Deal Intelligence · Investment Committee Case

The committee decides on more of the evidence, and knows exactly where the gaps are.

Vela reads the whole data room, surfaces the material risks in one ranked view, and links every conclusion back to its source. The committee is no longer approving a deal on the slice the team had time to read. It is approving one where the unknowns have been named.

· The decision-quality case

What the committee is actually deciding on.

Four things determine whether a committee is judging a deal or judging a summary of one. None of them is about how much work was done.

What the IC sees Today With Vela
Data-room coverage Whatever the team had time to read. Extent unknown, uneven across workstreams. Every material document reviewed. Coverage is stated, not assumed.
Material findings Surfaced ad hoc, ranked by whoever raised them, scattered across email and calls. Surfaced and ranked by severity, with the deal team’s disposition on each.
Traceability Conclusions asserted in the memo. Sources known to the author, hard for the IC to verify. Each material conclusion linked to its source document. The IC verifies rather than trusts.
Known gaps Rarely written down. The committee cannot see what the team did not get to. Named as open questions, so the risks the committee accepts are the actual risks.

What we commit to measuring.

Three measures, logged on your own pilot deal. These are the targets we hold ourselves to — not results already achieved on your transactions.

Material findings surfaced
10–25 per deal
Gaps and risks raised, each logged with whether it was already known to the team.
Findings accepted and used
70%+
Used in advisor scope, Q&A, the model, terms, the SPA or the IC discussion. The strongest signal of real value.
Conclusions traceable to source
80%+
Share of material conclusions the committee can verify to a source document on demand.

What we deliberately do not price.

That leaves the efficiency case, which stands on its own and is modelled separately. On Vela’s published assumptions and a reference profile of eight diligence processes a year, it comes to:

External spend addressed
€1.52M
Third-party diligence fees a year that better early evidence could narrow or remove.
Capacity released
396.6 days
Professional days a year returned to the deal team — a capacity equivalent, not a payroll saving.

Model it against your own deal activity.

Vela does not claim to prevent mistakes. It makes the picture more complete and every conclusion checkable, and commits to measuring that on your own deal.

Value Creator Assessment Talk it through with us

This page describes a decision-support capability, not a commercial commitment or guarantee of outcomes. The measures above are the targets we commit to measuring during a pilot, not results already achieved on your deals. The efficiency figures are drawn from the value creator assessment on Vela’s published assumptions and a reference deal profile; they change entirely with your own inputs. Ratios throughout are shown against a fixed indicative annual investment of €500,000; actual pricing depends on scope and is agreed separately.