# Investment thesis builder

> The investment thesis builder turns a fund's thesis into a rubric you can apply the same way to every deal: hard rules for stage, sector, geography and round size, weighted preferences scored 0 to 10, exceptions and questions. Try the rules on a sample company to see Met, Mismatch and Unknown, then copy the rubric as Markdown or JSON. A missing fact stays Unknown and becomes a question. It runs in your browser.

Source: https://delsivo.com/tools/thesis-builder · Updated 2026-11-06

## Key takeaways

- Hard rules are yes-or-no checks against facts. Weighted preferences need judgement, so a reviewer scores them from 0 to 10.
- A fact missing from the deck is Unknown, not a fail. It becomes a question for the founder.
- A mismatch is flagged for a person to review against your exceptions. It is never an automatic rejection.
- Weights are scaled to add up to 100, and preferences nobody could score yet are left out of the weighted score instead of counting as zero.

## How to use the investment thesis builder

1. Name the fund or strategy and pick the currency for round sizes. A sample thesis for a fictional fund is filled in to start from.
2. Switch on the hard rules you hold to, and tick the stages, sectors and geographies in your mandate. Set a round size range, or leave one end open.
3. Weight each preference from 0 to 10, or add up to three of your own. A weight of 0 leaves a preference out.
4. Write your exceptions and any extra questions, one per line. A question for each hard rule is added for you.
5. Change the sample company's facts to see each rule read Met, Mismatch or Unknown, score a few preferences, then copy the rubric as Markdown or JSON.

## The four parts of a thesis rubric

| Part | What it is | Example | How it is applied |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Hard rule | A requirement you can check against a fact | Stage is Pre-seed or Seed | Met, Mismatch or Unknown, per company |
| Weighted preference | Something you favour that needs judgement | Founders have worked on this problem before (weight 8) | Scored 0 to 10 by a reviewer, with the evidence for the score |
| Exception | When you would look past a hard rule | A partner may sponsor a company outside our sectors | Read by a person when a rule shows Mismatch |
| Question | What to ask when a fact is missing | How much are you raising, and on what instrument? | Sent when a rule shows Unknown |

## Why Unknown is not a fail

Early decks leave things out. A pre-seed deck may not state the round size or where the team will be based, and that says little about the company. If a missing fact counted as a fail, the rubric would reject companies for what they didn't mention rather than for what they are.

So a rule with no fact to check reads Unknown, and the builder turns it into a question. A rule that clearly doesn't match reads Mismatch, and that is flagged for a person to check against the exceptions, not rejected automatically. People decide what happens next.

## How the preference weights work

Weights are scaled so they add up to 100: each weight is divided by the total of all weights. The sample's six preferences have weights 8, 9, 6, 5, 6 and 4, a total of 38, so customer demand (weight 9) counts for 9 ÷ 38, or 23.68%.

The weighted score is the sum of each score times its weight, divided by the total weight of the preferences that were scored. If a reviewer scores only founder experience (7) and customer demand (4), the score is (7 × 8 + 4 × 9) ÷ (8 + 9) = 5.41 out of 10, from 2 of 6 preferences. The rest are left out instead of counting as zero, and the tool shows how much of the weight was scored.

The sample's weights after scaling

| Preference | Weight | Share of 100 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Evidence of customer demand, paid or committed | 9 | 23.68 |
| Founders have worked on this problem before | 8 | 21.05 |
| Bottom-up market large enough for a venture outcome | 6 | 15.79 |
| Hard-to-copy advantage (data, distribution or technology) | 6 | 15.79 |
| Capital-efficient path to the next milestone | 5 | 13.16 |
| A clear first sales channel | 4 | 10.53 |

## Writing a thesis that screens consistently

- Keep hard rules to what you would really never invest outside of. Everything else is a preference.
- If one preference carries most of the weight, it is probably a hard rule. The builder warns you when one reaches 60 of the 100.
- Describe what earns a high and a low score for each preference, so two reviewers reading the same deck land close together.
- Write exceptions down. An exception that lives only in a partner's head is applied to some companies and not others.
- Give the rubric a version and a date, and keep the old version when you change it, so earlier decisions can be read against the rules of the time.

## Thesis rubrics in Delsivo

Delsivo's thesis screening is planned for the pilot and uses the same four parts. By design, a fund publishes its rubric as a version, hard rules run in code against facts taken from the deck with slide citations, and each criterion shows the rule, the observed value, the rationale and the source. AI suggests preference scores with citations; analysts accept, change or override them, and an override needs a reason. Thesis fit, evidence quality and diligence readiness are shown separately.

There is no import for the builder's JSON yet. Use it as a record of your thesis, or as the brief when you set up any screening tool. [See how thesis screening works](https://delsivo.com/thesis-screening).

## Frequently asked questions

### Should a missing fact count against a startup?

No. A missing fact says the deck didn't mention it, not that the company fails your thesis. Mark it Unknown, ask the founder, and check the rule again when the answer comes back.

### What is the difference between a hard rule and a preference?

A hard rule is a yes-or-no check against a fact, such as stage or geography. A preference is something you favour that needs judgement, such as founder experience with the problem, so a reviewer scores it from 0 to 10.

### How many hard rules should a fund have?

As few as your mandate really requires. Each hard rule shows a mismatch for every company outside it, so rules you would often waive belong in preferences or exceptions instead.

### Is what I type in the thesis builder stored?

No. It runs in your browser and needs no sign-up. Your thesis, weights and sample facts are not sent to Delsivo or anyone else, and nothing is saved when you close the tab, so copy the rubric first.

### Can I import the JSON into Delsivo?

Not yet. The JSON uses the same four parts as Delsivo's thesis rubrics, which are planned for the pilot, but there is no import for it. Keep it as a record or map it to any tool by hand.

## Related pages

- [How to write an investment thesis](https://delsivo.com/how-to-write-an-investment-thesis)
- [Investment thesis template](https://delsivo.com/templates/investment-thesis-template)
- [Thesis screening](https://delsivo.com/thesis-screening)
- [Thesis rubrics](https://delsivo.com/features/thesis-rubrics)
- [Pitch deck grader](https://delsivo.com/tools/pitch-deck-grader)