0% found this document useful (0 votes)
28 views21 pages

VC Tech Stack Challenges and Insights

The VC Tech Stack Report outlines the challenges and opportunities within the Venture Capital ecosystem, emphasizing investor dissatisfaction with current technology tools. A significant portion of investors express a need for innovative solutions to enhance operational efficiency and decision-making processes. The report highlights the importance of integrating advanced technologies to unlock the value of data and improve investment strategies.

Uploaded by

James Cahyadi
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
28 views21 pages

VC Tech Stack Challenges and Insights

The VC Tech Stack Report outlines the challenges and opportunities within the Venture Capital ecosystem, emphasizing investor dissatisfaction with current technology tools. A significant portion of investors express a need for innovative solutions to enhance operational efficiency and decision-making processes. The report highlights the importance of integrating advanced technologies to unlock the value of data and improve investment strategies.

Uploaded by

James Cahyadi
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

August 2025 scout-vc.

app

The VC
Tech Stack Report
This report sheds light on the current landscape
of the VC tech stack, highlighting the hurdles
investors face in pursuing higher returns and
greater operational efficiency.
Purpose
The purpose of this report is to offer insights into the chal-
lenges, opportunities, and preferences within the Venture
Capital ecosystem. It supports the development and im-
plementation of transformative solutions that contribute
towards reshaping the future of private market investing for
the betterment of all stakeholders.

Our best,
The Scout Team

[Link] 2
Table of Contents

01 Introduction 4
02 What are the most ­common ­frustrations
and challenges in a VC’s workload? 7
03 Tools used by VCs 11
04 Key CRM players in the market 14
05 Criteria VCs consider when
investing in tools 17
06 Conclusion 20
[Link] 3
01 Introduction
Venture Capital (VC) is an infamously high-stakes game
centred around the ability to fiercely prioritise. Early-stage
investors need to perfect the balance of processing a high
volume of deals whilst providing thoughtful, personalised
responses to founders, investors, and stakeholders to
maintain their fund‘s reputation and image. Ironically, al-
though investors are exposed to cutting-edge techno­logies,
the current selection of tech tools available to VCs to exe-
cute their multi-faceted role seems to be falling short.

80 % of investors surveyed expressed dissatisfaction with their


current tech stack and were interested in trying a new solution.

Dissatisfaction leads to opportunities. Out of 130 investors


interviewed, more than 100 cited significant challenges in
managing their workload efficiently and dissatisfaction with
their tech stack – highlighting a clear opportunity for inno-
vation and change in how private market investors operate.

Amidst these challenges, VCs possess some of the biggest


and most valuable private company datasets. Collected
over the years, VCs store decks, business plans, cap tables,
reports, thought pieces, references, contacts, founder
­intelligence, and more. Recognising the potential within
these data sources and observing the advancements in
natural language processing (NLP), generative artificial
intelligence (AI), and machine learning (ML), the team at
Scout saw an opportunity to reimagine the VC tech stack
from the ground up.

[Link] 4
Our Hypothesis:

By harnessing advanced
technologies, VCs can
­unlock the latent value
in internal and external
data sources, ­empowering
investors to make more
informed investment
decisions.

[Link] 5
To validate this hypothesis, the Scout team conducted a
series of investor interviews from some of the most well-
regarded firms in the world. Through these interviews, we
sought to gain an understanding of the current VC tool
tech stack landscape, and a comprehensive breakdown
of the following:

Identify Frustrations and Challenges:


Uncover the pain points experienced by VCs in
their day-to-day operations. From grappling with
overwhelming workloads to the struggle of balanc-
ing efficiency with personalised communication,
these frustrations formed the backdrop against
which the need for innovation emerged.

Explore Current Tech Stacks:


Whether it was proprietary software, off-the-shelf
solutions, or a combination thereof, gaining insights
into the existing tech stack provided valuable
context for potential integration of advanced
technologies.

Map Existing Players:


Map the different tech solutions that offer VCs a
range of services to identify areas for innovation
and further development.

Understand Tech Purchasing Decisions:


How do VCs prioritise when evaluating solutions?
Whether it's scalability, customisation, or specific
features, what solutions need to be developed to
serve the needs of the market?

