Because it is built from what only you have. Every data subscription sells the same database to you and to everyone else. Kruncher builds a data source that exists nowhere else.
A subscription gives you the second. The first and the third are yours, and putting all three in one record is what makes the result proprietary.
CIMs, teasers, banker decks, management presentations, meeting notes, call transcripts, prior diligence, and the judgment your team has accumulated across every deal it has looked at and passed on. None of it exists in any database anyone can buy.
More than twenty premium sources, the public web and country level registries, reconciled into the same record rather than sitting in twenty browser tabs. Where a snapshot database gives you the last quarter, this gives you the last week.
Every company classified the way your firm classifies companies, and scored against the criteria your firm actually uses. Two firms running the same company through Kruncher get two different answers, because the lens is theirs.
Your documents alone are incomplete. External data alone is the same data your competitors bought. Reconciled into one record, each one makes the other worth more.
Every value keeps the layer it came from, so a reader can always see whether a figure is what the company claimed, what the public record shows, what Kruncher estimated, or what your own team wrote down.
Your sources, your diligence playbook and your decisions feed the ingestion layer. The knowledge graph connects what comes out. Workflows, analytics and your own agents read from it.
Kruncher maintains an entity resolved graph over millions of private companies. It is not a list with tags. Every edge has a type, a direction and a source.
A snapshot database answers what a company is. The graph answers what surrounds it: who backs it, who competes with it, who sells to it, who buys from it, who founded it and who runs it. An analyst sees the syndicate, the customer base, the vendor dependencies and the competitive set without running twenty searches.
The report is a template your firm owns. The signals are rules your firm writes. Neither is something a vendor decides on your behalf.
Choose the sections, add the ones only your firm asks for, reorder them, and score each against your own criteria. The same template then runs on every company you analyze, so an output arrives already in the shape your investment committee reads.
Every section is scored against your own criteria and written into your own template, so two firms running the same company get two different reports.
You define the signals that matter to you: a competitor launch, a target raising, a key hire, an expansion into your geography. When something relevant happens, it is sent to you. You do not query it. It tells you.
You do not query it. When something you said mattered happens, it reaches the person who owns the answer.
A general purpose extraction tool reads a document. It does not know what the document is, what the numbers mean, or whether the answer it produced is plausible. Six places where that difference shows up.
Funds, vehicles, feeders, AIVs, LPs, GPs, commitments, capital accounts, rounds, cap tables, marks and holdings are first class objects, not custom fields bolted onto a generic CRM. A generic tool has no idea what a sleeve is.
A CIM reads differently from a teaser, a capital account statement differently from a quarterly report, an LPA differently from a side letter. The engine classifies the document before it reads a figure, because what a number means depends on where it was printed.
Gross versus net of accrued carry. Reference date versus file date. ARR versus revenue versus bookings. Fully diluted versus outstanding. TVPI, DPI and MOIC computed the way the industry computes them. These are the places a generic extractor quietly gets it wrong.
Top down NAV computed against bottom up NAV. Implied multiples sanity checked. Bridges that have to reconcile. A general purpose model has no view on whether a number is plausible. A private markets engine does.
Public comparables are easy and everybody has them. Knowing which private companies are genuinely comparable, who competes with whom and who sells to whom, is what the graph is for, and it is built from 200,000 company analyses rather than scraped tags.
600 configurable signals across people, liquidity, M&A and business deals, defined as the moments that move a private market decision rather than as generic news alerts. You add your own on top.
It is not pooled, not resold and not used to train shared models. It can run inside your own cloud, against models your risk function has already approved, and it is reachable over the API and the MCP server like everything else. How that is kept yours.
Connect one document store and one inbox on the call, and see what the record looks like when your own material sits beside twenty external sources.