1752vc Pitch Deck Analyzer
Know what investors will say before you ever hit send.
Start new thread

1752vc Pitch Deck Analyzer - Know what investors will say before you ever hit send.

by•
The Pitch Deck Analyzer gives you investor-grade feedback in minutes — trained on 25,000+ real decks and the investor decisions that followed. Upload yours and get slide-by-slide fundability feedback — stage-calibrated, checking narrative cohesion and cross-checking your claims for contradictions investors will catch. Know exactly where you lose conviction before you ever hit send. