vcmatch · diff
v1.0 to v2.0
64 added, 44 removed. Audit A to A.
---
name: vcmatch
- description: "Match the active startup profile against a VC fund. Usage: /vcmatch <VC Fund Name>. Reads STARTUP_PROFILE.md, researches the fund, and produces a structured VC Match Report with fit score, mandate alignment, pitch angle, red flags, diligence questions, and a pursue/no-go recommendation."
+ description: "Match the active startup profile against a VC fund. Usage: /vcmatch <VC Fund Name>. Reads STARTUP_PROFILE.md, researches the fund, and produces a structured VC Match Report with firm snapshot, thesis focus, key people, dimensional fit scoring, positive case, risks, pitch approach, and a verdict table."
license: MIT
compatibility: Requires Claude Code with WebSearch and WebFetch. Internet connection required.
allowed-tools: WebSearch WebFetch Read Write
metadata:
author: 3Flux
- version: "1.0"
+ version: "2.0"
workflow-step: "4 — run after /vcposer scores 60+"
---
# /vcmatch — VC Match Analysis
Match the active startup profile against a VC fund and produce a structured, scored VC Match Report.
## Invocation
```
/vcmatch <VC Fund Name>
```
- Example: `/vcmatch a16z` or `/vcmatch Lowercarbon Capital`
+ Example: `/vcmatch a16z` or `/vcmatch Y Combinator`
## Execution Steps
When invoked, execute these three steps in order.
### Step 1 — Load Startup Context
Read `STARTUP_PROFILE.md` from the current working directory. Extract and hold in context:
- Company name and one-liner
+ - CEO name and profile
+ - CTO name and profile
- Core problem and solution
- Target customer and market size
+ - Key value proposition
- Business model and pricing
- Current stage, traction, and milestones
- Team backgrounds and relevant credentials
- Geography and founding date
+ - Referral
+
If `STARTUP_PROFILE.md` does not exist, stop and tell the user to create it first.
### Step 2 — Research the VC Fund
**Poser pre-check:** Before beginning research, look for a `vcposer-<fund-slug>.md` file in the current working directory (derive the slug the same way as the output filename). If it exists:
- Read the Poser Score and verdict.
- If score is **below 40**: stop and tell the user — "This fund scored [X]/100 on the poser check — the red flags suggest this fund may not be actively deploying capital. Investigate those findings or re-run `/vcposer <fund>` if conditions have changed before spending time on a full match analysis."
- If score is **40–59**: continue with research but add a warning banner at the top of the output report: `⚠️ Poser Score: [X]/100 (Watch List) — this fund shows legitimacy concerns. De-prioritize unless a warm intro exists.`
- If score is **60+** or no vcposer file exists: proceed normally.
Use WebSearch (and WebFetch on key pages like the fund's website, team pages, and portfolio pages) to gather:
- Investment thesis and mandate (verbatim quotes where possible)
+ - Program model (accelerator, seed fund, multi-stage, etc.) and any mandatory time commitments
- Stage focus (pre-seed / seed / Series A / growth)
- Sector and vertical focus (deep tech, climate, enterprise SaaS, etc.)
- Geography preference
- - Typical check size and fund size
- - Portfolio companies — especially recent investments in the last 2 years
+ - Deal terms: standard equity %, check size structure, SAFE vs. priced round
+ - Fund/batch size and cadence
+ - Portfolio companies — especially sector analogs and recent investments in the last 2 years
+ - Recent batch or portfolio composition (thematic trends, % AI, notable cluster sectors)
- Key partners, their backgrounds, and their stated focus areas
- Any thesis essays, blog posts, or public statements about what they invest in
+ - Application/referral dynamics (open applications, referral advantage, partner assignment)
- Any known portfolio conflicts or "too close to portfolio" sectors
Search queries to use:
1. `"<Fund Name>" investment thesis portfolio stage`
- 2. `"<Fund Name>" recent investments 2024 2025`
+ 2. `"<Fund Name>" recent investments 2024 2025 2026`
3. `"<Fund Name>" partners focus sectors check size`
4. `site:<fund-website> thesis` (if website is known)
### Step 3 — Produce the VC Match Report
- Output a structured markdown report with exactly these seven sections:
+ Output a structured markdown report with exactly these eight sections:
---
- ## VC Match Report: [Fund Name] x [Startup Name]
+ ## VC Match Report: [Fund Name] × [Startup Name]
- ### 1. Fund Overview
- Thesis, stage focus, sector/vertical, check size, fund size, geography, key partners (with their focus areas). Keep to 5-8 bullets.
