Application volume arrives at once
Deadline-driven cohorts compress weeks of reading into a short review window. Every extra deck competes for the same programme team.
For accelerators and incubators
Screen your entire startup cohortwith one consistent evaluation framework.
Load one applicant batch, apply the same review structure to every company, and inspect the friction and missing evidence before your team spends its scarce hours. Zurvek supports the review; your committee makes the selection.
5 evaluations free · no card required · one evaluation per triaged company
The selection constraint
More applications do not create more reviewer hours.
Accelerator selection is an attention-allocation problem. The work is not only reading every application; it is applying one standard, preserving the gaps, and knowing which records justify deeper review.
Reviewers inspect different things
One reviewer follows the market story, another the team, and another the financial model. Important omissions can disappear between spreadsheets and calls.
The shortlist needs a defensible record
A score alone cannot show what was supplied, what was missing, or why an application needed deeper review.
Traditional review vs Zurvek
Keep the judgement. Remove the avoidable review work.
Zurvek does not replace programme judgement. It structures the first pass so reviewer time is spent on discussion, verification, and applicant conversations rather than rebuilding the same intake record.
Review stage
Traditional workflow
With Zurvek
First pass
Traditional workflowReviewers open applications one by one and build separate notes.
With ZurvekLoad one batch and apply the same evidence structure to every applicant.
Missing information
Traditional workflowBlank fields are easy to overlook or interpret differently between reviewers.
With ZurvekDark-data gaps remain visible and are never silently estimated.
Cohort comparison
Traditional workflowTeams reconcile spreadsheets, comments, and scoring conventions by hand.
With ZurvekEligible plans show rank and percentile inside the submitted batch beside the absolute score.
Deeper review
Traditional workflowThe team rereads the full intake before deciding where to spend interview time.
With ZurvekOpen one review record, inspect friction and gaps, then escalate a selected applicant to full analysis.
Time
One structured first pass reduces repeated reading and reconciliation.
Effort
Reviewers start from the same gaps, friction, and submitted evidence.
Cost
Programme teams can focus paid reviewer hours on applicants that need deeper scrutiny.
Operational benefits depend on cohort size, intake quality, reviewer process, and account eligibility. No fixed time or cost saving is guaranteed.
The bandwidth problem in accelerator selection
Application volume can exceed the reviewer capacity available to inspect it. These figures are reported in the linked research note; they are not Zurvek customer or product metrics.
1,100+
Active incubators reported in India
4,000 → 5
Applications to seats in one 2026 AI cohort
~8.2%
Share of Indian startups reported as ever incubated
Product view · sample data
The same structure used in the signed-in Pipeline
This is a faithful, non-interactive preview of the table and review drawer. Applicant names and values below are labelled sample data; no customer or evaluated company is shown.
Batch
Sample intake
Source
XLSX · 3 rows
Completed
3 / 3
Allowance used
3 evaluations
Rank
Applicant
Sector · stage
Score
Cohort
Friction band
Dark data
01
Applicant 01
SaaS · Seed
72/100
TOP 25%
Low friction
1 gaps
02
Applicant 02
Health · Pre-seed
58/100
TOP HALF
Material friction
3 gaps
03
Applicant 03
Climate · Seed
34/100
BOTTOM HALF
Elevated friction
5 gaps
Review drawerApplicant 02
Material friction · 58
The application states early customer interest, but the submitted material does not establish conversion, retention, or the terms of the pilots.
Recorded strength
Named customer problem and a defined buyer.
Friction
Pilot terms and conversion evidence are unclear.
Dark data
Retention, burn rate, and cap table not supplied.
Sample data. Cohort labels show position inside this batch only. Starting full analysis uses one additional evaluation.
From application file to reviewer focus
01
LOAD THE INTAKE
Upload one CSV or XLSX applicant sheet, or up to 20 PDF decks. The current batch limit is 20 companies, and every triaged company uses one evaluation from the account allowance.
02
APPLY ONE REVIEW STRUCTURE
Each applicant receives the same triage structure. Missing information stays visible as dark data instead of being estimated or silently completed.
03
READ THE COHORT IN CONTEXT
Eligible plans can switch from the absolute score to a rank and percentile inside that batch. The cohort label is not a global benchmark or an admission recommendation.
04
OPEN THE REVIEW RECORD
The company drawer shows the friction band, score, strengths, deal-breakers, and missing fields together. Full analysis can then be started for one additional evaluation.
Use the intake you already have
Upload a CSV or XLSX export with one applicant per row, or upload PDF pitch decks. Only a company-name column is required in the sheet; absent fields are reported as dark data.
Supported
CSV · XLSX · PDF
Batch maximum
20 companies
Per PDF
20 MB maximum
What is available today
Batch triage
CSV, XLSX, or PDF intake with a maximum of 20 companies in the current batch.
Cohort-relative ranking
Rank and percentile inside the submitted batch on eligible plans, shown beside the absolute score.
Zero-Inference gaps
Missing information is listed as dark data. An absent field is not treated as false.
Per-company review
Open one applicant to inspect the recorded strengths, deal-breakers, and missing fields.
Full-analysis escalation
Run the complete evaluation for a selected applicant using one additional evaluation.
Batch analytics
Eligible plans can inspect distribution and gap frequency, then download a structured XLSX workbook.
Reviewer assignment
Eligible institutional accounts can assign applicants to active team members and track review status.
Custom rubric overlay
Eligible institutional accounts can add up to three programme dimensions alongside the Zurvek score.
What this does not decide
- Zurvek does not admit, reject, recommend, or predict returns. The selection decision stays with the programme committee.
- Cohort position compares applicants inside the submitted batch. It is not a global quality ranking.
- A founder-provided deck, model, or cap table is not independent verification. Uploaded material remains labelled accordingly.
- Reviewer assignment, custom rubrics, and batch analytics depend on account eligibility. They are not included on every plan.
Request a sample cohort.
Share the shape of your intake and the review objective. The current workflow accepts up to 20 companies per batch. One allowance unit is used for each successfully completed triage; selected full analysis uses one additional evaluation. Failed runs are not charged.