SSkilltecabyclaudinhocode
Enviar skill
← Voltar para o catálogo

RateVC

DevOps e Infra

RateVC (查VC) — Rate any investor before you meet them. Michelin 3-star system on a 1-4 scale. Works for both Chinese and US investors. Trigger on: investor evaluation, VC background check, fundraising decisions, investor names, fund names, term sheets, FA recommendations, meeting decisions, 查VC, 投资人, 基金, 融资, 见投资人, 背调, 值不值得见, 靠不靠谱, 收到TS, FA推荐, 帮我查一下这个投资人, 这个基金怎么样, 要不要见这个投资人, rate this VC, check thi

1estrelas
Ver no GitHub ↗Autor: 1-SKILL

RateVC (查VC)

Investors run due diligence on you. They ask for your data, metrics, traction. But who are they? Why don't they introduce themselves first?

RateVC — Check them before you meet them.

投资人不停问你要数据、要traction,对你做尽调。但他是谁? 查VC —— 见面之前,先看评级。


Mission

Help founders and FAs answer one question before taking a meeting:

Will this investor fund me? Is this meeting worth my time?

No bios. No personal stories. Just investment behavior data, a clear rating, and an action recommendation.

Output language: match the user's language. If the user writes in Chinese, respond in Chinese. If in English, respond in English.


Michelin Three-Star Rating

Rating investors the way Michelin rates restaurants — from the founder's time-cost perspective.

RatingScoreMeaningAction
⭐⭐⭐≥ 3.0Worth a Special Trip (值得专程拜访)Book a flight to meet them
⭐⭐≥ 2.0Worth Meeting In Person (值得当面交流)Same-city meeting or invite them over
≥ 1.0Worth a Video Call (值得线上沟通)30-60 min video call
No RatingDon't Invest Time (暂不投入时间)Exclusion reason provided

Stars = integer part of score. 3.5 = three stars, 2.3 = two stars, 1.7 = one star. Max 4, base 1.


Scoring Matrix (1-4 Scale)

Six dimensions, weighted:

DimensionWeight4 (Top)3 (Strong)2 (Adequate)1 (Base/Missing)
Dry Powder25%Fund <2yr + deals in 3mo + >60% remainingActive fund + deals in 6moUnclear / older fundDepleted / no fund
Sector Fit25%≥3 deals in your space (12mo) + sector >50% of fund≥2 deals in space (12mo)Related but impreciseNo match
Decision Power20%Founding GP + solo authority + >10yr tenureGP/Partner + can decidePartner/MD + can recommend to ICVP/Director/Associate
Activity15%>15 deals/yr + deals in 3mo5-15/yr + deals in 6mo<5/yrDormant >6mo
Lead Role10%Leads >70%Leads >50%MixedMostly follows / can't lead
Risk5%Clean recordMinor controversyModerate riskHard red flag → veto

13 Override Rules

Calibrated from 120 case studies across Chinese and US investors:

Downgrade rules:

  1. Sector + Activity double-low: Both ≤1 → force downgrade one star.
  2. Conflict of interest ceiling: Investor runs a competing business → rating capped at ⭐.
  3. Stage mismatch: Investor only does B+ rounds, founder raising A → Sector -1.
  4. Power decay: Semi-retired / delegated daily decisions → Decision Power -1.
  5. CVC ceiling: CVC capped at ⭐⭐. Corporate approval + info leakage risk. Exception: parent has zero competitive overlap.
  6. Angel limitation: No fund vehicle → Lead Role = 1, Dry Powder ≤ 2.

Upgrade rules: 7. Sector focus bonus: Target sector >70% of fund portfolio → Sector +0.5 (capped at 4).

Exclusion rules (No Rating): 8. Unverifiable: No fund registration + no verifiable deals in 2 years → No Rating. 9. Departed: Retired / left firm / fund closed → No Rating. 10. Cooling period: Joined new fund <6 months ago → Pending, no rating.

Labeling rules: 11. Same fund, different people: Rating is for the person, not the firm. Must specify the individual. 12. FA / Banker tag: FAs and bankers don't invest. Dry Powder=1, Decision=1, Lead=1. Add ⚡tag with FA value explanation. 13. Fund structure is signal: E.g., Benchmark = all equal GPs → every partner is a core decision maker.


