Startup Analysis

Produces a multi-perspective analysis of a startup, examining it through three lenses that each reveal different aspects of company health and potential:

1. VC Investor Lens — Is this a good investment? Market size, unit economics, growth trajectory, team quality, defensibility
2. Job Applicant Lens — Should I work here? Equity value, runway risk, culture signals, career growth, compensation fairness
3. CEO/Founder Lens — How healthy is this company? Product-market fit, burn efficiency, competitive moat, organizational health

Each perspective surfaces insights the others miss. A company can be a great investment but a terrible place to work (or vice versa). The goal is to give the user a 360-degree view so they can make informed decisions.

Step 1: Gather Information

Before analyzing, collect as much public information as possible about the startup. Use web search, the company's website, Crunchbase data, press coverage, and any other available sources.

Key data to gather:

If certain data isn't publicly available (e.g., revenue for private companies), note the gap and infer what you can from indirect signals (hiring pace, customer logos, web traffic proxies, job postings).

When information is insufficient

Many startups — especially early-stage or niche ones — have limited public presence. If web search does not return enough information to produce a meaningful analysis (e.g., you can't determine what the company does, who founded it, or how it's funded), ask the user to provide the company's website URL before proceeding. The company website is often the single most information-dense source, and reading it directly (about page, pricing page, team page, blog) can fill most gaps.

You can also ask the user for:

• The company's website or landing page URL
• A Crunchbase, LinkedIn, or PitchBook link
• Any pitch deck, job listing, or press article they have
• Specific context they already know (e.g., "they just raised a Series A from Sequoia")

It is better to ask for a URL and produce an accurate analysis than to guess and produce a misleading one.

Step 2: Determine Which Perspectives to Cover

By default, produce all three perspectives. If the user specifies a particular angle (e.g., "I'm considering joining them" or "should I invest"), emphasize that perspective but still include the others as context — they often reveal relevant information.

Step 3: Analyze from Each Perspective

Read the relevant reference files for the detailed framework for each perspective. These contain the specific criteria, metrics, and red/green flags to evaluate.

VC Investor Analysis

Read references/vc-framework.md for the full evaluation framework.

Core areas to assess:

• Market opportunity — TAM/SAM/SOM, market timing, secular trends
• Product & traction — Product-market fit signals, growth metrics, retention
• Unit economics — CAC, LTV, margins, burn multiple, path to profitability
• Team — Founder-market fit, technical depth, hiring ability
• Defensibility — Moats (network effects, switching costs, data, brand, regulatory)
• Deal terms context — Stage-appropriate valuation, comparable exits

Produce a clear Investment Thesis (bull case) and Key Risks (bear case). End with a verdict: Strong Pass / Lean Pass / Lean Invest / Strong Invest, with reasoning.

Job Applicant Analysis

Read references/job-applicant-framework.md for the full evaluation framework.

Core areas to assess:

• Financial stability — Runway, burn rate, funding trajectory, revenue health
• Equity value — Option/equity package analysis, dilution risk, liquidation preferences, realistic exit scenarios
• Career growth — Role scope, learning opportunity, resume value, mentorship
• Culture & work-life — Glassdoor signals, employee tenure data, leadership style
• Product & market risk — Is PMF real? What happens if the startup fails?
• Red flags — High turnover, constant pivots, vague metrics, founders cashing out

Produce a clear Why Join (pros) and Watch Out For (risks). End with a verdict: Strong Pass / Lean Pass / Lean Join / Strong Join, with reasoning.

CEO/Founder Analysis

Read references/ceo-framework.md for the full evaluation framework.

Core areas to assess:

• Product-market fit — Retention curves, organic growth, Sean Ellis test proxy
• Growth efficiency — Burn multiple, CAC payback, magic number
• Competitive position — Moat strength, competitive dynamics, market share trajectory
• Organizational health — Hiring pipeline, attrition, team capability gaps
• Fundraising readiness — Metrics vs. benchmarks for next round, investor narrative
• Strategic risks — Platform dependency, customer concentration, regulatory exposure

Produce a clear Strengths to Double Down On and Urgent Areas to Address. End with a health grade: Critical / Struggling / Stable / Strong / Exceptional, with reasoning.

Step 4: Synthesize Cross-Perspective Insights

After the three analyses, add a synthesis section that highlights:

1. Where perspectives agree — If all three lenses flag the same strength or weakness, it's probably real
2. Where perspectives diverge — A company can be VC-attractive (huge market) but employee-risky (high burn, low runway). Call these out.
3. The bottom line — One paragraph summary: what kind of company is this, what's its most likely trajectory, and what should the user do based on their stated (or implied) situation

Step 5: Present the Report

Structure the output as a clean, scannable report:

# [Company Name] — Startup Analysis

## Summary
[2-3 sentence overview with key verdict]

## VC Investor Perspective
### Market Opportunity
### Product & Traction
### Unit Economics (if available)
### Team
### Defensibility
### Investment Verdict: [Strong Pass / Lean Pass / Lean Invest / Strong Invest]
[Reasoning]

## Job Applicant Perspective
### Financial Stability
### Equity Value Assessment
### Career Growth Potential
### Culture & Work-Life Signals
### Risk Factors
### Employment Verdict: [Strong Pass / Lean Pass / Lean Join / Strong Join]
[Reasoning]

## CEO/Founder Perspective
### Product-Market Fit Assessment
### Growth Efficiency
### Competitive Position
### Organizational Health
### Strategic Risks
### Health Grade: [Critical / Struggling / Stable / Strong / Exceptional]
[Reasoning]

## Cross-Perspective Synthesis
### Points of Agreement
### Points of Divergence
### Bottom Line

Adapt section depth to available data — if financials are completely opaque, say so and focus on what's observable. Don't fabricate metrics, but do make informed inferences and state your confidence level.

Reference Files

• references/vc-framework.md — VC due diligence checklist with metrics, benchmarks, and red/green flags
• references/job-applicant-framework.md — Job seeker evaluation framework with equity analysis and culture assessment
• references/ceo-framework.md — CEO self-assessment framework with operational metrics and strategic analysis

Read these when you need the detailed criteria and benchmarks for each perspective.