Solution
For private equity deal teams, corporate strategy groups, and CDD consultants: a cited read of market, customers, competition, and growth — with management's claims checked against the documents.
The problem
A seller-assembled room, a CIM written to persuade, and external research that may agree with neither — all to be read under exclusivity pressure.
The manual version is partners skimming hundreds of documents and hoping the important contradiction is in the ones they happened to read.
Revenue-quality and market-growth claims flow into the model without being tested against the contracts and research that could confirm them.
The product, not a promise
How it works
The data room, CIM, and external research load in whatever format they arrive.
Market claims, customer metrics, competitive positions, and growth assumptions are pulled out and structured.
Management's claims are checked against contracts, filings, and outside sources; gaps and conflicts are flagged.
Findings assemble into a structured diligence view — market, customers, competition, growth.
The deal team reviews the cited findings and approves what goes into the report.
Who it's for
Deal team associate
Deal partner
Investment committee & risk
Commercial due diligence runs on a hard deadline against a soft data set: a data room assembled by the seller, a CIM written to persuade, and a pile of external research that may or may not agree with either. The manual version means senior people skimming hundreds of documents and hoping the important contradiction is in the ones they read. This solution reads everything and shows its work.
The platform ingests the full diligence set: the CIM, data room documents, customer contracts, management presentations, earnings transcripts, and external market research, in any format. It extracts the commercially meaningful content — market size and share claims, customer concentration and retention signals, competitive positioning, pricing structures, growth assumptions — and structures it so the deal team queries findings instead of hunting through folders.
Crucially, it corroborates. A revenue-quality claim in the CIM gets checked against the actual customer contracts. A market-growth assumption gets set beside the external research. Where sources agree, the finding is stronger; where they conflict, the conflict itself is surfaced as a diligence item, with both sources cited.
Every finding links back to the document and page that produced it, so a partner can verify any number in the output in one click. Nothing reaches the report on the platform’s authority alone: conclusions are human-approved by the deal team, with the evidence trail attached. That traceability is what holds up in the investment committee — and later, when someone asks why the thesis said what it said.
The practical effect: the first structured, cited read of a data room takes hours instead of days, and senior time goes to judgment — the questions the documents raise — rather than to finding what the documents say.
Objections, answered
Every finding links to the document and page that produced it, so a partner verifies any number in one click. Where sources conflict, both citations are shown — and nothing reaches the report without the deal team's approval.
Yes. Findings are structured to your diligence framework — the market, customer, competition, and growth questions your committee actually asks — rather than a generic template.
Each engagement is processed under strict access controls, isolated per deal, and every extraction, flag, and approval is logged. The evidence trail that makes findings verifiable also makes access reviewable.
The first structured, cited read of the room takes hours. Corroboration runs as documents load, so contradictions between the CIM, the contracts, and the research surface in the first days, not the final week.
Watch its market and customer claims get checked against the room, every conflict surfaced and cited, live.
Request a demo