AI AUTOMATION FOR VENTURE CAPITAL

|

Built for how investors actually work

Partners spend more time on deck triage and LP reports than on the thesis work that drives returns. We build custom AI systems that automate the operational grind so your team focuses on conviction.

2,000+inbound pitches per year at a typical fund, most never get a second look
FUND OPERATIONS AUDIT: TIME ALLOCATION ANALYSIS
Fund AUM:$150M
Inbound pitches/month:250
Pitches screened by partners:250
Pitches worth a meeting:12
Partner hours on triage/month:60+
Partner time spent on:
Investment decisions28%
Deal flow triage25%
LP reporting & admin24%
Portfolio monitoring23%
FINDING: 72% of partner time is not investment judgment.
The Record

MARKET INTELLIGENCE:

The Venture Landscape

STATE OF THE MARKET

The venture landscape is more competitive, more data-intensive, and more operationally demanding than ever. Funds that systematize will outperform. Funds that don't will fall behind.

1.3,012

Active VC Firms

Number of active VC firms in the U.S., up 40% from 2019

(NVCA Yearbook, 2024)

2.$170B

Annual Deployment

U.S. VC investment in 2024, normalizing from pandemic peaks

(PitchBook-NVCA Venture Monitor, 2024)

3.37%

Dry Powder Pressure

of committed capital remains undeployed, creating LP pressure to deploy or return

(Preqin Venture Capital Report, 2024)

4.74%

LP Data Demands

of institutional LPs now require quarterly reporting with standardized KPIs

(ILPA Reporting Best Practices, 2024)

5.12-18 months

Fundraising Cycle

Average time to close a new fund, up from 6-9 months in 2021

(PitchBook Fund Benchmark Report, 2024)

6.5,000+

Inbound Pitches

Annual pitch volume at top-quartile funds, requiring systematic screening

(Affinity State of VC Report, 2024)

The competition squeeze

More funds chasing the same deals. Founders have options. The funds that win aren't necessarily the ones with the best terms — they're the ones that move fastest and demonstrate the most conviction. Speed is a competitive advantage, and it starts with operational efficiency.

3,012Active Funds

Active U.S. VC firms, up 40% since 2019. Every deal has more competition.

(NVCA Yearbook, 2024)

Rising LP expectations

Institutional LPs are demanding more transparency, more frequent reporting, and standardized metrics. The days of a one-page quarterly email are over. Funds that can't deliver institutional-grade reporting lose allocations to funds that can.

74%Quarterly Reporting

of institutional LPs require quarterly standardized KPI reporting

(ILPA Reporting Best Practices, 2024)

The operations inflection point

Venture firms are recognizing that operational excellence isn't back-office overhead — it's a competitive advantage. Funds with mature data infrastructure make faster investment decisions, provide better LP reporting, and retain better talent.

37%Dry Powder

of committed capital remains undeployed — LPs want deployment velocity or their money back

(Preqin Venture Capital Report, 2024)

Dispatches from the Partner Desk

Conversations with GPs, associates, and operations leads about a typical week in venture.

MONDAY 8:00AM
Q:

What does your inbox look like right now?

A:

Partner opens email to find 47 new pitch decks forwarded from warm intros, cold inbound, and two co-investors. A portfolio company also sent last night's board deck with financials that need review before Wednesday's call.

“There are maybe three real opportunities in here. I'll spend four hours finding them.”

THE HIDDEN COST:

Senior partner spending 4+ hours per week on first-pass deck triage that an associate could do in 2 — if they had clear scoring criteria automated

TUESDAY 11:00AM
Q:

How is your investment memo coming along?

A:

Associate is building an investment memo for a Series A prospect. Market sizing requires pulling data from PitchBook, Crunchbase, and three industry reports. Competitive mapping is a manual spreadsheet exercise.

“I've spent six hours on this memo and I haven't written the thesis section yet. All I've done is aggregate data.”

THE HIDDEN COST:

60% of investment memo time spent on data aggregation, not investment judgment

WEDNESDAY 3:00PM
Q:

How are quarterly LP reports going?

A:

Operations lead is chasing portfolio companies for quarterly updates. Eight of twenty-four companies haven't submitted KPIs yet. The LP report is due in two weeks.

