Deep research framework for pre-IPO / private companies (Ant Group, SpaceX, Stripe, ByteDance...). Six analyst lenses — business model, financial forensics, competitive landscape, risk & governance, tech & IP, alternative-data signals — run in parallel via run_swarm, then cross-validated for signal consistency before any verdict. Built around the core challenge of private-company work: information is scarce, so every data point carries a confidence label (high / medium / low), inference is shown separately from fact, and 'I don't know' is a valid output. Outputs a fair-value range, exit-path analysis, and an information-gap map. Use for any unlisted company where you need to judge what the business is actually worth.
Deep research framework for pre-IPO / private companies (Ant Group, SpaceX, Stripe, ByteDance...). Six analyst lenses — business model, financial forensics, competitive landscape, risk & governance, tech & IP, alternative-data signals — run in parallel via run_swarm, then cross-validated for signal consistency before any verdict. Built around the core challenge of private-company work: information is scarce, so every data point carries a confidence label (high / medium / low), inference is shown separately from fact, and 'I don't know' is a valid output. Outputs a fair-value range, exit-path analysis, and an information-gap map. Use for any unlisted company where you need to judge what the business is actually worth.
Private-Company Research: Multi-Lens Deep Framework
Deep research on an unlisted company (e.g. Ant Group, ByteDance, SpaceX, Stripe).
Ultimate goal: under information scarcity, recover the company's true value — not the market valuation, but what the business is actually worth.
Framework Characteristics
Private vs public research: no standardized financials (multi-source patchwork + cross-validation); few valuation anchors (funding rounds, comparables, scenarios); large information asymmetry ("jigsaw" research); uncertain exit path (IPO / M&A / secondary).
AI Research Bias Self-Check (core premise)
Private companies are where AI bias is worst. Watch for:
False conservatism — with little data, AI gives conservative/vague conclusions, but scarce data ≠ bad company.
False precision — to fill the template, AI disguises "reasonable guess" as "sourced analysis".
Comparables trap — forcing a public-comp overlay inherits public-market logic and misses private-specific value.
Survivorship bias — what's searchable online is mostly company-propagated good news.
Counter: prefer leaving blanks ("I don't know") over filling tables with speculation to fake certainty; label every data point with confidence (🟢high/🟡medium/🔴low); separate verifiable fact from inference; when information is extremely scarce, switch to "first-principles mode" and answer only: ① what real problem does this business solve? ② why this team? ③ ceiling if it succeeds / how it dies if it fails? ④ the key validation node at this stage?
Invert the asymmetry: the market knows little about private companies → pricing is inefficient → that's exactly where alpha may live.
Execution
Six lenses, best run in parallel (via run_swarm, one worker per lens; or sequentially via web_search):
Role
Lens
business-decoder
Business model + product/user analysis: "what is this business, essentially"
financial-detective
Financial patchwork + valuation: "recover the true financial picture under missing data"
competitive-mapper
Industry + competition + substitution: "who competes, who could disrupt"
risk-governance-analyst
Risk全景 + management/governance/investors: "what could go wrong, who's at the helm"
tech-ip-analyst
Tech stack / patents / R&D / moat: "is the tech barrier real and durable"
signal-miner
Alternative data (hiring / patents / litigation / app / supply chain): "clues beyond the usual sources"
You (team-lead) integrate, patch the picture, cross-validate, output the final report.
Lens 1: Business Model & Users (business-decoder)
Core business definition: one sentence (Duan Yongping style: plain language to a smart layperson). What problem? For whom? If the company didn't exist, what would users do? Is demand rigid (cut in a downturn)?
Revenue model: ads/commission/subscription/take-rate/financial/SaaS/hardware; mix and trend; monetization efficiency (ARPU / take rate / conversion); recurring vs one-off; concentration; predictability.
Unit economics: CAC (paid vs organic, by channel, trend), LTV, LTV/CAC, payback, marginal cost, scale-inflection point.
Cross-validation: list every source for the same metric; check convergence across methods; flag single-source ("isolated evidence") data.