Report Structure

Summary (top of report, 30-second decision)

# [Investor Name] / [Firm] — RateVC Report
Generated: YYYY-MM-DD | Perspective: [user's sector and stage]

## Rating: ⭐⭐⭐ / ⭐⭐ / ⭐ / No Rating (X.XX)
[One-line action recommendation]

| Key Metric | Data | Signal |
|-----------|------|--------|
| Dry Powder | Total AUM $X, est. remaining $X | 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 |
| Activity | X/yr, X in last 6mo, last deal X days ago | Very Active / Active / Conservative / Dormant |
| Sector Fit | X deals in your space in last 12mo | Precise / Broad / Adjacent / None |
| Decision Power | [Title], [X]yr at fund | Decision Maker / Influential / Advisory / Junior |

### Score Breakdown
| Dimension | Score | Basis |
|-----------|-------|-------|
| Dry Powder (25%) | X/4 | [one line] |
| Sector Fit (25%) | X/4 | [one line] |
| Decision Power (20%) | X/4 | [one line] |
| Activity (15%) | X/4 | [one line] |
| Lead Role (10%) | X/4 | [one line] |
| Risk (5%) | X/4 | [one line] |
| **Total** | **X.XX** | **⭐⭐⭐ / ⭐⭐ / ⭐** |

Six Sections

Section 1: Capital Overview — "Do they have money?"

  • Fund list (name, vintage, size, status, currency)
  • Dry powder estimate (total raised, deployed, remaining, methodology)
  • Signal (🟢 Loaded / 🟡 Unclear / 🔴 Depleted)

Section 2: Investment Activity — "How fast do they deploy?"

  • Annual deal count (3-year lookback with representative deals)
  • Activity classification (Very Active / Active / Conservative / Dormant)
  • Conversion rate estimate (deals/yr ÷ meetings/yr ≈ founder's odds)

Section 3: Sector Distribution — "Where does their money go?"

  • Sector breakdown table (sector, deal count, %, representative deals)
  • Key findings (sector shifts, emerging focus areas)
  • Stage distribution (with average and median check sizes)
  • Lead ratio

Section 4: Decision Power — "Can they say yes?"

  • Title, tenure, years at fund
  • Decision process (Solo GP / Partnership consensus / IC vote)
  • Power tier (Decision Maker / Influential / Advisory / Junior)

Section 5: Track Record — "How did their bets turn out?"

  • Exit scorecard (last 5 years: entry → exit → method → return multiple → hold period)
  • Failed / struggling companies
  • Follow-on rate, portfolio graduation rate
  • Exit style (long hold / quick flip / flexible)

Section 6: Risk Flags

  • Conflict of interest / Competitive portfolio overlap
  • Litigation and arbitration records
  • Regulatory enforcement actions
  • GP turnover / fund instability
  • CVC parent company conflicts
  • Hard red line check (any one → No Rating)

Data Sources

Use the correct data sources based on investor geography. Never use Chinese sources for US investors or vice versa.

China Investors

PrioritySourceAccessCoverage
Must-haveIT桔子APIDeals, sectors, rounds, amounts
Must-have天眼查 / 企查查APICorporate registry, equity, litigation
Must-haveAMAC (基金业协会)Public / AKShareFund status, AUM, registration
Enhancement36氪 / 投中网Public reportsNew funds, personnel, exits
EnhancementCSRC / AMAC bulletinsPublicRegulatory enforcement

US Investors

PrioritySourceAccessCoverage
Must-haveCrunchbaseAPI (paid)Deals, portfolio, fund info, people
Must-haveSEC EDGARFreeForm D (new funds), 13F, enforcement
Must-haveLinkedInPublicBackgrounds, tenure, board seats
EnhancementPitchBookEnterprise APIDeep deal data, valuations, LP data
EnhancementTracxnAPIDeal history, competitive landscape
EnhancementTwitter/XPublicInvestor thesis, real-time signals
EnhancementPACERCourt recordsFederal litigation
EnhancementForbes Midas ListAnnualTop 100 VC ranking

Data Freshness Protocol

  • Weekly update: Scan for new deals, fund changes, personnel moves
  • Event-driven update: Fund announcements, GP departures, enforcement actions → immediate re-score
  • Staleness flag: Data >90 days old → flag in report: "⚠️ Data last verified [date]"

Usage Guide

Triggers

Activate RateVC in ANY of these scenarios. Founders express intent in many ways — don't wait for explicit requests.

Direct triggers:

  • "RateVC" / "查VC" / "Rate this VC" / "查一下这个投资人"

Como adicionar

/plugin marketplace add 1-SKILL/rate-vc

O comando exato pode variar conforme o repositório. Confira o README no GitHub.

Comentários · Nenhum comentário

Entre para comentar. Entrar

  • Ainda não há comentários. Seja o primeiro.