Market intelligence that updates while you sleep
Sectors, comps, signals, and benchmarks always live
Static market research goes stale the moment the deck is published. Reuben AI keeps market intelligence live: sector dynamics, comparable transactions, capital flows, talent signals, and regulatory shifts continuously refreshed and tied to your investment strategy.
When a deal arrives, the market context is already there. When the IC asks 'what is the comp set?', the answer is current, not three months old.
Why most market research is already obsolete
Most funds buy a market report at fundraise, then make decisions against it for the next ten years. By year three, the report is wrong. By year five, the firm is making decisions against a market that no longer exists.
Reuben AI keeps the market view alive by continuously ingesting structured signals across the sectors you care about.
How it works
Sector dashboards
For each sector in your thesis, a live dashboard of capital flows, talent moves, comparable transactions, and regulatory shifts.
Comp transactions
Auto-surfaced comparable transactions filtered by stage, geography, and sub-sector. Use them in IC memos and LP communications.
Capital flow signals
Track which funds are deploying into which sectors. Spot crowding before it shows up in valuations.
Custom watchlists
Watch specific companies, founders, or sub-sectors. Get notified when they raise, hire, or go quiet.
See Market Research in your fund
Explore the workflow directly with an investment team, or discuss how it could support a platform's clients.
What live intelligence changes
Funds making decisions against live market intelligence are faster to spot inflection points and faster to call peaks. They sound more credible to LPs because they are talking about the market that exists today, not the market that existed when the fund was raised.
And analysts spend less time assembling decks because the underlying intelligence is already structured.
How should continuous research trigger a fresh thesis-fit review?
Reopen thesis-fit review when new evidence challenges a recorded assumption, changes the relevant market context or crosses a team-defined review condition. Link the signal to its source and the affected assumption, then ask a named reviewer to retain, revise or reject the thesis with reasons.
Judgement stays human. The process becomes disciplined.
Frequently asked questions
Where does the data come from?
A combination of public sources, partner data feeds, and structured ingestion of the data your firm already pays for. Source-attributed end to end.
Can we add proprietary data?
Yes. Private deal flow, partner intelligence, and proprietary research can be layered into the same dashboards.
Is this a PitchBook, Preqin or Crunchbase replacement?
No. It complements them. Reuben AI uses your existing private-market data subscriptions and adds the synthesis and routing layer on top.
Where does the market research data come from?
Reuben AI synthesises market research from named primary sources: regulator publications, official industry reports, association datasets and the private-market data providers your firm already subscribes to. Each insight carries a citation and a confidence tier.
Can market research outputs be used in IC memos and LP materials?
Yes. Outputs are exportable with citations intact, so the IC memo or LP material carries the source attribution required by SEC Marketing Rule 17 CFR 275.206(4)-1 and FCA SYSC standards.
Which signals warrant review?
Material changes to demand, competition, regulation or financing warrant review when they affect an explicit thesis assumption, not simply because a new article appears.
Who decides whether the thesis changes?
The responsible investment team reviews the evidence and records its judgement; a signal is a prompt, not an investment instruction.
How should conflicting research be handled?
Keep both sources, their dates and their scope visible. Record why one is more relevant and what remains unresolved.
What should a thesis review record contain?
Capture the original assumption, the new evidence, the reviewer, the review date and the resulting rationale without replacing the original thesis.