[Link] 6
02 What are the most common
­frustrations and challenges
in a VC’s workload?
The Scout team interviewed over a 130 investors, predom-
inantly working at pre-seed and seed funds. These inves-
tors were typically non-partner level and were responsible
for sourcing and managing their own pipeline of deals.
Each investor was asked the same list of questions in the
same order, to keep the survey as standardised as possi-
ble. The first question posed was the following:

What are the most common frustrations and challenges in a VC's workload?
Data Search & Consolidation

Deal Tracking & Management

Tool/Tab Switching

15
Turn Down Emails

Competitor Analysis
Fund Admin/ LP Reporting

10
Documentation Write-ups

Manual Data Input

Sourcing

Cap Table Building


Founder Outreach

Screening

Staff Training

05

00

[Link] 7
It is an infamous fact that investors are ‘always on’. There
is always another business to source (between March
2022–2023, 801,006 companies were founded in the UK
alone). Statistically, 9 in 10 start-ups fail and on the other
end of the success spectrum, there are only 1,200 uni-
corns worldwide as of July 2025.

For the early-stage investor, with volume comes op-


portunity; finding their next unicorn is part numbers
game, part strategy.

Managing large quantities of data relating to a pipeline of


companies (pre-seed and seed funds review thousands
of deals a year) can often become overwhelming. Consid-
erable bottlenecks arise in two scenarios:

• Managing multiple deals across various communica-


tion channels like email, WhatsApp, and LinkedIn can
cause some deals to slip through the cracks, leading to
missed opportunities for investors. Additionally, if col-
leagues are not included in email threads or data isn’t
entered into a centralised system, it can create confu-
sion about the status of a deal.

• When a deal is placed in the ‘more research required’


category, ideally, an investor would have the time and
resources to learn about a specific industry area and
form an educated opinion on whether a deal is suitable
or not for their fund’s thesis. However, this is far from
reality, as collating this information typically takes hours
of research, which few investors can afford.

These scenarios often lead to frustrated founders and


anxious investors. As investors struggle to prioritise
the right deals at the right time, founders risk being

[Link] 8
overlooked – or simply forgotten – all while investors re-
main uneasy about missing the next major opportunity.

Analysing a start-up’s suitability for an investment requires


a lot of information gathering. As the ecosystem has
evolved, data sources have become highly distributed
with key players (LinkedIn, Crunchbase etc.) holding some,
but not all information, making the search and consolida-
tion of data increasingly arduous.

In summary, the top three frustrations share a c


­ ommon thread:

Dispersed data leads to delayed decision making.

[Link] 9
In today’s venture world, it has never
been truer to say that time is our most
valuable commodity. Manual, fragmented
workflows are commonplace, where
pattern recognition becomes impossible.
The most elegant solution to this problem
codifies our processes within the tools we
use, reflecting both the firm’s character
and each investor’s approach.

Keshvi Radia
Head of Product

[Link] 10
03 Tools used by VCs
Even with bespoke in-house solutions, every interviewee
relies on multiple tools to complete their workflow. All
investors use either Microsoft or Google tools, which are
excluded from the figure below. Notably, 65 % of investors
used transcription tools to capture meeting notes – spe-
cific tools were not disclosed and thus omitted from the
graph. All investors reported using a Customer Relation-
ship Manager (CRM) to track sourced startups and in
some cases, manage broader network interactions.

What productivity tools do you use? *

Attio Specter
(16)
(18)
ChatGPT4
Pitchbook
(12) Crunchbase (22)
(21)
Copper Google
Streak

Landscape
(5)
Typeform In-house
Affinity Solution
Notion Sircular
(65) Beauhurst
Partial
(35) (3)
(27)

Hubspot

Tegus
Other
Bespoke
LinkedIn Sales CRMs
Salesforce
(5)
in-house Tracxn
Navigator (7)
Solution
Full-Stack Airtable (32)
(7)
(20) Pipedrive
(6) Compass
Dealroom
(5)

2= Typeform, Sircular, Hubspot, Google


Streak, Copper, Compass, Tracxn, Tegus Categories: CRM Sourcing Company Information Other

* Please note that LinkedIn Sales Navigator is the paid version of the solution, 100 % of investors interviewed
use LinkedIn. This graph shows the most popular tools VCs use (or in some cases tried but not adopted).

[Link] 11
VCs are often experimenting with multiple tools to optimise
workflow. If merged into the categories above, this graph
represents an ideal – but currently non-existent – scenario
where investors could encapsulate public and private com-
pany data in a single platform, combining it with proprietary
insights from decks, references, and meeting notes.

Constraint: Software siloing within the VC industry means


there is no single source of truth.

Suggestion: Key players in both software and VC industries


should engage in collaborative dialogue to facilitate smoother
integrations that eliminate data silos and foster a more
cohesive and informed industry, which would ultimately
benefit all stakeholders involved.