Funding history: full timeline (round/amount/valuation/lead investor); health of the curve, interval, down-rounds, whether existing investors keep participating; latest-round terms (liquidation preference / anti-dilution / ratchet) and their effect on common-share value.
Valuation (multi-method): ① last-round (adjust for liquidation prefs, 20-40% discount); ② comparable public comps (3-5, PS/PE/EV-EBITDA, liquidity discount 20-30%); ③ DCF scenarios (bear/base/bull, each assumption grounded); ④ terminal-value rollback (5/10y terminal state → implied IRR); ⑤ transaction comps (recent M&A/funding multiples).
Valuation synthesis: do the methods converge? If divergent, explain. Distinguish "fair value" and "conservative (margin-of-safety) value".
Social sentiment (Weibo/Zhihu/Xiaohongshu/X/Reddit): official engagement, organic discussion, KOL views, negative events, insider leaks.
Business/legal (天眼查/企查查): registry/paid-in/equity changes/subsidiaries (new = new biz; deregistered = contraction)/scope changes; litigation/arbitration/penalties/enforcement.
Supply chain: known suppliers (if listed, check their filings), procurement, partner evaluation.
Digital footprint: registered domains (new = new biz), subdomains (api/pay → architecture), trademarks (new brands).
Industry exposure: exec talks, awards, government/association interaction, media frequency/quality.
Secondary-market signals (if any): SharesPost/EquityZen, implied valuation vs last round, employee selling.
Anomaly list (most important): things inconsistent with the company's narrative; inconsistent with industry norms; sudden changes (hiring freeze / executive departures); unexplained.
Cross-Validation (team-lead, mandatory)
Before synthesis, the team-lead must:
Data conflict arbitration: same metric across sources — list all, state which is adopted and why.
Signal consistency matrix: business-growth signal vs hiring trend? tech-leadership narrative vs patent/talent data? valuation level vs competitive position? management narrative vs action signals? (contradictions must be explained)
Information jigsaw: white zones (known) / gray (clues but uncertain) / black (unknown).
Bias check: is positive info detailed while negative is brief? Does every positive judgment have a reverse check?
Final Report Structure
One-line conclusion (50-100 words): what's it worth, why.
Key data jigsaw (only cross-validated, with source count + confidence).
Signal-consistency matrix.
Per-lens summary (3-5 top findings each).
Fair value assessment: business essence + 7-dimension moat card + 5-method valuation + fair value range (conservative/reasonable/optimistic + current market valuation + margin of safety %).
Investment thesis: bull 5-7 (with sources) vs bear 5-7 (with sources), which side is stronger.
Information-gap map (dimension / known / missing / missing-impact / how-to-get): does the gap affect the core conclusion? If yes, state "under missing X, conclusion confidence is Y".
Save via write_file to reports/{company}/{company}-private-{YYYYMMDD}.md. Run report_audit on the numbers as a quality gate.
Data Labeling Standard (strict)
Every key data point: source (specific to media + article), time (year/month), confidence (🟢 prospectus/official / 🟡 credible media / 🔴 estimate/rumor).
Conflicting data: list all + explain difference and adoption.
Separate fact from inference: fact in normal text; inference in italics with derivation.
Missing info: explicitly mark "data missing"; never fabricate.
Key Principles
6 lenses in parallel (run_swarm, or sequential).
Transparent derivation — show the math and assumptions; don't hand-wave numbers.
Cross-validate — key data ≥2 sources; conflicts all listed.
Signal-consistency check — mandatory cross-lens check at synthesis.
Clear conclusion — don't dodge invest/watch/avoid; state confidence.
Search in both EN and CN — private-company info spans both.
Honest blanks — distinguish "sourced analysis" from "speculative fill"; "this dimension lacks data, no meaningful conclusion" is acceptable.
Alt-data is not noise — hiring/patents/litigation/app data may be closer to truth than news.
True-value focus — the goal is what the business is worth, not a pretty report. If info can't support a reliable valuation, say so.
Scarce data ≠ bad company — short AI output ≠ low certainty. Under extreme scarcity, switch to first-principles mode.