“Same companies, same excuses, same follow-up emails. Half the data will arrive in different formats anyway.”

THE HIDDEN COST:

40+ hours per quarter spent collecting, normalizing, and formatting portfolio data for LP reporting

THURSDAY 9:00AM
Q:

Tell us about the follow-on decision you're facing.

A:

Partner needs to decide on a follow-on investment. The portfolio company's metrics are in a Notion database, financials in a Google Sheet, and the last board deck is somewhere in DocSend.

“I know the numbers support this, but I can't pull together a clean picture without burning half a day. We're going to miss pro rata if we don't move by Friday.”

THE HIDDEN COST:

Follow-on decisions delayed by data fragmentation — every hour of delay is potential allocation risk

FRIDAY 4:00PM
Q:

What slipped through the cracks this week?

A:

GP reviews the week and realizes two warm introductions from last Tuesday never got a response. A portfolio company flagged a hiring crisis in a Slack message that got buried.

“I dropped the ball on those intros. The founder who referred them is going to notice.”

THE HIDDEN COST:

Relationship capital erodes when responsiveness drops — the best deals go to the fastest-moving funds

Operational Audit Findings

Every operational bottleneck compounds. Lost time means missed deals, delayed decisions, and LP frustration.

FINDING I: DROWNING IN DEAL FLOW, STARVING FOR SIGNAL

THE PROBLEM:

Partners and associates screen 200+ decks per month. First-pass triage is manual, inconsistent, and the biggest time sink that isn't investment work.

EVIDENCE:

200+decks per month screened by a typical partner
15-20 hours/month in partner time on deck triage

FIELD NOTES:

“I see 200 decks a month. Maybe 10 are worth a meeting. The other 190 are burning my best hours.”

FINDING II: PORTFOLIO VISIBILITY IS A QUARTERLY FIRE DRILL

THE PROBLEM:

Tracking KPIs across 30-80 portfolio companies with inconsistent reporting formats, cadences, and completeness. Nobody has a real-time view.

EVIDENCE:

40+ hoursper quarter chasing and normalizing portfolio data
$25k-$50k annually in ops team time on data wrangling

FIELD NOTES:

“We manage 52 portfolio companies. Getting a clean KPI dashboard for our Monday meeting is a two-day project every week.”

FINDING III: LP REPORTS CONSUME YOUR BEST PEOPLE FOR WEEKS

THE PROBLEM:

Quarterly LP updates, annual meeting prep, and fund performance attribution require pulling data from multiple systems and formatting it to institutional standards.

EVIDENCE:

60-80 hoursper quarterly LP report cycle across the team
$100k+ annually in team time dedicated to LP reporting

FIELD NOTES:

“Our LP report is 45 pages. Every quarter, we rebuild it from scratch because the data sources changed. Our LPs deserve better. So does my operations team.”

FINDING IV: INVESTMENT MEMOS ARE 60% DATA ASSEMBLY, 40% INSIGHT

THE PROBLEM:

Market sizing, competitive mapping, comparable transaction analysis — the research grunt work consumes most of the memo timeline before any thesis writing begins.

EVIDENCE:

15-25 hoursper investment memo, mostly on data aggregation
$3,000-$5,000 per memo in analyst/associate time

FIELD NOTES:

“My associate spent three days building a competitive landscape for a deal that moved to term sheet while we were still in research mode. Speed kills in this business.”

FINDING V: CAP TABLE COMPLEXITY GROWS FASTER THAN YOUR PORTFOLIO

THE PROBLEM:

Tracking ownership across rounds, SAFEs, convertible notes, and option pools requires precision. Errors compound across follow-on decisions and LP reporting.

EVIDENCE:

4-8 hoursper round modeling cap table scenarios
Mispriced follow-ons or incorrect ownership calculations

FIELD NOTES:

“We had a SAFE conversion scenario that three different people modeled three different ways. The right answer required a lawyer. For a $500k check.”

FINDING VI: FOLLOW-ON DECISIONS RUN ON GUT, NOT DATA

THE PROBLEM:

Analyzing portfolio company performance to inform reserves allocation requires assembling data from board decks, KPI reports, and financial models scattered across systems.

