Investors

See What Other Investors MISS

The biggest investment risks hide in the technology. Most investors can't read them.

3 Problems A Geek Can Fix

01

Surface-Level Reviews

Your technical DD consists of asking the CTO 'is the technology solid?' and accepting the answer.

Comprehensive code, architecture, and team assessment that reveals true technical health—not the CTO's spin.

02

Hidden Technical Debt

You invested in a company whose tech looked great in the demo but was held together with duct tape.

Deep codebase analysis that quantifies technical debt and its impact on roadmap velocity and scaling capacity.

03

Scalability Fantasies

Founders claim their tech 'scales infinitely' and you have no way to verify.

Architecture stress-testing and scaling analysis that separates credible claims from founder fantasy.

I've reviewed the technology of 200+ companies for investors. The pattern is always the same: founders present their best demo, show impressive metrics, and tell a compelling scaling story. And about 40% of the time, the technology behind the curtain can't support any of it. That's not malice—most founders genuinely believe their tech is solid. They just don't have the perspective to see the gaps. That's what technical due diligence provides.

Proper technical due diligence isn't about finding reasons to say no. It's about understanding exactly what you're buying: the strengths, the risks, the technical debt, the scaling constraints, and the cost of getting from where they are to where they say they're going. According to Bain & Company, inadequate due diligence is cited as a factor in 70% of failed acquisitions and investments. For technology companies, the technology itself is the asset—evaluating it superficially is like buying real estate without an inspection.

Jeff Cline's PROFIT AT SCALE methodology brings a structured, repeatable framework to technical due diligence that goes far beyond the typical 'have a developer look at the code' approach. The assessment covers seven dimensions: Architecture Quality (can the system scale to meet projections?), Code Health (how much technical debt exists and what will it cost to resolve?), Team Capability (does the team have the skills to execute the roadmap?), Security Posture (are there vulnerabilities that create liability?), Data Assets (what proprietary data exists and what's it worth?), Infrastructure Costs (what does it really cost to operate and scale?), and Technology Differentiation (is the tech actually defensible?).

Each dimension receives a quantitative score and a detailed narrative assessment. The result is a Technical Due Diligence Report that gives investors a clear, comprehensive picture of what they're investing in—not the picture the founder painted, but the objective reality. This report has saved investors from multi-million dollar mistakes and, equally important, has given investors the confidence to move quickly on opportunities they might have otherwise passed on.

The hidden cost of inadequate technical DD is enormous. Jeff Cline has seen investors pour $10M into companies whose technology couldn't scale beyond the demo, companies whose codebases were so brittle that adding features took 5x longer than projected, and companies whose 'proprietary AI' was actually a thin wrapper around open-source libraries. Each of these situations was discoverable through proper technical due diligence. Each one cost investors millions.

The Increase/Decrease framework applies to your investment portfolio. Technical DD INCREASES your effective deal flow by giving you confidence to act quickly on good deals—speed wins in competitive rounds. It builds more Efficient evaluation Teams by providing a standardized assessment framework that makes deal comparison consistent. And it directly protects IP Value and Exit Multiples by ensuring you invest in companies whose technology actually supports their valuation narrative.

On the DECREASE side, technical DD reduces Cost by preventing investments in companies that will require expensive technology rebuilds. It reduces Risk by identifying technical vulnerabilities, scaling limitations, and team capability gaps before they become expensive problems. And it reduces Operational Strain on your portfolio by ensuring your investments have sound technical foundations that don't require constant intervention.

How It Works: Engagement begins with a scoping call to understand the deal context, investment thesis, and specific areas of concern. The assessment itself typically takes 5-10 business days and includes: codebase review, architecture analysis, infrastructure assessment, team interviews, security evaluation, and competitive technology benchmarking. You receive a comprehensive Technical DD Report with scores, findings, risks, and recommendations—plus a 1-hour walkthrough where Jeff Cline explains the findings and answers your questions. If you're also building your investment thesis or optimizing deal flow, technical DD capability becomes a systematic advantage across your entire portfolio.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does technical due diligence cover for startup investments?

Comprehensive technical DD covers seven dimensions: architecture quality and scalability, code health and technical debt, team capability and depth, security posture, data assets and IP, infrastructure costs, and technology differentiation. Jeff Cline provides quantitative scores across all seven dimensions plus detailed narrative assessments.

How long does technical due diligence take?

A thorough technical DD assessment typically takes 5-10 business days, depending on the complexity of the technology. Jeff Cline can provide expedited assessments in 3-5 business days for time-sensitive deals. The assessment includes codebase review, architecture analysis, team interviews, and a comprehensive written report.

How much does technical due diligence cost compared to a bad investment?

Technical DD typically costs $15-50K depending on scope. Considering that the average failed technology investment loses investors $1-10M+, the ROI on proper DD is enormous. One prevented bad investment pays for decades of DD assessments.

What are the most common red flags found during technical due diligence?

The five most common red flags are: technical debt that will require major rewrites to scale, architecture that can't support projected growth, key-person dependency where one developer is the entire technical team, security vulnerabilities that create liability, and technology claims that don't match reality (e.g., 'proprietary AI' that's actually commodity tools).

Should I do technical due diligence on every deal?

For any deal where technology is a significant component of value—which is most deals today—yes. The depth can be scaled: a lighter assessment for smaller checks, comprehensive DD for larger investments. Jeff Cline offers tiered DD packages to match investment size and risk profile.

Get real technical due diligence. Not a checkbox.

Take the 2-minute quiz or reach out directly.