A diligence pass that runs the checks a buyer's QoE team will run, scored against a calibrated transaction dataset. Every finding carries cited evidence, so the read holds up to the people on the other side of the table.
The engine scores deals on two dimensions buyers actually evaluate. The categories under each pillar reflect the questions every QoE team asks; the specific weighting is calibrated to lower middle market deal data.
What a buyer's QoE team will accept as the earnings number, and the assumptions behind it.
What survives change of control, and what the buyer can run from Day 91 without the seller.
The decisions about what to exclude are what make the engine usable. These are the two we hold the hardest line on.
If a seller "could" raise prices 10%, that's not in the score. The engine reports what is, not what could be. Speculative upside is the easiest way to produce a number that doesn't survive buyer scrutiny, and once that happens, the advisor's credibility goes with it.
Every flag in the report points to a file, page, paragraph, or row. If we can't cite it, we don't claim it. The downside of fewer findings beats the downside of one finding the seller can credibly dispute.