EVIDENCE:

6-10 hoursper follow-on analysis to build a complete picture
Misallocated reserves or missed pro rata opportunities

FIELD NOTES:

“We have $8M in reserves. Deciding where to deploy it shouldn't require a week of data archaeology. But it does, every time.”

AI automation by fund type

Every fund strategy has unique workflows, pain points, and automation opportunities. Here is how AI transforms work across the VC landscape.

High deal volume, fast decision cycles, and founder evaluation at scale. Seed funds see the most inbound and need the fastest triage to stay competitive.

Deal SourcingFounder EvaluationMarket Thesis ValidationPortfolio Support

Workflows

Pitch Deck Screening20-30 hrs/month

First-pass scoring and filtering of inbound deal flow

Automation
85%
Founder Reference Checks3-5 hrs/check

Background research, reference outreach, and synthesis

Automation
40%
Market Thesis Research8-15 hrs/thesis

Market sizing, trend analysis, and thesis validation

Automation
65%
Portfolio Touchpoints5-10 hrs/week

Regular check-ins, resource requests, and intro facilitation

Automation
50%

Benchmarks

Avg hours/investment20-40 hours per investment decision
Avg cost/investment$5,000-$15,000 in team time
SourceKauffman Fellows Research 2024

Priority Opportunities

AI Deal Flow Triagecritical
Time savings70-85%
Cost savings$50k-$100k/year in partner time
high
Automated Market Researchhigh
Time savings50-65%
Cost savings$3k-$5k per thesis
high
Portfolio Engagement Automationmedium
Time savings40-50%
Cost savings$20k-$40k/year
medium

Case Studies

What this looks like in practice

Example scenarios based on common VC fund challenges. Numbers reflect industry benchmarks.

3,500 inbound pitches. Four partners. Zero system.

$200M AUM|Multi-stage venture fund|San Francisco

Challenge

The fund was receiving 3,500+ inbound pitches per year from warm introductions, cold inbound, and accelerator demo days. Four partners were each independently screening decks with no consistent criteria, leading to duplicated effort, missed opportunities, and frustrated founders who never heard back. An associate estimated they were spending 60% of their time on deck triage instead of deep research.

Annual inbound pitches3,500+
Partner hours on triage/month60+
Average response time9 days
Deals lost to slower response~15/year

Outcome

AI-powered intake system scores every inbound pitch against the fund's thesis criteria, extracts key metrics, and routes qualified deals to the right partner. First-pass triage dropped from 60+ partner hours/month to 8 hours of review. Response time improved from 9 days to 48 hours. The fund estimates they captured at least 3 additional deals in year one that would have been lost to slow response.

“We went from drowning in decks to having a curated pipeline. Our founders noticed — they started telling other founders we were the most responsive fund they'd worked with.”

52 portfolio companies. 12 LPs. One operations lead.

$350M across 3 funds|Series A/B firm|New York

Challenge

The fund managed 52 active portfolio companies across three fund vehicles. Their single operations lead spent 6-8 weeks per quarter assembling LP reports. Portfolio companies reported KPIs in different formats — some in Notion, some in Google Sheets, some in email updates. IRR and TVPI calculations required manual Excel modeling. Two LPs had requested custom report formats, adding another week to the cycle.

Portfolio companies52
Fund vehicles3
Quarterly report hours240-320
Data formats to normalize7+

Outcome

Automated data pipeline ingests portfolio KPIs from any format, normalizes to a standard schema, and calculates fund performance metrics in real time. Quarterly LP reports auto-generate with fund-specific and consolidated views. Custom LP formats are configuration, not manual work. Reporting cycle dropped from 6-8 weeks to 1 week of review and refinement.

“Our operations lead went from spending half the quarter on reports to spending one week reviewing them. The quality improved too — our LPs specifically commented on the consistency.”

$25M fund. One GP. 200 inbound pitches a month. Zero bandwidth.

$25M Fund I|Solo GP micro-VC|D.C. metro

Challenge

A solo GP running a $25M debut fund was spending 30% of their time on operations — deal triage, LP updates, capital call calculations, and portfolio tracking. The remaining 70% was split between sourcing, evaluation, and portfolio support. With 200+ inbound pitches per month and 18 active portfolio companies, every hour spent on admin was an hour not spent with founders or LPs.