Several VCs interviewed have attempted to partially inte-


grate some of these tools (e.g. Specter integration into Affini-
ty) into their CRM system. However, those who have done so
voiced concerns over technical staff departing, which would
leave the rest of the team potentially uninformed about the
operational setup, as well as the risk of integrations breaking
or becoming blocked due to updated firewalls.

Additionally, many popular software providers are reluctant


to integrate with other software. For example, LinkedIn's
strategy is geared towards safeguarding users from ex-
cessive spamming and minimising user attrition from the
platform and aligns with its broader market scope beyond
Venture Capital. However, this approach inadvertently con-
tributes to an underserved VC industry.

[Link] 12
The hardest challenge is no longer access
to information, but knowing how to
activate it to focus our attention where
it will have the greatest impact. The
opportunity lies in building the right
scaffolding – systems and intelligence
that strip away noise, sharpen clarity,
and guide action – so we can spend our
time where it matters most: building the
right relationships, deepening context,
and exercising judgment in moments
of high ambiguity, uncertainty, and
subjectivity.

Tom Wehmeier
Partner & Head of Intelligence

[Link] 13
04 Key CRM players
in the market
Most CRM platforms are designed around sales processes,
which creates a fundamental mismatch when applied to
venture capital – a minority segment compared to the
broader sales market. VCs typically use CRM software to
manage and track founder relationships, which follow a
series of stages unique to the private capital sector:

1. Source
2. Analyse / Due Diligence (often through multiple steps)
3. Decide (on whether to pass, wait or invest)

What productivity tools do you use? *

5%
Other * 15 %
Airtable
12 %
Attio 2%
Google Streak
4%
Salesforce 2% 5%
Hubspot
2% Pipedrive
Copper
5%
Bespoke in-house
full-stacksolution

49 %
Affinity

* Other CRMs mentioned fewer than three times

[Link] 14
Our research shows that Affinity is the clear off-the-shelf
CRM market leader (50 %), followed by Attio. Based on
our interviews, no platform managed to fully satisfy cus-
tomers, with investors noting dissatisfaction with the high
cost and the absence of automation as the primary
frustrations.

Meanwhile, Airtable was typically the CRM of choice for


funds with smaller assets under management (AUM). Al-
though limited in features compared to Affinity and Attio,
its freemium model helped ensure that technology ex-
penses didn’t significantly impact operational budgets.

Findings suggest a gap in the market for price-sensitive but


more automated VC-centric CRM systems, presenting an
opportunity for innovation.

Conversely, only a small fraction of interviewees – 4 % of


the total – had d­ eveloped a custom end-to-end in-house
solution and e­ xpressed complete satisfaction with their
solution. H
­ owever, three key points emerged in these
discussions:

• Most wanted to purchase an off-the-shelf option but


found none that suited all their needs.
• The cost, time spent and effort of building an in-house
solution was very high (usually six figures +).
• Some feared being locked into their in-house system,
concerned it might lag behind market developments
and erode their proprietary edge.

Differentiators for these in-house solutions, compared to


off-the-shelf options, include automated input of external

[Link] 15
data and utilisation of ML and AI within their CRM. For ex-
ample, Headline – a US/Europe-based fund – developed
‘Deep Dive’ as an integral part of their due diligence pro-
cess; this tool integrates external data sources to assess
business performance.

Every in-house solution we’ve encountered aimed to


serve as the sole repository for team members to manage
and store start-up data, yet each one varied in design and
data input methods.

Every investor has a unique way of managing their relationships


with founders and the data they need in order to make
informed investment decisions.

These findings highlight the need for CRMs to strike a


balance: providing robust infrastructure for managing deal
flow while allowing investors the flexibility to tailor systems
to their unique workflows and diverse data needs for in-
formed decision-making.

[Link] 16
05 Criteria VCs consider when
investing in tools
The tech stack budget of a Venture Capital firm heavily
depends on its Assets Under Management (AUM), with
operational costs typically ranging from 1–2 % of AUM
annually. This budget tends to remain steady unless a new
fund is closed, posing a challenge for upselling in the VC
software market.

The entire Venture Capital industry is built on forecasting


future value – and this extends beyond investment decisions
to include how operational spend is allocated.

