Startup Viability Index – Quantitative Approach to Evaluate Startup Ideas(I will not promote)

Hey all, I created an objective way to evaluate startup ideas. It's called the **Startup Viability Index (SVI)** \- a quantitative framework to help founders and investors quantify startup potential. It's a framework/tool I made for myself and then realized it might be useful for others. **TL;DR: I made a free calculator to quantify startup potential:** **Link Redacted.** Full methodology here if you're curious: Link Redacted. # The Problem As founders, we evaluate ideas qualitatively based on assumptions in our heads. This makes objective comparison nearly impossible, especially when: * We naturally get attached to our ideas * Each opportunity has different strengths and weaknesses * Our gut feelings often lead us astray # Introducing SVI: A Mathematical Approach I developed the Startup Viability Index to quantify startup potential on a scale from 0 to 1, balancing market opportunities against execution challenges. **SVI(M,B,D,I,C,R) = 1 / (1 + e\^(-k))** Where k = (S - 0.75) / 0.8125 and S = M + (B × D) + 2I - C - R The six key components: * **M = Market Size** \- How large is your addressable market? * 0.0-0.2: Tiny market (<$10M) * 0.2-0.4: Small market ($10M-$100M) * 0.4-0.6: Medium market ($100M-$1B) * 0.6-0.8: Large market ($1B-$10B) * 0.8-1.0: Massive market (>$10B) * **B = Barrier to Entry** \- How difficult is it for competitors to enter? * Ranges from basic websites (0.0-0.2) to deep tech with heavy regulation (0.8-1.0) * **D = Defensibility Multiplier** \- Can you sustain your advantage? * This interacts with barriers to entry in the formula * **I = Insight Factor** \- What unique insight do you have about the market? * This is weighted 2x in the formula because founder insight is often the most critical factor * **C = Complexity** \- How difficult is your solution to build and maintain? * Higher complexity scores reduce overall viability * **R = Risk Factor** \- What external/regulatory/market risks exist? * Higher risk scores reduce overall viability # The Origin Story I created this after realizing my team had spent years on a product where the technical complexity far outweighed its maximum revenue potential. When pivoting, I wanted to avoid making the same mistake. The formula started as a simple "Effort-to-Market Function" (complexity vs. market size), but evolved as I realized venture-scale startups need more factors: barriers to entry, defensibility, founder insight, and risk assessment. # What Your Score Means * **0.8-1.0**: Exceptional viability (Early Stripe, SpaceX) * **0.6-0.8**: Strong viability (Early Airbnb, Uber) * **0.4-0.6**: Moderate viability (Typical B2B SaaS) * **0.2-0.4**: Challenging viability (Most failed startups) * **0.0-0.2**: Minimal viability (Structurally flawed ventures) # An Invitation for Discussion I'd love to hear from other founders and investors: * What factors do you think are missing from this framework? * Any improvement we can do to the tool? * Maybe allow changing weights for each factor? This isn't meant to replace intuition - just to complement it with a more structured approach.