it generate real cost or carbon savings? Would they expand usage? b. Competitive Landscape Map direct and indirect competitors: Incumbents Emerging cleantech startups Cross-category substitutes (e.g., batteries vs. thermal storage) Assess defensibility and switching costs. c. Infrastructure & Channel Risk Evaluate dependencies such as: Utility approval cycles Installation labor availability Supply chain bottlenecks Dependence on one large customer or geographic region 9. ESG, Sustainability & Risk Management   a. Environmental Impact Request lifecycle analyses or carbon footprint data. Verify claims around emissions reduction, recyclability, and energy savings. b. Resilience &

    Read More »

    How to Diligence a Medical Device Startup

    min read How to Diligence a Medical Device Startup How to Diligence a Medical Device Startup A comprehensive investor guide to evaluating clinical value, regulatory risk, and commercialization potential Medical device startups operate within one of the most complex innovation categories, requiring mastery across engineering, clinical medicine, regulation, manufacturing, and reimbursement. For investors, diligence on these companies requires a structured, evidence-based approach that goes far beyond the pitch deck. This guide outlines how to properly diligence a medical device startup, integrating core industry frameworks, regulatory expectations, and the milestone roadmap unique to medtech innovation. Key content to highlight essential metrics, timelines, and development paths. 1. Clinical Problem & Unmet Need Every strong medical device startup begins with a validated, painful clinical problem. The most investable solutions are those that clearly improve outcomes, reduce complications, save clinician time, or reduce healthcare costs. Diligence Questions Is the problem clinically significant and supported by evidence Is the startup solving a proven, unmet need, or is it simply a “nice-to-have”? Does the device fit naturally into a clinician’s workflow? Evidence to Request Peer-reviewed publications Interviews with clinicians (surgeons, nurses, technicians) Hospital pilot interest or letters of support Workflow analysis Clinical validation is not optional; investors should look for early signs that the device will be accepted in practice. 2. Technology, Engineering Maturity & IP Investors must evaluate whether the technology is real, reliable, and defensible. Key Areas to Diligence Prototype functionality (bench testing, usability testing) Software validation (IEC 62304) Human factors engineering (IEC 62366) Reliability and failure mode testing Freedom-to-operate and patent filings Prototypes vs. Clinical Units Prototypes → used for engineering tests and early feedback Clinical unit → the version intended for formal clinical testing Investors should verify that the startup understands and is progressing toward an actual clinical unit, not just a lab prototype. 3. Regulatory Pathway, Risk Class, & Key Metric The regulatory pathway defines cost, timeline, risk, and capital needs. Misjudging it is one of the most common investor mistakes. Your One Key Metric: 510(k) Cycle Time For medical device startups, the key performance metric is not revenue, but rather: Cycle Time Through the 510(k) Application and Approval Process Why? A medical device cannot generate revenue until it receives FDA clearance. The 510(k) process exists to demonstrate that the device is at least as safe and effective as a predicate device already on the market. The typical cycle time ranges from: 50–300 days, depending on device complexity. Investors should ask the startup: What is the standard cycle time for comparable devices? How are you benchmarking against that? What regulatory consultant or QA/RA firm is guiding your path? Understanding this timeline is essential to evaluating execution risk and funding needs. 4. Clinical Evidence, Validation & Trials Investors must examine whether the startup is producing the right evidence at the right time. Core Stages of Clinical Validation Preclinical validation – Initial safety and bench/animal tests First-in-human tests – Early clinical study Clinical validation – Broader human clinical trial data Evidence to Request Cadaver/animal study results Human factors reports Early feasibility human data Biocompatibility and electrical safety testing Strong startups demonstrate a clear, statistically powered plan for pivotal clinical trials, including sites, budget, endpoints, and timeline. 5. Manufacturing, Quality Systems & Supply Chain A medtech startup must eventually scale hardware manufacturing, a central diligence area many investors overlook. Diligence Checklist Design for manufacturability (DFM) Supplier qualification Sterilization pathway and validation Packaging and shelf-life testing ISO 13485-aligned quality management system Without proper QMS and design controls, FDA clearance and manufacturing scale become extremely risky. 6. Reimbursement Strategy & Commercial Model Even with FDA approval, a device can fail commercially without reimbursement. Key Reimbursement Questions Is there an existing CPT, HCPCS, or DRG code? Will a new code be required? What is the economic value to hospitals and providers? Are early health economic studies underway? Strong startups can demonstrate real cost savings or efficiency improvements that justify purchasing. 7. Team, Advisors, & Capital Strategy Execution in medtech requires multidisciplinary excellence. What to Look For Founders with clinical or engineering depth Regulatory and quality expertise Key opinion leaders (KOLs) involved early Experience with device commercialization Capital Planning Medical device development often requires three to five years to reach FDA clearance and initial sales. Investors should verify: Milestone-based fundraising strategy Clear runway aligned to regulatory events. Transparent burn projection 8. The Medical Device Roadmap: A Critical Diligence Tool Medical Device Startup Roadmap Market requirements Product requirements Prototypes Clinical unit Preclinical validation First-in-human test Clinical validation CE Mark (Europe) First European orders 510(k) clearance (US) First US orders Break-even Growth and scale Why this matters for diligence Investors should map the startup’s current stage against this roadmap to evaluate: How far they’ve progressed Whether they are ahead or behind industry norms Whether capital needs align with upcoming milestones What risks remain before revenue is possible This roadmap provides a clear, standardized structure for evaluating readiness and execution risk. Common Red Flags During Diligence No predicate identified for 510(k) No regulatory consultant engaged Confusion between intended use and indications for use Only early prototypes, no pathway to a clinical unit Unrealistic regulatory timelines Limited or no clinical advisor involvement Weak or nonexistent reimbursement plan Underestimation of hospital sales cycles (12–24 months) Diligencing a medical device startup requires a holistic approach that integrates: Clinical need Technology maturity Regulatory strategy 510(k) cycle-time metrics Clinical validation Manufacturing readiness Reimbursement viabilit Team capability Roadmap alignment Capital planning By using these frameworks, especially the medical device roadmap and the 510(k) cycle time regulatory metric, investors can distinguish between a promising concept and a fundable medtech venture capable of achieving clinical and commercial success. Read More from TEN Capital Education here. Hall T. Martin is the founder and CEO of the TEN Capital Network. TEN Capital has been connecting startups with investors for over ten years. You can connect with Hall about fundraising, business growth, and emerging technologies via LinkedIn or email: hallmartin@tencapital.group

    Read More »

    Site Map

    Scroll to Top