Investment Memos
IC-ready memos that state a falsifiable thesis, weigh evidence honestly, and pre-register what would change the answer.
A good memo is a thinking instrument, not a sales document. We structure memos around the variant perception, what you believe that the market or the cap table does not, with evidence graded, risks decomposed, and kill criteria written before money moves.
Who this is for
Funds, syndicates, and family offices formalizing their process or pressure-testing a live deal.
How the work is done
State the thesis falsifiably
The core claim written so it can be wrong: what you believe, why the consensus differs, and the 2–3 load-bearing assumptions. If nothing observable could disconfirm the thesis, it is not a thesis.
Weigh the evidence
Bayesian discipline without the ceremony: explicit priors from base rates for this class of company and deal, updated by the specific evidence, with source reliability graded. Confirmation-bias controls are structural, a designated disconfirming-evidence section, not good intentions.
Decompose the risk
Risks separated into idiosyncratic (thesis-specific) and systematic (market, cycle, liquidity), with expected-value framing across scenarios, distributions and ranges, not point targets.
Pre-register the exits
Kill criteria, milestone tripwires, and a review cadence written into the memo. The memo becomes the baseline for post-decision calibration: what did we believe, and were we right for the stated reasons?
How the Investment Memos engagement runs
We begin with the decision, use the evidence that can genuinely change it, and make the reasoning reviewable from first input to final handover.
What we need to begin
- The thesis as currently held, including the version that would be pitched out loud.
- The proposed terms: price, structure, ownership, and rights.
- The data room, or an index of it if access is staged.
- The consensus view the memo will argue against, where there is one.
If an input is unavailable, we state the gap, its effect on confidence, and the agreed workaround. It is never quietly ignored.
Your four-phase engagement map
-
Phase 1
State the thesis falsifiably
The core claim written so it can be wrong: what you believe, why consensus differs, and the two or three load-bearing assumptions.
-
Phase 2
Weigh the evidence
Explicit priors from base rates, updated by graded evidence, with a designated disconfirming-evidence section.
-
Phase 3
Decompose the risk
Separate idiosyncratic from systematic risk with expected-value framing across scenarios.
-
Phase 4
Pre-register the exits
Kill criteria, milestone tripwires, and a review cadence written into the memo as the baseline for later calibration.
Methods and models we draw on
- Variant-perception framing
- Base rates & reference classes
- Bayesian evidence weighting
- Scenario & expected-value analysis
- Risk decomposition
- Pre-registered kill criteria
- Decision journaling & calibration
Methods are chosen for the problem, not the brochure, expect a subset of these, applied properly, plus whatever the evidence demands.
The decision this enables
A decision your future self can audit: thesis, evidence, and exit conditions on the record.
Research, not investment advice
Jagdeep Ventures produces independent research and analysis for informational and educational purposes. To keep that boundary clear and professional:
- No recommendations. Nothing we deliver constitutes a recommendation, offer, or solicitation to buy, sell, or hold any security or financial instrument, or to pursue any investment strategy.
- No advisory registration. Jagdeep Ventures LLC is not registered as an investment adviser, broker-dealer, or research analyst with the SEC, SEBI, or any other regulator, and does not provide personalized investment advice. No fiduciary or advisory relationship is created by an engagement.
- Scope. Our work evaluates businesses, markets, and evidence quality. Decisions about whether and how to invest, including suitability, sizing, and timing, remain solely with the client and their licensed advisers.
- Conflicts. We disclose any material conflict of interest before accepting an engagement and do not trade in securities of companies under active coverage during an engagement.
- Jurisdiction. Clients are responsible for ensuring that use of our research complies with the laws and regulations applicable to them. Where an engagement touches regulated activity, we will say so and step back.
Analysis involves judgment under uncertainty; estimates can be wrong, and past results do not guarantee future outcomes.