AperioHub · Project Brief
April 2026 Cohort
Group Kepler · Pre-IPO Investment Thesis
Advising a Singapore family office on a $15M position in a late-stage private technology company ahead of a potential public listing.
Banking & Finance
Consulting & Business Strategy
Digital Innovation & Entrepreneurship
Client Brief
The situation. A Singapore-based multi-family office manages $1.2B in assets for ultra-high-net-worth families across Southeast Asia and the Middle East. Approximately 12% of AUM is allocated to alternative investments, with a growing sub-allocation to late-stage pre-IPO technology companies — targeting names within 18–36 months of a potential public listing. The investment committee has shortlisted four companies and is evaluating a $15 million initial position to establish exposure in this segment. They have engaged your team to produce a full investment thesis: business quality, financial analysis, valuation, risk, and a clear BUY / HOLD / PASS recommendation — in a format suitable for committee presentation.
Key challenges
Limited public financials
Valuation uncertainty
Regulatory exposure
IPO timing risk
Skills you will develop
Investment analysis
Financial modeling
Competitive benchmarking
Risk evaluatement
Executive communication
Company Selection — Choose One in Week 1
The investment committee has shortlisted four companies. Your group selects one and builds the full investment thesis around it. Research all four briefly in Week 1 before committing — the right choice depends on your team's interest, the data available, and where you think the most interesting analytical challenge sits.
Program Roadmap
The structure below is a suggested progression — each team is free to adapt the pace, sequence, or approach based on what works best for their project and group dynamic.
Week 1
A
Align
Scope · explore
Week 2
B
Build
Research · model
Week 3
C
Converge
Synthesise · decide
Week 4
D
Deliver
Present · submit
A — Align: Company Selection & Team Setup
Pick your company, assign workstreams, and agree on what a compelling investment case looks like for the committee.
Days 1–7
Select one company from the shortlist as a team — research all four briefly before committing
Assign workstream ownership based on interest and background — 1–2 members per workstream
WS1: Start mapping the business model and competitive landscape
WS2: Identify where financial data exists — funding rounds, regulatory filings, media reports
WS3: Begin sizing the total market and mapping the regulatory environment
Suggested output by end of week
Coordinators: Run a short team call in the first 2–3 days to align on company choice. A team that picks the same company will move faster — surface any strong preferences early and decide democratically. Confirm the split to the mentor by end of Week 1.
B — Build: Deep Research & Analysis
Each workstream runs independently and deep. This is where the investment case is built or broken.
Days 8–14
WS1: Complete competitor benchmarking table and moat evaluatement
WS2: Build the first version of the financial model — revenue, margins, valuation range
WS3: Draft the risk matrix (likelihood × impact) and TAM breakdown
All workstreams: share interim findings in the group Slack channel — look for connections across workstreams
Does the data support your Week 1 hypothesis — or is the picture more complicated?
Suggested output by end of week
Coordinators: Chase workstream updates mid-week — do not wait until Sunday. If any workstream is struggling with data, flag early so the group can help. A stalled workstream in Week 2 creates a Week 4 crisis.
C — Converge: Valuation, Risk & Recommendation
Stop collecting. The question now is: what does all of this actually mean — and what is the right recommendation for the committee?
Days 15–21
WS2: Finalise the 3-scenario valuation model (bull / base / bear) and entry price sensitivity table
WS3: Complete the regulatory landscape note and finalise the risk matrix visual
WS4: Draft the investment recommendation — BUY, HOLD, or PASS — and the investment structure proposal
Coordinators: pull all workstream outputs together into the investment memo first draft
What would have to be true for your bear case to play out? Make sure the team can answer this.
Suggested output by end of week
Coordinators: No new research from this point. Redirect any workstream still gathering data toward synthesis. Making a well-evidenced recommendation under incomplete information is exactly what this project is testing.
D — Deliver: Investment Memo & Presentation
Content first, presentation second. Every claim in your memo should be one you can defend under questioning.