+ ### Firm Snapshot
- ### 2. Mandate Alignment
- Line-by-line comparison of the fund's stated criteria against the startup's profile. Use a table or bullet pairs:
- - Stage match: fund's stage vs startup's current stage
- - Sector match: fund's verticals vs startup's category
- - Business model match: fund preferences vs startup's pricing model
- - Geography match
- - Team match: fund's team preferences vs startup's credentials
- - Traction match: fund's typical entry bar vs startup's current milestones
+ Markdown table with these fields: Founded, Model, CEO, Key GPs, Standard Deal, Fund/Batch Size, Notable Portfolio/Alumni. Keep each cell concise.
- ### 3. Fit Score
- **Score: XX/100**
+ ### Investment Thesis & Current Focus
- Break down the score across: sector fit, stage fit, team fit, traction fit, thesis alignment. Provide 2-3 sentences of rationale. Be honest — a 45/100 with clear reasoning is more useful than an inflated score.
+ Table with columns **Theme** | **Signal**. List the fund's active investment themes as rows — distinguish de facto focus (what they're actually funding right now) from stated mandate. Include verbatim partner quotes where available. Note any thesis drift from prior years.
- ### 4. Optimal Pitch Angle
- What to lead with when pitching THIS specific fund. Identify:
- - Which element of the startup maps best to this fund's thesis
- - Which partner to target (by name and focus) and why
- - The 1-2 sentence opening hook tailored to this fund's language
- - What NOT to lead with (points that may not resonate)
+ ### Key People
- ### 5. Red Flags
- Honest assessment of mandate mismatches, portfolio conflicts, or thesis gaps. Flag:
- - Stage mismatch (too early / too late)
- - Sector overlap with existing portfolio
- - Missing proof points this fund typically requires
- - Geographic or structural concerns
+ Table with columns **Person** | **Role** | **Relevance to [Startup Name]**. List 3–6 decision-makers or relevant partners. After the table, add a plain-text note on HOW to approach (referral required? open application? partner assignment process?). Do not fabricate people or titles — caveat any uncertain data.
- ### 6. Diligence Questions to Prepare
- List 5-8 questions this fund is likely to ask, based on their thesis and portfolio pattern. Make them specific, not generic.
+ ### Fit Assessment
- ### 7. Recommended Action
- One of three verdicts with a 2-3 sentence rationale:
+ **Overall Fit Score: X/10**
- - **Pursue** — strong fit, prioritize outreach now
- - **Warm Up First** — fit exists but missing a proof point; revisit in N months after X milestone
- - **No-Go** — material mandate mismatch; explain why and suggest what would need to change
+ Table with columns **Dimension** | **Score** | **Rationale**. Score each of these dimensions: Sector Fit, Stage Fit, Check Size Fit, Thesis Alignment, Program/Network Value. Scores are out of 10. Be calibrated — a 5/10 with clear reasoning is more useful than an inflated 8/10.
+ ### Why It Works
+
+ Bullet list of the strongest positive signals for pursuing this fund. Lead with concrete portfolio analogs (named companies + outcomes). Include narrative hooks, structural advantages, and timing factors that favor the startup right now.
+
+ ### Key Risks & Objections
+
+ Numbered list of material risks and mandate mismatches. Where relevant, include specific math (dilution %, valuation impact, timing lock-in). Flag structural concerns (batch schedule, mandatory program overhead, check size constraints, portfolio conflicts). Be direct — omit risks that don't materially affect this specific startup.
+
+ ### Best Approach
+
+ - **Intro strategy:** how to get a warm referral or bypass cold outreach (specific tactic for this fund)
+ - **Lead with:** 3–4 specific bullets — what to put front and center in the application, pitch deck, or first meeting
+ - **Avoid:** 1–2 things not to emphasize for this specific fund's current focus
+
+ ### Cold email
+ Subject: [subject line]
---
+ [4-5 sentence email body. Open with a specific reference to their thesis or a recent portfolio company. State what 3Flux does in one sentence. Explain why 3Flux fits their mandate using the match signals found. End with a clear, low-friction ask such as "Would a 20-min call make sense?"]
+ ### LinkedIn message (≤150 chars, ready to send)
+ [Reference one concrete thing — portfolio company, thesis, or recent post — and end with a soft ask]
+
+ ### Gaps / things to verify
+
+ ### Sources
+
+ ### Verdict
+
+ Table with two columns — **Question** | **Answer**. Rows:
+ - Should you pursue?
+ - Stage fit verdict
+ - Run a parallel raise?
+ - Best-case outcome
+ - Bottom line (one punchy sentence)
+
+ ---
+
## Output Format
- - Use markdown headers and bullets throughout
- - Keep the full report under 800 words
+ - Use markdown tables for Firm Snapshot, Key People, Fit Assessment, and Verdict
- Cite sources inline where possible (e.g., "per their 2024 thesis post")
- - Do not pad — if a section has nothing meaningful, say so in one sentence
-
+ - End with: `Email Subject: VC Match <fund-slug> - <fit-score>`
+ `Suggested save filename: vcmatch-<fund-slug>.md`