Investment memo teardown: what each section is actually for
Most memo templates tell you the headings. They rarely say what each section is defending against, what evidence has to sit underneath it, or what the section is careful not to claim. This is the same structure Zurvek produces, walked through part by part.
In short
An investment committee memo has six working parts: the thesis, the evidence base, the findings by pillar, the contradictions, the risk and downside case, and an explicit statement of what it does not capture. Each finding names the document it came from, and the memo argues a position rather than predicting an outcome.
01
Thesis and deal summary
One page stating what the company does, what is being asked for, and why this deal is in front of the committee at all. If the thesis cannot be written in a paragraph, the deal is not ready for a memo.
Evidence underneath it
Company, sector, stage, geography and the round being raised
The instrument, the amount, and the ownership it implies
The single claim the investment depends on, stated plainly
What it does not claim
A memo's thesis is an argument, not a forecast. It does not assert that the claim is true — it states what would have to be true.
02
Evidence base and document integrity
Before anything is analysed, the memo records what it was analysed from. Committees routinely argue about conclusions drawn from documents nobody re-checked.
Evidence underneath it
Every document read, with page counts and the date received
What was extracted from each and what could not be read
Which supporting files were missing at the time of writing
What it does not claim
Recording a document is not verifying its contents against an external source. A deck listed here is evidence of what the founder claims, not proof of the claim.
03
Findings by pillar
The substantive body: team, product, market, traction, financial health, defensibility and risk, each worked against the actual documents rather than the narrative.
Evidence underneath it
The specific figure, clause or statement that supports each finding
Where the finding came from — which document, which page
Confidence, and what would raise or lower it
What it does not claim
A pillar with weak evidence is reported as weak evidence, not as a weak company. Early-stage absence of data is a visibility limit, not a negative signal.
04
Contradictions and friction
The section most memos omit. Where the documents disagree with each other, the disagreement is quoted in both directions and left unresolved for the committee.
Evidence underneath it
Revenue in the deck against revenue in the model or statements
Headcount, customer counts or dates that move between documents
Market sizing that cannot be rebuilt from the stated inputs
What it does not claim
A contradiction is not an accusation. Most resolve with one clarifying question; the memo's job is to make sure the question gets asked before the cheque, not after.
05
Risk, sensitivity and the downside case
What breaks the deal, in what order, and how much room the plan has. Written as structural exposure rather than a probability of failure.
Evidence underneath it
The dependencies the business cannot survive losing
Capital sensitivity: what a flat or delayed round does to the plan
Timing and regulatory exposure specific to the sector
What it does not claim
No probability of success is asserted, and no return is projected. Risk analysis maps exposure; it does not price it.
06
What this memo does not capture
An explicit blind-spot section. A memo that lists no limits is either incomplete or overclaiming, and committees discount it accordingly.
Evidence underneath it
Founder behaviour under pressure, which documents cannot show
Private competitor information and unannounced incumbent moves
Second-order capital market conditions at the time of the next round
What it does not claim
This section exists to prevent the memo being read as a complete picture. It is the part most worth reading aloud in the meeting.
How to read a memo in committee
Read the contradictions and the limits sections first. The findings tell you what the documents say; those two sections tell you how much weight the findings can carry. A memo whose conclusions are stronger than its evidence base is the failure mode worth catching, and it is visible in about a minute if the sections are read in that order.