Fund size$25M
Inbound pitches/month200+
Portfolio companies18
Time on operations30%

Outcome

AI-powered systems now handle deal triage scoring, quarterly LP update drafting, capital call calculations, and portfolio KPI dashboards. The GP's operational time dropped from 30% to under 10%. That 20% was redirected to founder meetings and LP relationship management — directly correlated with closing Fund II in 8 months instead of the projected 14.

“I went from running a fund and an operations department to just running a fund. The AI handles the operational load that used to keep me up at night.”

The Solution

How we fix it

Four workflows, four custom-built AI systems. Each one addresses a specific operational bottleneck with measurable before-and-after results.

Partners burn 15-20 hours per month on first-pass deck screening that rarely surfaces the best opportunities.

AI-powered intake scores inbound pitches against your thesis criteria, extracts key metrics, flags pattern matches with successful portfolio companies, and surfaces only the deals worth a partner's time.

Before200+ decks/month

Partners scanning decks at midnight. Great deals buried under mediocre ones. Response times slipping. Warm intros going cold.

After15-20 qualified/month

Partners see pre-scored, pre-summarized deal flow. Time spent on conviction, not triage. Founders get faster responses.

80% savings

“Imagine opening your inbox to 15 pre-qualified deals instead of 200 unscreened decks. That is what Thursday morning looks like now.”

Industry Expertise

We understand venture capital

Building AI for VC firms requires deep understanding of fund economics, LP relationships, regulatory requirements, and the speed at which investment decisions are made.

I. Regulatory & Compliance

SEC Regulatory Compliance

Our systems are built with SEC requirements in mind — Form D filings (Reg D Rule 506(b)/506(c)), Form ADV for registered advisers, and Blue Sky compliance for state securities registrations.

Investor Verification

We understand qualified purchaser and accredited investor verification requirements, including the documentation and record-keeping obligations under Regulation D.

QSBS (Section 1202) Tracking

Qualified Small Business Stock compliance tracking is built into our portfolio management systems — critical for funds and their LPs seeking capital gains tax exclusions.

AML/KYC & ERISA

Anti-money laundering and know-your-customer protocols, plus ERISA considerations for pension fund LPs. Compliance is architecture, not afterthought.

II. Tech Stack Familiarity

Carta

Cap Tables & Fund Admin

Affinity

Relationship CRM

Visible.vc

Portfolio Monitoring

PitchBook

Market Intelligence

AngelList Stack

Fund Management

DocSend

Deck Tracking

Airtable

Workflow Automation

Crunchbase

Market Data

III. Data Sources & Research

  1. 1.NVCA Yearbook (National Venture Capital Association)
  2. 2.PitchBook-NVCA Venture Monitor
  3. 3.Preqin Venture Capital Reports
  4. 4.ILPA Reporting Best Practices
  5. 5.Cambridge Associates VC Benchmark
  6. 6.Kauffman Fellows Research
  7. 7.Affinity State of VC Report

IV. Regulatory Context

SEC Form D & Reg D

Rule 506(b) and 506(c) exemptions for private fund offerings. Our systems support Form D filing data management and investor qualification tracking.

NVCA Model Documents

Familiarity with NVCA model legal documents — term sheets, stock purchase agreements, voting agreements, and side letters that form the backbone of venture transactions.

Fund Tax & Compliance

QSBS Section 1202 tracking, carried interest waterfall calculations, management fee compliance, and K-1 preparation support for fund administrators.

ROI Analysis

Fund Operations Savings Calculator

Potential Recovery Analysis

Fund Parameters

200

Total inbound decks from all sources

30

Companies you actively monitor

20

Total team hours per investment memo

60

Total team hours per quarterly LP report cycle

6

Partners + associates + operations

$500

Blended value of partner time (opportunity cost, not billing rate)

