Venture-Grade Tech Deal Diligence
Pattern-Level Read on AI, Infra & Security Plays

• A clear map of the target's architecture — data, models, agents, trust stack, and where the real value (or fragility) actually lives.
• A pressure-test of the business story against the mechanics: unit economics, scaling assumptions, and where the system will choke long before the pitch deck admits it.
• A read on "real tech vs. wrapper" — what's defensible IP, what's commodity, and what's pure buzzword theater.
• A risk pass across identity, governance, and drift: where behavior, access, or “normal operations” can quietly wobble once reality hits users, adversaries, and regulators.
• A concise written brief you can circulate internally: red flags, green lights, and the questions that must be answered before you invest.

Most diligence splits into two silos: finance people who can model cash flows but don't see the architecture — and technologists who love the stack but don't pressure-test incentives, go-to-market constraints, or operational reality.

I built my career living in both worlds: markets and risk, plus real systems engineering and build work. That blend matters because deals don't fail in one dimension. They fail when locally-reasonable choices combine into globally-bad outcomes.

Here’s the part people try to shortcut: you can absolutely feed materials into AI and get summaries, comparisons, and lists of questions. What you won't get is synthesist judgment — the ability to discover missing frames, identify the actual decision points, and see how incentives and authority boundaries collapse under pressure.

I’m not evaluating claims — I’m evaluating permission.

Drift behaves like unhedged delta exposure over time — small movements look harmless until gamma spikes and the system collapses. People drift too — executives, boards, ICs, and entire orgs can stay “confident” while the underlying assumptions quietly change.

My lens is built around survivability: trust, identity, boundaries, admissibility before execution, and whether the system remains coherent when incentives shift and accountability becomes real.

• I read systems end-to-end: trust, data, memory, governance, and how humans will actually interact with the product.
• I've worked under real-world accountability regimes — markets, licensing, and operational risk — so I don't confuse “sounds plausible” with “survives contact with reality.”
• SAQ™ / Unified Trust Stack™ thinking gives a structured way to evaluate whether the architecture can survive regulation, adversaries, and scale.
• The goal isn't to say "yes" or "no" — it's to make sure you know exactly what you're buying, what's actually defensible, and what must be true for the investment to hold.

This diligence is not about whether a system sounds coherent. It is about whether it remains coherent when pressure hits: incentives, adversaries, scaling, procurement, and the messy reality of humans.

1. Scoping call: we align on deal size, stage, timelines, and what you already know vs. what feels fuzzy. This call is to determine whether formal diligence is warranted — it is not a paid diligence engagement.
2. Material review: deck, data room, tech docs, contracts, and any prior technical opinions you've collected.
3. Architecture & risk pass: I map the system, spot drift risks, and identify where claims don't match the underlying structure.
4. Follow-up with the team: targeted questions to founders and technical leads — no grandstanding, just clarity.
5. Written brief & live review: you get a structured memo and a working session to walk through scenarios, red flags, and "if we fund this, what has to be true" conditions.

Turnaround and depth are matched to the deal: from quick "go/no-go" reads to deeper SAQ™ / trust-stack reviews on larger positions.

• Single-deal assessments: fixed-fee engagements scoped to stage and complexity.
• Portfolio & repeat work: preferred pricing for firms who want a standing Synthesist lens on multiple deals per quarter.
• Side-by-side with your team: I'm happy to plug into your existing IC process rather than replace it.

We'll set exact numbers on a call once I understand your pipeline, average check size, and how you like to run diligence today. Fees apply once diligence work begins — review, analysis, and written opinion — and are scoped to the depth required.