Every application gets the same review. Your team gets its time back.
evalue8 reads every submitted deck, checks its claims against public sources, and flags each applicant green, amber or off-scope — with the reasoning attached. Your reviewers then correct, question and decide inside the same report. And it finds the startups that never applied.
Inbound and outbound in one workspace. The selection stays with your team.
Application 380 does not get the same attention as number 12
Not because your team isn't careful. Because it is human, and the deadline is on Friday. Selection quality quietly becomes a function of reading order, writing skill, and who happened to be reviewing at 11pm.
The startups that write well get in. The ones that build well sometimes don't.
What the deck says, next to what the sources say
This is the part built for you. Applicants hand you a pitch deck; evalue8 takes each claim in it and comes back with one of five verdicts — supported, likely true, insufficient, likely false or contradicted — each one openable down to its source.
- SupportedIndependently confirmed in public sources.
- Likely trueConsistent with the evidence, without direct confirmation.
- InsufficientNot verifiable from public sources — the honest and most common verdict at early stage.
- Likely false / ContradictedThe sources point the other way. Worth a conversation, not an automatic rejection.
Read it as a question list, not a verdict
"Insufficient" is not a red flag — at pre-seed it is the normal state. What it gives you is a precise list of what to ask in the interview.
Green, amber, off-scope — with the reasoning attached
A number without an explanation is worse than no number. Every flag comes with the sentence behind it and the sources you can open, so a decision on an applicant can be explained to that applicant.
- What the company actually doesBeyond the pitch, in plain language.
- Team, market, technology, tractionResearched outside the application form.
- Signals and risksPositive signals and risk factors side by side, each one sourced.
- Questions for the interviewDiligence priorities come with the specific questions to put to the founders.
Every applicant gets the same depth of review — including the one submitted four minutes before the deadline.
For publicly funded programs and university transfer offices, equal treatment isn't a nice-to-have — it's something you have to be able to demonstrate.
The research is systematic. The judgement stays yours.
A selection committee's value is exactly the thing an analysis can't produce: domain instinct, knowledge of the region, a sense of whether these two founders will still be talking in a year. evalue8 is built so that judgement lands in the same document as the evidence.
- Question any claimSelect a sentence in the report and ask where it came from. The chat can pull fresh sources for that specific line.
- Suggest a changeA juror who knows something the public record doesn't can correct the report rather than argue with it in a meeting.
- Notes and classification per applicantKept in Cockpit next to the analysis, so the batch view shows both perspectives at once.
- Nothing is decided automaticallyevalue8 does not reject anyone. It prepares the case; your committee closes it.
Useful for accelerators, startup challenges, innovation competitions, corporate programs and selection committees — anywhere several people have to reach one defensible verdict.
Green — worth a full review
Strong fit with your criteria, claims that hold up, evidence found beyond the application.
Amber — needs a human
Promising, with open questions a person has to resolve. This is where your team's time belongs.
Off-scope
Clearly outside your program's remit, with the reason written down so you can defend it.
The best startups in your field didn't apply
Applications tell you who found you. They don't tell you who exists. Scout sweeps a field in three to six minutes and returns the companies and founders that match your program — including the ones with no website yet.
- Scout by themeThe technologies and markets your program is built around.
- Scout by stage and regionCompanies at the point where your program is genuinely useful.
- Scout by personResearchers and operators who have just started, or are about to.
- Save the runKeep the search and come back to what has changed before the next call opens.
Fill the pipeline before the call for applications, not after it closes.
University spinoffs at Seed or Series A in our focus fields
Quantum startups headquartered in Europe with public research backing
Startups developing mounting systems for utility-scale solar
Founders who left a research institute in the last twelve months
Real search patterns from the product. Saved runs keep a topic alive between cohorts.
What evalue8 does not do
It does not select your cohort. It does not reject anyone. It does not hand you a number you'd have to defend without knowing where it came from.
It removes the reading, not the judgement — so your team spends its time on the startups that deserve human attention. Human approval is part of the workflow by design, not a setting you switch on.
Built for anyone who runs a selection process
Accelerators & incubators
Batch screening plus proactive sourcing between cohorts.
Corporate programs
Assess applicants against the parent company's strategic priorities.
Startup competitions
Consistent, defensible review across hundreds of entries.
Public funding programs
Equal treatment you can document, with the reasoning preserved.
University tech transfer
Find the spin-offs forming inside your own institution's research.
Ecosystem organisations
Map who is actually active in your region, not just who is registered.
Applications contain other people's data
You're processing material founders trusted you with. That shapes how it is handled.
Security & privacy overview- Documents used only on releaseApplicant material is processed only for your review, with clear data separation.
- EU data sovereigntyEuropean hosting and role-based access.
- A person decidesevalue8 prioritises attention. It does not make automated decisions about people.
- Everything traceableEach verdict opens to the source behind it, so a rejected applicant's question has an answer.
Try it on a batch you've already decided.
Send us your criteria and a previous cohort's applications. We'll run them and show you what a consistent review would have surfaced — including whether it agrees with the choices you made.