Potential Recovery

Deal Flow Triage Savings

$200,000

Pitches x 12 months x 10 min saved/deck x Partner Cost / 60

Portfolio Monitoring Savings

$216,000

Portfolio Co's x 2 hrs/month x 12 months x Blended Rate

Investment Memo Savings

$43,200

Hours/Memo x 60% automation x 12 memos/year x Blended Rate

LP Reporting Savings

$57,600

Hours/Report x 80% automation x 4 quarters x Blended Rate

Total Annual Savings

$516,800

Sum of all recovery categories

ROI Multiple

4.3x

Total Annual Savings / Annual Partnership Investment

Assumptions & Sources

Assumptions

  • 1.Deal flow triage assumes 10 minutes saved per inbound deck through AI scoring (Affinity benchmarks)
  • 2.Portfolio monitoring assumes 2 hours saved per company per month through automated data ingestion
  • 3.Investment memo automation assumes 60% of research time can be automated (data aggregation, not judgment)
  • 4.LP reporting automation assumes 80% time savings on data collection and formatting
  • 5.ROI calculated against Growth Partnership tier
  • 6.Actual results vary based on fund strategy, team structure, and current operational maturity

Sources

  • [1]NVCA Yearbook 2024
  • [2]PitchBook-NVCA Venture Monitor Q4 2024
  • [3]Affinity State of VC Operations Report
  • [4]ILPA Reporting Best Practices Survey

Proof Points

What Changes for Your Fund

I. From the Field

We were screening 250 decks a month manually. Now our AI triage surfaces the 15-20 that actually match our thesis. My partners are doing investment work again.

— Managing Partner, $150M seed fund, Example scenario

Our quarterly LP report went from a three-week project to a three-day review cycle. Our LPs noticed the quality improvement before we told them about the system.

— Head of Operations, Multi-stage platform fund, Example scenario

Investment memos that took my associate three days now take one. The research scaffolding is better than what we were building manually, and she spends her time on judgment calls.

— General Partner, Series A/B firm, Example scenario

I run a solo GP fund. I was spending 30% of my time on operations. Now I spend 30% more time meeting founders. The math speaks for itself.

— Solo General Partner, Micro-VC fund, Example scenario

II. Before & After

General Partners

Before:

15-20 hours/month on deck triage, LP report review, and portfolio data requests

After:

3-5 hours/month reviewing pre-scored deals and auto-generated reports

75% reduction in operational overhead

Associates & Analysts

Before:

Days on data aggregation for memos, competitive landscapes built from scratch every time

After:

Research scaffolding auto-generated, focus shifts to thesis development and judgment

60% more time on substantive investment work

Operations / Fund Admin

Before:

Quarterly crunch mode for LP reports, chasing portfolio companies for data

After:

Automated data pipelines, report generation, and compliance tracking

80% reduction in reporting cycle time

The Fund

Before:

Competing on hustle, losing deals to faster-moving firms

After:

Competing on speed and conviction, with institutional-grade operations

Faster decisions, better LP relationships, scalable operations
Engagement Models

How we work with venture funds

We understand fund economics, LP dynamics, and the pace at which investment decisions need to happen. We build custom AI systems for funds like yours.

AI Opportunity Assessment

Fixed scope, discussed during consultation
What:

We audit your fund operations and identify the 3-4 highest-ROI automation opportunities specific to your strategy and team structure.

Deliverable:

Prioritized opportunity roadmap with fund economics

2–4 weeks
Learn more

Deal Flow Pilot

Standalone or as part of partnership
What:

Prove the value on your actual deal flow. See AI-powered triage and scoring in action before committing to fund-wide implementation.

Deliverable:

Working AI triage system with scoring metrics comparison

2–4 weeks
Learn more
Most Popular

Growth Partnership

Monthly partnership, scoped to your needs
What:

Embedded engineering partner building custom systems for your fund. Most popular tier for mid-size funds.

Deliverable:

Production AI systems, ongoing enhancement, priority support

Ongoing monthly engagement
Learn more
Ready to systematize your fund operations

Talk to someone who understands fund economics

Expect a direct reply from a senior engineer — not a sales automation.

Talk to someone who understands fund economics

IRR, TVPI, DPI, carry waterfalls, LP dynamics. We speak your language.

What We Deliver
  1. 1.That partners spend their time on investment conviction, not deck triage
  2. 2.That LP reports generate in days, not weeks
  3. 3.That portfolio monitoring happens in real time, not quarterly scrambles
No commitment required
30-minute conversation
Confidential

Or email hello@scalewerk.net directly

Respectfully,

SCALEWERK CONSULTING LLC

Engineering Partner for Venture Capital Operations