Services

Service modules

Biotica runs AI-assisted, human-reviewed diligence and translates it into a citation-backed authority atlas with public and private layers. The same system supports fund-level thesis authority and deal-level underwriting communication.

Diligence Engine

AI-assisted and human-reviewed research across science, patents, trials, companies, and markets.

Produces decision-ready evidence that can be audited and reused.

Evidence Graph

A structured map of claims, sources, companies, mechanisms, risks, and investment implications.

Gives teams one searchable source of truth instead of fragmented notes.

Authority Interface

A branded research interface with public and private views tailored to each audience.

Makes diligence usable in real workflows: IC, LP updates, founder discussions, and syndication.

SEO and GEO Layer

Crawlable pages, structured data, internal links, citations, and AI-readable summaries.

Turns diligence output into discoverable authority that compounds over time.

What clients receive

A private memo may help one investment committee once. A Biotica Authority Atlas turns that work into a reusable evidence system: public pages for authority and discoverability, plus private layers for underwriting and decision support on individual deals.

Branded Authority Atlas with public and private views
Fund-thesis and/or deal-specific authority pages
Structured claim ledger with source citations
Risk matrix and key underwriting questions
Patent, trial, and competitor landscape summary
Investment implications summary for internal and external communication
Searchable source library
SEO/GEO-ready structured page architecture

Public and private layers

The same diligence system supports external authority and internal decision workflows.

Public layer

Category overview
Key facts
Market map
Company profiles
Technology explainers
Evidence summaries
Source-backed thesis pages

Private layer

Investment conclusion
Bull/base/bear case
Risk scoring
Target prioritization
Deal comparables
Decisive experiments
Proprietary reviewer notes

Pilot packages

Authority Sprint - $10,000-$20,000

Family offices, emerging funds, and syndicates validating one priority thesis in 4-6 weeks.

One scoped thesis with decision questions
Core evidence atlas
Public authority pages
Private investment summary

Single Deal Authority Pack - $12,000-$30,000

Funds and syndicates that need one live deal translated into a clear, citation-backed communication and diligence asset.

Deal-specific diligence synthesis
Claim and risk ledger for one opportunity
Private IC/co-investor decision layer
Public-facing authority view and GEO/SEO-ready architecture

Category Authority Atlas - $25,000-$50,000

Funds or family offices building durable category association and reusable diligence infrastructure.

Expanded diligence corpus
Company landscape
Patent/trial/paper mapping
Public and private interface
SEO/GEO authority architecture

Regional Innovation Atlas - $40,000-$100,000

SSBCI funds, state funds, and ecosystem organizations.

Regional company landscape
Technology maps
Sector thesis pages
Public ecosystem authority site
Stakeholder-ready reporting layer

Ongoing Monitoring - $3,000-$8,000/month

Clients who want continued category tracking.

Monthly updates
New papers/patents/trials
Company movements
Investment signal monitoring
Atlas updates

Measurement and governance

We treat discoverability and engagement as operating signals that inform content refinement and diligence reuse, not as substitutes for investment judgment.

Visibility metrics are directional and operational. They help teams see indexing and query trends; they do not prove fundraising or deal outcomes.

Sources (tiered)

These links are grouped by authority type. Together they support pieces of the thesis—that public, structured, credible information supports outsider learning and that screening and diligence are central in how capital providers allocate attention—without proving that a specific website causes financing or inbound term sheets.

Peer-reviewed finance (public information & investor-side learning)

Top-tier empirical finance on how disclosure and information access shape outsider learning—not startup “content marketing” outcomes.

Gao, Huang & Goldstein (2020), Review of Financial Studies — “Informing the Market: The Effect of Modern Information Technologies on Information Production” (DOI)Public dissemination of corporate disclosures and information production.
Kerr, Lerner & Schoar (2014), Review of Financial Studies — “The Consequences of Entrepreneurial Finance: Evidence from Angel Financings” (DOI)Rigorous evidence on angel financing and selection; context for early-stage financing institutions.
Gompers, Gornall, Kaplan & Strebulaev (2020), Journal of Financial Economics — “How Do Venture Capitalists Make Decisions?” (DOI)Large VC survey: screening/selection/monitoring practices.
Same study — Stanford GSB publication overview (non-PDF entry point)Publisher-adjacent summary page for the JFE article.

Theory & reviews (signals, asymmetric information)

Foundational and review work on why credible, verifiable information reduces evaluation friction.

Spence (1973), Quarterly Journal of Economics — “Job Market Signaling” (RePEc record)Canonical signaling under asymmetric information.
Connelly, Certo, Ireland & Reutzel (2011), Journal of Management — “Signaling Theory: A Review and Assessment” (DOI)Highly cited management review; maps to partner-facing diligence narratives.
Lambert, Leuz & Verrecchia, NBER Working Paper 14881 — “Information Asymmetry, Information Precision, and the Cost of Capital”Theory on disclosure, information precision, and capital-market pricing logic.

Venture capital process (foundations & diligence intensity)

Kaplan & Strömberg (2001), American Economic Review — “Venture Capitalists As Principals: Contracting, Screening, and Monitoring” (RePEc record)Classic framing of screening, contracting, monitoring.
NBER Working Paper 33987 — Fu & Taylor (2025), “Due Diligence and the Allocation of Venture Capital”Working paper; diligence intensity, uncertainty, and outcomes—cite version/date if quoting.

Industry survey (VC data & inbound in the sourcing stack)

Vendor-run survey (2018 fieldwork). Strong for directional “inbound + databases matter alongside networks,” not for causal inbound marketing claims.

PitchBook — PR Newswire summary of VC Data Usage Survey findings (Feb 14, 2019)n=391 global VC investors (winter 2018); includes inbound leads vs networks statistics.
PitchBook — accompanying blog / methodology entry (“VCs have traditionally relied on their personal networks…”)Linked from the release; use for methodology context.

B2B evaluation (partners & enterprise buying-group analogues)

Useful when the audience is BD / pharma / strategic partners evaluating asynchronously—not a substitute for VC-specific evidence.

Institutional (SME digitalization & finance — macro context)

OECD-level evidence on digitalization and financing conditions; not startup-level inbound dealflow.

Operational measurement (site discoverability)

Google — Search Console documentation (start here)Indexing and query trends for public pages; directional, not financing proof.

Start with one thesis.

Choose one scientific thesis, one live deal, or both. We will convert your diligence into a public/private authority atlas that supports decision-making now and discoverability over time.

Request a Pilot Atlas