Generated banner for Startup Analysis
Generated logo for Startup Analysis

Startup Analysis

Alex YangCommunityCreated by Alex Yang

  • Skill
  • Research and analysis
  • Business and productivity
  • MIT
  • No issues found

From the author

Analyze a startup from three perspectives — VC investor, job applicant, and CEO/founder — covering market, traction, unit economics, team, defensibility, runway, equity value, culture, and competitive position, with a verdict for each. Use this skill whenever the user wants to evaluate a startup or private tech company: due diligence, whether to invest in it or join it, weighing a startup job offer, company health, outlook, or competitive position, or open-ended asks such as "what do you think of [company]" or "research [company] for me".
— the description by Alex Yang

AutoGineer summary

Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author

Startup Analysis provides a structured, multi-lens evaluation of private tech companies. By synthesizing data from public sources, it generates a report that examines a company's health and potential through three distinct viewpoints: the VC investor (focusing on market and economics), the job applicant (focusing on career risk and equity), and the CEO (focusing on operational efficiency and strategy). This approach ensures users understand not just the company's viability, but how it aligns with their specific goals, whether they are looking to invest, join, or lead.

What it does

  • Gathers and synthesizes public data on startups including funding, traction, and team.
  • Evaluates companies from a VC investor perspective to assess market opportunity and defensibility.
  • Analyzes companies from a job applicant perspective to assess equity value and career risk.
  • Assesses companies from a CEO perspective to identify operational strengths and strategic gaps.
  • Provides a cross-perspective synthesis to highlight where different lenses agree or diverge.
  • Delivers a structured report with clear verdicts for each perspective.

When to use it

  • When performing due diligence on a potential investment target.
  • When weighing a job offer from a startup to understand the risks and potential upside.
  • When a founder needs an objective, third-party style assessment of their own company's health.
  • When conducting general research on a private tech company's competitive position.

Advantages

  • Provides a balanced view by separating investor, employee, and founder interests.
  • Helps identify hidden risks like high burn rates or poor equity structures.
  • Standardizes the evaluation process using clear metrics and frameworks.
  • Encourages critical thinking by forcing the user to consider multiple stakeholder viewpoints.

Usage examples

“What do you think of Acme Corp as a place to work?”
The agent will research Acme Corp and provide a report focusing on the job applicant lens, including equity risks, culture, and runway, while providing context from the investor and CEO perspectives.
“Research the startup 'Nebula AI' for me.”
The agent will conduct a comprehensive 360-degree analysis of Nebula AI, covering market, traction, team, and providing verdicts for investment, employment, and operational health.

Install

  1. Download the skill as a ZIP:

    https://mp-staging.autogineer.com/agent-skills/himself65/startup-analysis/download
  2. Unzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:

    mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip startup-analysis.zip -d .agents/skills

Documentation by Alex Yang

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:

CategoryWhat to find
BasicsFounded year, HQ location, employee count, what the product does
FundingTotal raised, last round (size, date, valuation if known), key investors
ProductWhat they sell, who buys it, pricing model, key competitors
TractionUsers, revenue (if public), growth signals, notable customers
TeamFounders' backgrounds, key hires, LinkedIn headcount trends
MarketIndustry, market size estimates, tailwinds/headwinds
NewsRecent press, product launches, partnerships, layoffs, pivots

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.

User's situationPrimary perspectiveStill include
Considering investingVC InvestorJob Applicant (talent signal), CEO (operational health)
Considering a job offerJob ApplicantVC Investor (funding runway), CEO (strategic direction)
Running the company / advisoryCEO/FounderVC Investor (how investors see you), Job Applicant (talent attractiveness)
General curiosity / researchAll equally—

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

Write it as a scannable report titled [Company Name] — Startup Analysis:

  • Summary — a short overview that states the three verdicts up front.

