A weighted diligence rubric for quantum and deep-tech startups. Rate the eight dimensions, set the three risks, and read an attractiveness tier plus a suggested strategic posture — from a neutral investor/acquirer vantage. Baselines and sources are under Methodology.
Illustrative starting profiles from public information — adjust any input to reflect your own diligence.
Conviction = Σ (rating ÷ 5 × weight), with weights summing to 100. The baseline is a rating of 3 on every dimension — the bar a fundable deep-tech startup is expected to clear — which yields a conviction of 60. Above 3 marks genuine strength; below 3 marks a real gap. This mirrors standard venture diligence, which weights team, market, technology, moat, and terms rather than scoring them equally.
| Tier A · 75–100 | High conviction — clears the bar for an active strategic move. |
| Tier B · 60–74 | Promising — above baseline; act selectively, watch the gaps. |
| Tier C · 45–59 | Marginal — below baseline; needs de-risking before commitment. |
| Tier D · 0–44 | Below bar — the venture case isn't there yet. |
Deep-tech ventures fail on three distinct axes — science risk (does the core claim hold), execution risk (can this team build it), and market risk (will anyone pay, and when). They are rated separately and shape the type of move: high, unmitigated science risk on an unproven primitive caps even a high score at a staged option rather than an acquisition.
This reads from a general acquirer/investor seat, not one company's roadmap. Foundational hardware is capital-intensive and winner-uncertain, so it usually favors a partnership or staged option over an early vertical build; systems, software, and security layers tend to be more defensible and faster to value, which can support a build or acquisition when fit, conviction, and stage align. "Strategic fit" is fit to whatever thesis you hold.
Each company links to its site and to a source for what it does and its stage — a funding announcement or reputable profile where available, otherwise the company's own newsroom. Stage/funding reflect the latest public information found and should be re-verified before use; the 0–5 ratings are illustrative.
A reasoning aid for structuring a view from a general investor/acquirer vantage — not a substitute for primary diligence, and not tied to any single company's strategy. Company profiles are illustrative estimates from public information, not assessments of those companies. Weights, tiers, and posture rules are transparent defaults; adjust them to your own thesis.