General Partners (GPs) are focused on running their funds


efficiently, strategically allocating resources to maintain
operational excellence and gain a competitive edge. Any
investment in tools, whether built in-house or outsourced,
requires confidence from the partnership that it will yield
superior returns compared to channelling resources into
other fixed-cost items like hiring more staff, opening a
satellite office in another geography, or increasing salaries.
Whether deciding to invest in a start-up or choosing be-
tween buying software tools and building them in-house,
General Partners and their teams must carefully weigh the
risk-reward ratio of each decision. A ubiquitous pattern
emerges: every choice is an investment – of capital, time,
and focus – and demands the same level of scrutiny.

Scout mostly interviewed juniors to glean insights into


what was required for them to advocate for a new tech

[Link] 17
solution; an essential step to unlock budget a
­ llocation
which is typically controlled by their General Partner(s).

Constraint: A major hurdle for VC software tool providers to


overcome is that the buyers (GPs) of these software tools are
often not the main users (juniors), and thus do not experience
the ‘pain’ of repetitive work.

Suggestion: Offering a free trial serves as a palatable entry


point into the market and helps facilitate the adoption of a
new tool. This requisite strategy helps users gather evidence
for their GPs of the tool providing a return on investment (ROI),
plus the ability to compare and contrast existing solutions on
the market.

In the increasingly competitive landscape of VC tooling


software, new entrants face the dual challenge of offer-
ing superior functionality while maintaining competitive
pricing, which is necessary due to the number of players
currently available in the market.

A tool’s ability to significantly enhance efficiency and ef-


fectiveness is crucial, especially in meeting the time-sav-
ing needs of VCs. By streamlining relationship manage-
ment and data aggregation tasks with AI and ML, these
features could serve as a core motivation for funds to
switch and/or adopt a new solution.

[Link] 18
Tracking time-saving features is crucial for demonstrating
tangible ROI, aligning with the industry’s emphasis on pro-
ductivity enhancements. This focus is reinforced by the
frustrations of using multiple tools concurrently, under-
scoring the demand for integrated solutions. Time-saving
offers three key benefits to a fund:

1. More bandwidth for ‘human-centric’ tasks such as


relationship-building
2. Increased speed and clarity in prioritising thesis-
aligned deals while efficiently deprioritising those
­unlikely to succeed at Investment Committee (IC)
3. Cost reduction by eliminating the need to hire
­additional staff, allowing for capital redistribution
(e. g. salaries)

What factors determine your purchasing decision for new software tools?

40 % 16%

Reduced FTE costs

12 % 4%
Faster staff
training
Cost-effective with superior features
compared to competitors
4%
20 % Widely adopted
by other funds

4%
Increased deal Seamless
Significant time savings analysis integrations

[Link] 19
06 Conclusion
The VC industry faces an ongoing challenge: managing a
high volume of relationships – from sourcing new deals to
nurturing critical connections with Limited Partners (LPs),
co-investors, and other stakeholders – while delivering
personalised communication. Widespread dissatisfaction
with current technology underscores the urgent need for
innovation, as fragmented deal tracking and manual data
entry highlight the demand for seamless integration and
intelligent automation to unlock the full potential of data
and elevate decision-making.

Balancing functionality with affordability remains a core


challenge, as firms deliberate whether to buy off-the-
shelf tools, build bespoke solutions, or adopt a hybrid
approach – complicated by high switching costs (due to
migrating years’ worth of structured and unstructured
data) and the difficulty of measuring ROI. Interviewees see
technological advancements as crucial to transforming
the VC tech stack, enabling automation of low-value tasks
and unlocking deeper insights from consolidated data. To
achieve this, investors should aim to streamline workflows
by consolidating multiple tools into a single platform, cre-
ating a unified source of truth.

Findings of this report highlight that early-stage funds,


who are often operating with lean budgets, remain under-
served – revealing a clear market gap for more accessible
solutions. Now is a pivotal moment for the VC tech stack
to evolve – as new technologies (such as ML/NLP/AI etc.)
have the power to fundamentally transform how VCs in-
vest and operate and reshape the future of venture capital
for the betterment of the entire ecosystem.

[Link] 20
August 2025

This report was created by Scout, a platform


which helps VCs work smarter and invest
wiser. To learn more, apply for exclusive Alpha
­access – limited spots are available.

[Link]

Common questions

Powered by AI

Adopting AI and ML technologies is crucial for VCs as they enhance data management by automating the consolidation and analysis of disparate data sources, which is typically labor-intensive and time-consuming. These technologies enable the extraction of actionable insights from large datasets, which is essential for informed decision-making. By stripping away noise and sharpening clarity, AI and ML allow VCs to focus on high-impact areas such as relationship-building and strategic investments. Thus, the adoption of these technologies optimizes resource allocation, reduces operational inefficiencies, and significantly elevates the overall decision-making process .

