This product was not featured by Product Hunt yet. It will not be visible on their landing page and won't be ranked (cannot win product of the day regardless of upvotes).
Product upvotes vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product comments vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product upvote speed vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product upvotes and comments
Waiting for data. Loading
Product vs the next 3
Loading
Screen startups by evidence
Your deal flow, graded by evidence
An AI analyst for angels, VCs, and accelerators. It reads each inbound application and grades every claim: backed by artifacts, self-reported, or unverifiable as presented — plus red flags and founder questions. Humans make the decisions.
AI made starting a company cheap, and it shows in every investor's inbox: more decks, more polished narratives, more specific-sounding numbers. A faster summary of an unverifiable claim is still unverifiable. The question that eats a screener's time isn't "what does this startup do" — it's "what here can I actually check?"
Evidence Gate reads one application and returns a brief:
a proceed / hold / escalate verdict (readiness for review, never an investment view)
every material claim graded — supported in the pack, self-reported, or unverifiable as presented — with the exact artifact that would verify it
red flags visible in the pack: metric inconsistencies, arithmetic breaks, unnamed "major" partners
founder questions ready to paste into your reply
New today: the same gate works from the other side of the table. If you're a founder, run your own deck through it before you submit and see what an evidence-first screener sees — then attach the missing artifact, or reword the claim, before an analyst flags it for you.
What it isn't, on purpose: not a score of how good the startup is, not a factuality checker (it can't tell you a claim is true, only whether it's verifiable and how), not a replacement for judgment. Not investment, legal, or financial advice. Humans make the decisions.
Where it's at: a live demo with two illustrative sample applications and pre-generated agent runs. I'm looking for investors and founders to run a real batch and tell me where it's wrong.
Investors: send a batch from your current pipeline. Founders: run your own pack before you submit. I read every reply.
About Screen startups by evidence on Product Hunt
“Your deal flow, graded by evidence”
Screen startups by evidence was submitted on Product Hunt and earned 5 upvotes and 8 comments, placing #66 on the daily leaderboard. An AI analyst for angels, VCs, and accelerators. It reads each inbound application and grades every claim: backed by artifacts, self-reported, or unverifiable as presented — plus red flags and founder questions. Humans make the decisions.
On the analytics side, Screen startups by evidence competes within Investing, Venture Capital, Artificial Intelligence and GitHub — topics that collectively have 590.6k followers on Product Hunt. The dashboard above tracks how Screen startups by evidence performed against the three products that launched closest to it on the same day.
Who hunted Screen startups by evidence?
Screen startups by evidence was hunted by Vassiliy Lak. A “hunter” on Product Hunt is the community member who submits a product to the platform — uploading the images, the link, and tagging the makers behind it. Hunters typically write the first comment explaining why a product is worth attention, and their followers are notified the moment they post. Around 79% of featured launches on Product Hunt are self-hunted by their makers, but a well-known hunter still acts as a signal of quality to the rest of the community. See the full all-time top hunters leaderboard to discover who is shaping the Product Hunt ecosystem.
For a complete overview of Screen startups by evidence including community comment highlights and product details, visit the product overview.
Vassiliy Lak
Hi Product Hunt — I'm Vassiliy, solo builder.
AI made starting a company cheap, and it shows in every investor's inbox: more decks, more polished narratives, more specific-sounding numbers. A faster summary of an unverifiable claim is still unverifiable. The question that eats a screener's time isn't "what does this startup do" — it's "what here can I actually check?"
Evidence Gate reads one application and returns a brief:
a proceed / hold / escalate verdict (readiness for review, never an investment view)
every material claim graded — supported in the pack, self-reported, or unverifiable as presented — with the exact artifact that would verify it
red flags visible in the pack: metric inconsistencies, arithmetic breaks, unnamed "major" partners
founder questions ready to paste into your reply
New today: the same gate works from the other side of the table. If you're a founder, run your own deck through it before you submit and see what an evidence-first screener sees — then attach the missing artifact, or reword the claim, before an analyst flags it for you.
What it isn't, on purpose: not a score of how good the startup is, not a factuality checker (it can't tell you a claim is true, only whether it's verifiable and how), not a replacement for judgment. Not investment, legal, or financial advice. Humans make the decisions.
Where it's at: a live demo with two illustrative sample applications and pre-generated agent runs. I'm looking for investors and founders to run a real batch and tell me where it's wrong.
Try it → https://vassiliylakhonin.github.io/evidence-gate.html
Investors: send a batch from your current pipeline. Founders: run your own pack before you submit. I read every reply.