A full Vintane fundability report — before you pay
This is exactly what lands in your inbox: the final score, an executive summary of how investors read you, all five silent judgments named, and five ranked fixes. Below is a complete example for an anonymized developer-tooling SaaS company (Company N) — a realistic, fully anonymized seed raise — so you can see the paid value before spending a dollar.
“Developers clearly love the product — 61 paying teams and +28% MoM prove it — but the deck buries the exact numbers that would make this an easy yes.”
Executive summary
Company N has genuine pull: paying teams grew from 14 to 61 in six months (+28% MoM) and net revenue retention sits at 118%. The problem is that a busy partner can't find those numbers without asking. The traction slide says "strong momentum" instead of showing the curve; ARR is quoted three different ways across the last ten updates ($480K, $540K, $610K, never reconciled); the $28B TAM is top-down and undefended; and the $3.5M ask funds 24 months but the milestones only reach month 10. None of these are fatal — they're proof problems, not idea problems — and putting the real numbers on the page turns a 62 into a fundable story. Right now the raise reads as under-evidenced, and a partner would file it under "strong product, come back when the numbers are legible."
The 5 silent judgments — named
These are the deductions a partner makes in their head while skimming — the ones that almost never make it into the “pass” email. Ordered worst first.
The strongest fact you have — paying teams grew from 14 to 61 in six months, +28% MoM — appears nowhere on the traction slide, which says "strong momentum" instead. Partners read an unquantified traction slide as a number you'd rather not show, so they assume the worst about the best thing you've got.
ARR is quoted as $480K, $540K, and $610K in three of your last ten updates with no bridge between them, and "active team" swaps definition twice. When the same metric moves, investors can't tell if you grew 27% or just re-counted — and inconsistency reads as either sloppiness or spin.
The $28B TAM is top-down and unattributed. The first diligence question — "how did you get to $28B?" — collapses it, and there's no bottom-up build (developer teams × seats × ACV) to fall back on. A number that can't be defended is worse than a smaller one that can: your bottom-up math lands closer to a very fundable $2.1B.
The ICP moved from "individual developers" to "platform teams" to "enterprise DevOps" across your last five updates — yet 9 of your 12 most recent closed deals were platform teams of 5–20 engineers. A partner reading the deck and updates side by side can't tell what you are, even though your own data already answers it.
You're raising $3.5M for 24 months of runway, but the milestone list only reaches month 10. The math makes the round look padded, and it invites the question you least want: "what happens to the other 14 months of money?"
5 ranked fixes
Each judgment maps to one concrete fix — a rewrite or reframe you can apply to your deck and updates today. Ordered by impact.
Replace "strong momentum" with the real curve: paying teams 14 → 61 over six months, +28% MoM, 118% NRR. One verifiable chart beats three adjectives — and it disarms the "what are they hiding" reflex before it fires on the best fact you own.
Define ARR, "active team," and "qualified pipeline" once, in writing, then use those exact definitions everywhere — so $610K is $610K in the deck and in every update. Bridge the $480K → $540K → $610K jumps once and never restate them. Consistency is the cheapest credibility you can buy.
Show developer teams × seats × ACV: your defensible bottom-up build lands near $2.1B. Keep the $28B as a top-down ceiling in the appendix, not the headline — lead with the number you can walk a partner through without flinching.
9 of your last 12 closed deals were platform teams of 5–20 engineers — so write one "who we're for" sentence around that segment and repeat it verbatim in the deck, the updates, and the intro email. Stop letting the ICP move between sends when your own data already picked it.
Either extend the milestone list to cover all 24 months the $3.5M funds, or trim the raise to match the 10-month plan you can actually defend. The ask and the plan have to tell the same story to the dollar.
Delivered as a downloadable PDF
Now run it on your raise
Paste your deck and your last 10 founder updates for your own fundability score in about 30 seconds — free. The full report above, tailored to your materials, is a one-time $49.
Get my free fundability score →Free score, no payment needed · full report a one-time $49 · your deck stays private