  • One section per perspective, in the order that fits the user's situation from Step 2. Each covers the core areas from Step 3 with the evidence behind every judgment, and ends with its verdict on the scale defined there — Investment Verdict (Strong Pass / Lean Pass / Lean Invest / Strong Invest), Employment Verdict (Strong Pass / Lean Pass / Lean Join / Strong Join), or Health Grade (Critical / Struggling / Stable / Strong / Exceptional) — followed by the reasoning.

  • Cross-perspective synthesis — where the lenses agree, where they diverge, and the bottom line.

Scale each section to the evidence: where financials or other areas are opaque, say so in a line and spend the space on what's observable, rather than filling a heading for its own sake. Don't fabricate metrics; 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.

Files

references/ceo-framework.md

CEO / Founder Self-Assessment Framework

Detailed framework for a startup founder or CEO to assess their company's health, trajectory, and strategic position. This is the "view from inside" — honest self-assessment that surfaces what the founder might be too close to see.


1. Product-Market Fit Assessment

Quantitative Signals
MetricStrong PMFModerate PMFWeak PMF
Sean Ellis test (% "very disappointed" if product gone)>40%25-40%<25%
Monthly retention (B2B SaaS)>95%90-95%<90%
Monthly retention (consumer)>30% (D30)15-30%<15%
Net revenue retention>120%100-120%<100%
Organic acquisition %>40%20-40%<20%
Time to valueHours/daysWeeksMonths
Qualitative Signals
  • Are customers using the product without being asked/reminded?

  • Are they pulling you into new use cases you didn't design for?

  • Is word-of-mouth driving meaningful growth?

  • Do customers complain more about missing features than about the core product?

  • Would customers fight to keep the product if you tried to take it away?

Pivot vs. Persevere

Consider pivoting when:

  • 18+ months in with no clear retention or engagement improvement

  • Multiple customer segments tried, none sticking

  • The team is solving the problem better than anyone but nobody cares about the problem

  • The market window has closed or shifted

Persevere when:

  • Retention is strong but growth is slow (distribution problem, not product problem)

  • A specific segment loves it even if the mass market doesn't

  • Usage is increasing within existing accounts

  • You're seeing increasing organic pull from a defined customer persona


2. Growth Efficiency

Key Operating Metrics
MetricFormulaExcellentGoodConcerning
Burn multipleNet burn / net new ARR<1x1-2x>2x
CAC paybackCAC / (monthly ARPU × gross margin)<6 months6-12 months>18 months
Magic numberNet new ARR / S&M spend (prior quarter)>1.00.5-1.0<0.5
Gross margin(Revenue - COGS) / Revenue>75%60-75%<60%
Rule of 40Growth rate + profit margin>40%20-40%<20%
Runway Management
RunwayAction
>24 monthsComfortable. Invest in growth.
18-24 monthsStart fundraising prep.
12-18 monthsActively fundraising or cutting burn.
6-12 monthsEmergency mode. Cut to default alive.
<6 monthsSurvival mode. Consider bridge, acqui-hire, or wind-down.
Burn Efficiency Questions
  • Could you get to profitability (or "default alive") by cutting to just the core team?

  • What's the minimum viable burn rate to maintain the product and key relationships?

  • Is the marginal dollar of spend generating more or less revenue than the last one?


3. Competitive Position

Moat Assessment

For each potential moat, rate its current strength (0-5):

MoatQuestions to ask yourself
Network effectsDoes the product get better as more people use it? Is there a multi-sided network?
Switching costsHow hard is it for customers to leave? Have they integrated deeply?
Data advantageDo you have proprietary data that improves the product and that competitors can't easily replicate?
Brand / communityDo customers identify with your brand? Is there a community that would be hard to replicate?
Economies of scaleDo your unit costs decrease meaningfully with scale?
Technology / IPDo you have patents, trade secrets, or technical capabilities that are genuinely hard to replicate?
RegulatoryDo you have licenses, certifications, or regulatory relationships that create barriers?
Competitive Dynamics
  • Direct competitors: Who's building the same thing? What's their differentiation?

