Methodology
The Arkus methodology, applied to deep-tech fund review.
Every assessment runs the same rigorous process: patent review, scale-up review, and protection review. An analyst reviews every finding.
The three pillars
Three plain questions. One technical assessment.
Every engagement asks whether the invention is protected, whether the technology can become a product, and what still has to be proven before capital moves. The venture judgment stays with the fund. Our job is the technical read that makes that judgment possible.
Pillar 01
Patent landscape
We compare the invention with the patents and technical filings already around it, including filings the founder may never have seen.
- How crowded the patent area already is
- How well the patent covers the important parts of the invention
- Patent conflict risk created by nearby inventions
Pillar 02
Can the technology scale?
We test whether the prototype can survive manufacturing, deployment, and approval reality rather than stopping at a lab result.
- Technical readiness checked against real production requirements
- Scale-up, supply-chain, and approval risks
- The distance between a working prototype and a deployable product
Pillar 03
Can the invention be protected?
We assess whether the patent position creates real leverage, or only a temporary position competitors can work around.
- How hard the invention is to copy or avoid
- Whether the patents create leverage or only narrow protection
- How quickly competing patents could close the first-mover window
The scoring method
Eight review areas. Three sample sectors.
Toggle between sample biotech, robotics, and AI assessments to see how the same method shifts by sector.
Interactive scorecard
Same method, different sector profile. The shape shows where the next review should focus.
Active domain
Biotech
Average
63
View the underlying data
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Patent crowding | 78 |
| Open patent space | 62 |
| Protection strength | 83 |
| Technical readiness | 45 |
| Buyer fit | 70 |
| Cost model | 58 |
| Approval path | 40 |
| Competitive crowding | 65 |
Analyst in the loop
Humans review every machine-generated finding.
Models surface candidate findings. Analysts confirm them, add context, and decide what lands in the report. That is the only way we sign our name to the score.
See the methodology applied to your fund.
The 3% Advisory Program is where the methodology runs in full. Start a conversation about joining it.