deal-scoring-engine
// Automated deal scoring based on thesis alignment, market size, team, and traction metrics
$ git log --oneline --stat
stars:384
forks:73
updated:March 4, 2026
SKILL.mdreadonly
SKILL.md Frontmatter
namedeal-scoring-engine
descriptionAutomated deal scoring based on thesis alignment, market size, team, and traction metrics
allowed-toolsRead,Write,Glob,Grep,Bash,WebFetch
metadata[object Object]
Deal Scoring Engine
Overview
The Deal Scoring Engine skill provides automated, consistent evaluation of investment opportunities against defined criteria. It generates composite scores based on thesis alignment, market opportunity, team quality, and business traction to support pipeline prioritization and investment decisions.
Capabilities
Thesis Alignment Scoring
- Match opportunities against fund investment thesis
- Sector, stage, and geography fit assessment
- Strategic priority alignment scoring
- Anti-thesis and exclusion criteria flagging
Market Opportunity Assessment
- TAM/SAM/SOM scoring based on market data
- Market growth rate and timing assessment
- Competitive intensity evaluation
- Regulatory and macro environment scoring
Team Evaluation Scoring
- Founder background and experience assessment
- Domain expertise and market knowledge scoring
- Team completeness and capability gaps
- Track record and references scoring
Traction and Metrics Scoring
- Revenue and growth rate benchmarking
- Unit economics (LTV/CAC, margins) scoring
- Engagement and retention metrics assessment
- Capital efficiency and burn rate evaluation
Composite Score Generation
- Weighted composite scoring with configurable weights
- Stage-appropriate scoring models (seed vs. growth)
- Sector-specific scoring adjustments
- Historical score calibration against outcomes
Usage
Score New Deal
Input: Company data, metrics, team information
Process: Apply scoring models across dimensions
Output: Composite score, dimension scores, flags, recommendations
Configure Scoring Model
Input: Scoring criteria, weights, thresholds
Process: Update scoring model parameters
Output: Configured scoring model, validation results
Benchmark Against Portfolio
Input: Deal scores, portfolio company scores
Process: Compare against portfolio at similar stage
Output: Relative ranking, percentile position, comparisons
Calibrate Model
Input: Historical deals and outcomes
Process: Analyze predictive accuracy, adjust weights
Output: Calibration report, recommended adjustments
Scoring Dimensions
| Dimension | Weight Range | Key Factors |
|---|---|---|
| Thesis Fit | 15-25% | Sector, stage, geography, strategy |
| Market | 20-30% | TAM, growth, competition, timing |
| Team | 25-35% | Experience, domain, completeness |
| Traction | 20-30% | Revenue, growth, unit economics |
Integration Points
- Deal Flow Tracker: Embed scores in pipeline management
- Proactive Deal Sourcing: Score for outreach prioritization
- IC Memo Generator: Include scores in investment memos
- Market Sizer: Feed market data into scoring
Best Practices
- Calibrate scoring models quarterly against outcomes
- Use stage-appropriate models (early vs. late stage)
- Document override decisions when departing from scores
- Maintain transparency on scoring methodology
- Avoid over-reliance on scores for complex decisions