  • Indirect competitors: What do customers use instead of your product today (including doing nothing)?

  • Platform risk: Are you building on top of a platform that could compete with you or cut you off?

  • Big tech risk: Could a FAANG company build this as a feature? Would they?

  • Open source risk: Could an open-source alternative emerge that's "good enough"?


4. Organizational Health

Team Metrics
MetricHealthyWarning
Voluntary attrition (annual)<15%>20%
Offer acceptance rate>70%<50%
Time to fill key roles<60 days>90 days
eNPS (employee net promoter score)>30<10
Manager-to-IC ratio1:5 to 1:8<1:3 or >1:12
Organizational Health Questions
  • Do you have the team to execute the next 12-month plan?

  • What are the 3 most critical hires you need to make?

  • Is there a single-point-of-failure person (if they leave, you're in serious trouble)?

  • Are decisions being made at the right level, or is everything bottlenecked at founders?

  • Is the team aligned on what success looks like this quarter?

Culture Assessment
  • Do people disagree openly in meetings, or is conflict avoided?

  • Is information flowing freely, or are there silos?

  • Do people voluntarily recommend working here to friends?

  • Are people excited about the product and mission, or just collecting a paycheck?


5. Fundraising Readiness

Benchmarks by Stage
RoundTypical ARRGrowth rateOther expectations
SeedPre-revenue or <$500KStrong user/engagement growthCompelling team + market thesis
Series A$1-3M ARR>3x YoYClear PMF, repeatable sales motion
Series B$5-15M ARR>2.5x YoYUnit economics working, scalable GTM
Series C$20-50M ARR>2x YoYPath to profitability visible, market leadership
Fundraising Readiness Checklist
  • [ ] Metrics trending in the right direction (not just a good month)

  • [ ] Clear narrative: problem → solution → traction → market → team → ask

  • [ ] Data room prepared: financials, cap table, key metrics dashboard, customer references

  • [ ] Target investor list with warm intros identified

  • [ ] Board alignment on timing and terms expectations

  • [ ] 6+ months of runway remaining when starting the process

Investor Narrative
  • What's the big vision that makes this a $1B+ company?

  • What's the specific milestone this funding will help you hit?

  • Why is now the right time to raise?

  • What's your unfair advantage that makes you the team to win this market?


6. Strategic Risk Register

Risk Categories
Risk typeExamplesMitigation
Customer concentration>30% revenue from one customerDiversify aggressively
Platform dependencyBuilt on another company's API/platformBuild abstraction layers, diversify platforms
Key person riskSingle engineer owns critical systemCross-train, document, hire redundancy
RegulatoryNew laws could ban or restrict the productEngage lobbyists, build compliance early
Market timingAhead of or behind the marketAdjust GTM, consider pivoting market segment
Technology shiftNew technology makes your approach obsoleteR&D investment, stay close to cutting edge
FundingCan't raise next roundGet to default alive, explore bridge/debt
Health Grade Framework
GradeCriteria
ExceptionalStrong PMF, efficient growth, clear moat, great team, well-funded. Rare.
StrongGood PMF, growing well, defensible position, minor gaps. Well-positioned for next round.
StablePMF found but growth could be better, some efficiency concerns, adequate runway. Needs focus.
StrugglingUnclear PMF or declining metrics, burn concerns, competitive pressure. Needs significant changes.
CriticalNo PMF, <6 months runway, team attrition, no clear path forward. Pivot, bridge, or wind down.

Requirements and compatibility

Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta

“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.

Security

No issues found by our static scan· No issues found

A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.

Attribution and licence

Created by
Alex Yang
Publisher
Alex Yang (Community)
Source
himself65/finance-skills · plugins/startup-tools/skills/startup-analysis · commit a085078
Licence
MIT License (redistribution allowed)
  • LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
  • ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
Synced

AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by Alex Yang.

Download ZIP

The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download startup-analysis.zip