What VCs think but won't say

Get the feedback VCs think but won't say.

Upload your pitch deck and receive honest, actionable feedback powered by decades of VC evaluation experience.

Pitch deck or website · Results in minutes

Average VC deck review

Your deck gets less than two minutes. Most get rejected in the first pass.

Decks never get a meeting

Almost every deck is filtered out before a partner ever sees it.

£0

To see what they see

Get the same structured teardown a VC analyst writes internally.

Scroll

The VC funnel

Your deck enters a process you never get to see

Most founders have no idea what happens after they hit send. Here's the reality.

Inbox500+ decks/month

Most die here. An analyst skims for 90 seconds.

AI / ML Screening~200 pass initial filters

Funds increasingly use automated screening to triage volume. Your deck needs to survive algorithms before a human ever sees it.

← Refract helps you get through this

Analyst Screen~50 get read

The analyst triages through pre-vetted decks and prepares for the first call (well at least some do).

← Using Refract helps you become legible to VC analysts

First Call~12 get a meeting

By now, the VC already has an opinion. The call confirms or kills it.

Refract gets you past this frustrating stage.

Know what the analyst will think, before its written into a memo. Become legible to busy analysts.

Partner Review~5 get discussed

Partners read the memo, not your deck. The memo is everything.

Term Sheet1–2 get funded

The deck got them here. Everything else is execution.

Same deck. Different feedback.

A generalist says “looks good.”
A specialist tells you what kills it.

Generic AI

Your deck looks well-structured overall.

Consider adding more detail to your market size slide.

The team slide could highlight relevant experience more.

Your financial projections seem reasonable.

Nice use of visuals throughout.

Verdict: “Your deck looks promising overall”

Refract

CRITICAL

Your $44B TAM is unsourced — VCs will discount this immediately

Risk 7.2/10

Core assumption that market wants framework-native over SaaS is unvalidated

MISSING

No customer voice evidence. 8 customers claimed, zero shown.

STAGE OK

Lack of unit economics acceptable at seed — not a blocker

TEST THIS

4-week customer discovery can validate/kill the thesis for ~$5K

Zone 3: Lottery Ticket — Pass pending DD

Get the diagnosis first. Then use any AI tool to act on it.

What you receive

A real analyst memo. Not AI fluff.

Structured, calibrated, and honest. The same teardown a VC analyst writes internally before passing your deck up — or killing it.

SAMPLE — ANALYST MEMO EXCERPT

Expand

Outcome Zone: 3 — Lottery Ticket | Confidence: MEDIUM

The core thesis is clear: financial institutions need custom lending infrastructure without vendor lock-in. The “framework-native” positioning is differentiated but unproven. The critical question is whether the market actually wants this middle ground between full SaaS rigidity and custom builds.

Assumption 1: Market prefers framework-native over SaaS. Importance: 9/10. Certainty: LOW. Evidence: MARKETING language only. Risk Score: 7.2. If lenders are satisfied with existing solutions, the entire thesis collapses.

Technical Assessment. The architecture is described as “programmable lending blocks” — essentially modular financial primitives. This is hard but not unique. The real question is whether 80% pre-built + full customization creates maintenance nightmares at scale or genuine workflow entrenchment.

... continues with GTM reality check, experiments, due diligence questions, and bottom line recommendation

Full memos: 2,000–3,000 words across 9 structured sections

How it works

Four steps. No fluff.

Upload your deck

PDF. 30 seconds. Just your deck and your email.

We run the real analysis

Killer assumptions. Technical gaps. GTM blind spots. The stuff that kills decks.

You get the analyst memo

In your inbox within minutes. The structured teardown a VC analyst writes internally.

Use it everywhere

Drop the memo into any AI tool to refine your pitch and pressure-test responses.

Know what they'll think
before they think it.

Your next investor meeting shouldn't be the first time someone stress-tests your deck.