Days 22–28
Finalise the investment memo — 8 to 10 pages, structured as a committee-ready document
Complete the 10–12 slide pitch deck — lead with the recommendation, then support it
Submit the data workbook: competitor table, 3-scenario valuation model, risk heat map
Each member should be able to present and explain their workstream section
Include the team's 5 reflection responses as part of the final submission
Final submission — three components
Coordinators: A focused, well-argued investment memo beats a comprehensive but unfocused one. Quality of thinking — not volume of output — is what we are evaluateing. Confirm submission format and deadline with the mentor by start of Week 4.
Final group session — live video call
We close the program with a live group session where each team presents and walks through their investment thesis informally. Every member is expected to contribute their section. The last 10 minutes are an open conversation about what surprised you most — come with a view, not just slides.
Suggested Workstreams
These four workstreams are a starting framework — not a prescription. Assign 1–2 members to each based on interest and background. Workstreams run in parallel across Weeks 1–3 and come together in Week 4 for the final deliverable. Select a workstream below to see what it covers and where to start.
Workstream 1
Business Quality & Competitive Position
Evaluating whether this is a genuinely good business — the model, the moat, and how it stacks up against the competition.
Workstream 2
Financial Analysis & Valuation
Building the quantitative case — assembling financials from available sources and producing a 3-scenario valuation model.
Workstream 3
Market Sizing & Risk Evaluatement
Sizing the opportunity and stress-testing the thesis — TAM/SAM, regulatory landscape, and a structured risk matrix.
Workstream 4
Data Synthesis & Investment Recommendation
Pulling all workstream outputs together into a coherent data story and a clear BUY / HOLD / PASS recommendation for the committee.
What this covers
Useful starting points
Shared Google Drive
Keep all work in your team's shared folder. All work-in-progress files, drafts, and final deliverables should be maintained in your group's shared Google Drive folder throughout the program. Your team-specific Drive link will be shared on your respective Slack project channel.
Reference Resources
Data Source
Crunchbase
Funding rounds, valuations, investor names, and company timelines for all four shortlisted companies
↗
Data Source
UK Companies House
Audited financials for Revolut — one of the few pre-IPO companies with publicly filed accounts
↗
Template
Guide
Additional resources will be added to this section as the program progresses. Watch for an update notification in your Slack project channel.
Data & Analytics Component
Using AI Tools
We support the use of AI tools as part of your research and analysis process. Most of your peers will be using them — and in professional settings, so will you. The expectation is that you use AI as a thinking tool, not as a replacement for your own judgment. The analysis, the conclusions, and the recommendation are still yours.
Use it to accelerate, not to replace
AI is effective for research synthesis, structuring arguments, and sense-checking logic. It is not a substitute for understanding what you are presenting.
Verify before you rely
AI tools can produce inaccurate data, statistics, and citations. Any figure or fact in your final deliverable should be independently confirmed.
Own your recommendation
You should be able to explain and defend every conclusion in your work. If you cannot explain it, it should not be in your final deliverable.
Use it to get unstuck
Stuck on how to frame a problem or approach an analysis? AI is a useful thinking partner — ask it questions, not just answers.
Used by your cohort:
ChatGPT
Claude
Gemini
Perplexity
Llama
Reflection — Include With Your Submission
Include a brief group response to each of the following as part of your Week 4 submission. There are no right answers — these help us understand how your team engaged with the project and what to improve for future cohorts.
01 · Company Choice
What made your team choose this company — and did your view of it change as the project progressed?
02 · Most Valuable Insight
What is the single most important thing your team learned that you did not know before?
This could be about the company, the investment process, or how your team worked together.
03 · Hardest Part
What was the hardest part of completing this project — finding data, building the model, agreeing on a recommendation — and how did your team resolve it?
04 · Career Relevance
How does this type of project connect to the careers your team is pursuing? What aspects felt most relevant to where people are headed?
Be specific — generic answers are less useful than honest ones.
05 · What Would You Do Next
If you had four more weeks, what would you investigate or build on — and what did this project leave unanswered?
Submission: One response per group, submitted alongside your final deliverable. Coordinators should compile and review before submitting.