Angel investors
How should an angel examine early traction claims from a deep tech startup?
a deep tech startup: Examine traction metrics through their definition, denominator, period, and supporting records.
Examine traction metrics through their definition, denominator, period, and supporting records. A growth percentage can describe a tiny base or a changing cohort. Bookings, cash collected, revenue, active use, and pipeline should not be treated as interchangeable.
Start with the decision
Reconstruct a small sample from the underlying records when authorized. Ask about exclusions, refunds, services, incentives, and changed definitions. Have the finance owner or an independent specialist address formal accounting questions.
The illustrative scenario
This is an educational workbook. The company or fund and all numerical inputs below are fictional. They are not ADIN results, customer claims, market benchmarks, or a forecast.
The fictional team is developing a sensing component with a laboratory prototype. Commercial customers require validation outside the lab before a design win. Manufacturing and qualification milestones compete for the same runway.
A successful laboratory test does not establish production reliability or buyer adoption. Keep technical feasibility, manufacturability, customer qualification, and commercial commitment separate.
Turn the scenario into an evidence decision
Consider a review of a deep tech startup in which a confident explanation arrives before the supporting records. Start with the first question in the table. Write down what an answer would change: the next interview, the experiment's scope, a request for specialist review, or a decision to wait. A question without a consequence can produce a longer document while adding little understanding.
Next, inspect the record named in the table and record its date, owner, permission boundary, and limitations. Request dated test protocols, repeatability results, independent technical references, and a milestone budget. Distinguish a customer's evaluation agreement from an order. If the record contradicts the explanation, preserve both accounts and ask which definition, period, or workflow differs. Do not silently select the version that makes the opportunity look strongest.
Finish with a conditional statement: if the specified evidence supports the claim under these conditions, take the named next step; otherwise investigate the unresolved question. A metric is useful when it answers a relevant question and can be interpreted consistently. A precise number with an unclear definition can create more confidence than the evidence warrants. This worked exercise is about the decision process. It does not assert that a fictional company has met a real diligence standard or that a template can authorize an investment.
| Item | Illustration |
|---|---|
| Decision question | What is the metric definition? |
| Case-specific constraint | A successful laboratory test does not establish production reliability or buyer adoption. Keep technical feasibility, manufacturability, customer qualification, and commercial commitment separate. |
| Record to inspect | Request dated test protocols, repeatability results, independent technical references, and a milestone budget. Distinguish a customer's evaluation agreement from an order. |
| Comparison to preserve | Compare the next financing milestone with the resources and dependencies needed to reach it. Use qualified technical reviewers for claims outside the investor's expertise. |
| Unresolved case question | What test can be reproduced? |
Use this worksheet
Answer the questions with a source, date, owner, and next action. Mark an unknown as unknown. Use public or permissioned information and involve a qualified specialist when a question requires expertise beyond the team’s competence.
- What is the metric definition?
- What is the denominator?
- Which period is covered?
- What was excluded?
- Can the figure be reconciled?
Questions specific to this scenario
- What test can be reproduced?
- Which milestone depends on a third party?
- What changes between prototype and production?
Request dated test protocols, repeatability results, independent technical references, and a milestone budget. Distinguish a customer's evaluation agreement from an order.
A concrete next test
Ask a qualified technical reviewer to identify a repeatable test that distinguishes laboratory feasibility from the next commercial milestone. Record the equipment, conditions, dependencies, and evidence needed. A dramatic demonstration should not substitute for the specified validation process.
Interpret the result
A metric is useful when it answers a relevant question and can be interpreted consistently. A precise number with an unclear definition can create more confidence than the evidence warrants.
Compare the next financing milestone with the resources and dependencies needed to reach it. Use qualified technical reviewers for claims outside the investor's expertise.
Sources and method
These primary resources provide background for the concepts. The fictional scenario, calculations, and worksheet are ADIN educational examples; the sources do not report or validate those invented results. Reviewed October 11, 2026.