How it works

From public record to score.

We check how a VC fund treats founders, using sources you can open yourself.

01

We pull the public record.

02

We verify every source.

It counts only if it links, names the fund and shows its role.

03

We score the fund.

0 to 100, higher means fewer red flags in the sources we checked, from published rules.

How scoring works →
04

You check before you sign.

Read the report, save the fund, get alerts when it changes.

What we check

AreaSources
Legal recordsFederal dockets (PACER, CourtListener) and state courts: suits by or against the fund, its partners as directors, and its own companies.
Regulators and sanctionsSEC Form ADV and Form D, SEC and DOJ actions, OFAC, EU, UK and UN sanctions lists (exact identity matches only).
PressNamed, dated reporting from outlets such as TechCrunch, Bloomberg and Reuters. Anonymous-only claims don't count.
Founder experiencesFirst-hand reviews from founders and executives, verified via LinkedIn and anonymous by default.

Reports

Free · 2
Free account · 5 more
Plans
Reopening a fund you've seen is free.Create account
Scoring

How the score works.

It measures how a fund treats its own founders, not its portfolio's luck.

Version 2 · agreed Oct 2, 2026
60
Fund vs. founders
Its own startups, founders and executives
17.5
Ability to support you
Money, media reach, help after the check
17.5
Founder experience
First-hand accounts only
5
Conflicts of interest
Competing boards and in-house rivals
+3
Track record bonus
Years investing without a pattern of harm
0 to −50
Regulatory penalty
Probes, charges, fines, sanctions

Score = sections 1–4 + bonus − regulatory penalty, capped at 0–100.

Principles

  • Every fund starts with full points and loses them only for verified evidence about its own behavior.
  • Rates, not counts: bad events are measured as a share of all companies backed.
  • Copycat names are excluded.
  • A suit the fund brought differs from one brought against it.
  • Coverage is shown separately. Missing data lowers coverage, not the score.

Rate scale

Share of portfolio affectedEffect
Under 1%No penalty
1–3%About 10% of the section
3–10%About 35%
Over 10%About 70% or more

Bands

ScoreBand
90–100Very low risk
75–89Low risk
50–74Moderate
25–49Elevated
Under 25High

Any sanctions finding shows a red banner, whatever the score.

The rules

1 · Fund vs. founders 60

Sub-partPoints
Lawsuits with its own startups or founders30
Pushing out founder CEOs12
Down-round or pay-to-play behavior10
Blocking acquisitions or rounds8
  • −3 per case the fund lost or where fraud was found, even under 1%.

2 · Ability to support you 17.5

Sub-partPoints
Money: fund size, money left, hit target6
Media reach (capped)6
Help after the check, incl. partner stability5.5
  • Claims the fund makes about itself count at half until founders confirm them.
  • −0.5 for each calendar year with at least one partner departure, up to −2

3 · Founder experience 17.5

Only first-hand accounts from a founder or named ex-executive.

Negatives under 1%: age defaultPoints
10+ years and over 500 companies16.6
10+ years14.9
5–10 years12.25
2–5 years8.75
Under 2 years or a first fund7
Feedback 1% or more: tonePoints
Mostly positive15.75
Mixed9.6
Mostly negative3.5
Pattern of serious harm0
  • Fewer than 5 accounts: average of tone score and age default.
  • Accounts older than 5 years count half.

4 · Conflicts of interest 5

Partners on competing boards, backing a founder's direct competitor, in-house companies that compete with portfolio companies. −1 per documented conflict, scaled by partner count. Can't go below 0.

5 · Track record bonus +3

+1 per 5 years of investing with no significant pattern of harm.

6 · Regulatory penalty 0 to −50

EventPoints
Open investigation, no charges−2
Charges filed−10
Fine or settlement−10 to −20
Fraud finding, or partner barred−30
Sanctioned partner or sanctioned money−50 + red banner
Shareholder suit vs. partner as public-company director−0.5 to −1
  • Sanctions need an exact identity match, never name-only. Counter-sanctions cost 0.
  • Crypto token-buyer class actions are context only and cost 0.

Worked example

Andreessen HorowitzOpen the report →
95.4Very low risk · coverage 39%
Fund vs. founders60of 60

RuleBad events are measured as a share of the ~1,456 companies a16z has backed. Under 1% costs nothing. −3 per case the fund lost or where fraud was found.

InputPointsWhy
Lawsuits with its own startups or founders30 / 301 case (Run The World, 2023) ÷ 1,456 = 0.07%. Under 1%, no penalty.
Pushing out founder CEOs12 / 121 case (Zenefits, 2016) ÷ 1,456 = 0.07%. Under 1%, no penalty.
Down-round or pay-to-play behavior10 / 10No evidence found. Terms aren't public (0% checked), so no deduction.
Blocking acquisitions or rounds8 / 8No documented veto found (0% checked).
Lost case or fraud finding (−3 each)0None. Run The World federal claims were dismissed.
Ability to support you14.25of 17.5

RuleMoney 6 + media 6 (capped) + help after the check 5.5. Claims the fund makes about itself count at half until founders confirm them. Partner departures cost points.

InputPointsWhy
Money5 / 6Fund size 2/2: $15B+ raised Jan 2026. Money left 1.5/2: reserves not disclosed. Hit target 1.5/2: no published target.
Media reach (capped)6 / 6~290K YouTube subscribers, podcast since 2014, in-house New Media team, ~1.08M X followers.
Help after the check3.25 / 5.5Platform team 1/2 and intros 0.75/1.5: a16z's own claims, at half. Partner stability 1.5/2: −0.5 for 2025 departures (Pande, Wennmachers, O'Farrell).
Founder experience16.6of 17.5

RuleOnly first-hand accounts count. If negative accounts are under 1% of the portfolio, the fund gets its age default.

InputPointsWhy
First-hand accounts32 negative (Run The World, Zenefits), 1 positive (RapidAPI).
Negative share0.14%2 ÷ 1,456. Under 1%, so the age default applies.
Age default16.610+ years and over 500 companies = 95% of 17.5.
Conflicts of interest4of 5

Rule−1 per documented conflict, scaled by partner count. The section can't go below 0.

InputPointsWhy
Competing board seatsconflictHorowitz at Databricks, Casado at Fivetran (DOJ probe).
Incubation clauseconflictSEC filing: incubated companies “will be in direct competition” with portfolio companies.
Uniswap vote, 2023conflictVoted against Uniswap's bridge choice while backing LayerZero.
Scaled across 88 investing partners−13 conflicts, spread across 88 partners, cost 1 point.
Track record bonus+3max +3

Rule+1 for every 5 years of investing with no significant pattern of harm, up to +3.

InputPointsWhy
Years investing1616 ÷ 5 = 3.2, capped at +3.
Regulatory penalty−2.5range 0 to −50

RulePenalty only; a clean record earns 0. Open investigation −2. Shareholder suit against a partner as a public-company director −0.5 to −1.

InputPointsWhy
DOJ board-seat probe−2Open investigation, no charges.
Coinbase director suit−0.5Shareholder suit against Andreessen as a Coinbase director. Active.
SEC record0Clean. No disciplinary disclosures.
Sanctions0No exact match. Counter-sanctions on Anne Neuberger cost 0 by rule.

Rules: Regretamin score (Oct 2, 2026). Inputs: a16z score file.