Venture Capitalists face significant challenges in data management, primarily due to the dispersed nature of data sources and the manual, fragmented workflows that impede timely decision-making. VCs must handle 'deal flow' by managing vast amounts of data from different communication channels, which often leads to bottlenecks and missed opportunities. Advanced technologies like NLP and AI can address these issues by integrating dispersed data, enabling efficient data search and consolidation, and automating repetitive tasks. These solutions can empower VCs to unlock the latent value in internal and external data sources, leading to better-informed investment decisions and enhanced operational efficiency .

Market gaps in VC tech solutions include a lack of accessible and affordable tools, especially for early-stage funds operating with limited budgets. Present solutions often lack complete automation and integration capabilities necessary for efficient data management and decision-making. Upcoming technologies, particularly AI, ML, and NLP, have the potential to address these gaps by offering more sophisticated analysis tools that are cost-effective and easy to implement. These technologies can facilitate advanced data insights, enhance relationship management, and automate low-value tasks, thereby empowering smaller funds to compete more effectively and improving the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the VC ecosystem .

Current VC tech stacks fall short as they struggle with tool fragmentation, lack of seamless integrations, and insufficient automation. This leads to inefficiencies such as the need to switch between multiple platforms and prolonged data processing times. The report suggests innovations such as developing a unified platform that merges CRM, data aggregation, and analytic tools to streamline operations, facilitating better communication, and informed decision-making. Additionally, engaging in collaborative dialogues to foster tool integrations and adopting AI-driven solutions are recommended to address these shortcomings and enhance operational efficiency .

Integrating multiple productivity tools into a single platform could significantly transform VC operations by creating a unified source of truth that streamline workflows and enhances data coherence. This integration would consolidate CRM functions, data analytics, and management tools, reducing the need for tool-switching and minimizing the risk of data silos. By providing a comprehensive view of all relevant information in one place, investors could make faster, more informed decisions, direct their focus towards strategic activities, and reduce operational inefficiencies, ultimately leading to a more agile and responsive investment process .

Time-saving features in VC software tools are significant because they enhance operational workflows by reducing the time spent on low-value, repetitive tasks, thereby freeing up resources for strategic activities like deal evaluation and relationship management. Such features help prioritize deals aligned with investment theses and streamline data processing, ultimately leading to faster decision-making and improved efficiency. By allowing VCs to spend more time on human-centric tasks that require judgment and personal interaction, these features not only boost productivity but also contribute to better investment outcomes and reduced operational costs .

To improve the adoption of new VC software tools, it is suggested that providers offer free trials to allow users to experience the tools and gather evidence of their return on investment. This can help convince general partners, who typically control budget allocations but are not the main users of these tools, of their value. Additionally, ensuring that new tools are cost-effective, deliver superior functionality, provide significant time savings, and have seamless integrations with existing systems are recommended strategies to enhance their appeal and encourage widespread adoption among industry stakeholders .

Software siloing in the Venture Capital industry creates a significant issue by preventing seamless data exchange between different tools and platforms, resulting in a disjointed workflow and inefficient data usage. Such silos mean there is no single source of truth, complicating data management and decision-making processes. Potential solutions include developing tools that integrate seamlessly across platforms, encouraging collaboration between key industry players to foster smoother integrations, and promoting the adoption of interoperable software solutions. By eliminating silos, VCs can achieve a more cohesive and informed operational model .

CRM systems in the VC industry are primarily used to track and manage the complex array of relationships with founders, investors, and other stakeholders throughout various stages of the investment process. However, the limitations of current CRM solutions include their design primarily around sales processes, which may not align perfectly with the needs unique to venture capital. Additionally, high costs, lack of automation, and difficulties in achieving seamless integrations with other tools are common pain points for VCs, limiting the systems' effectiveness in boosting operational efficiency and decision-making .

VCs face several trade-offs when choosing between off-the-shelf software solutions and bespoke in-house developments. Off-the-shelf solutions offer quick implementation, standardized support, and often lower initial costs, but may not fully satisfy the unique needs of VCs, such as specific relationship management features and seamless data integration. Bespoke in-house developments provide tailored functionalities that can closely align with a firm's strategic requirements, but they involve higher upfront investment, longer development times, and potentially higher maintenance risks due to dependencies on in-house technical expertise. Ultimately, the choice depends on balancing the long-term benefits of customization against the immediate advantages of accessibility and ease of use .

You might also like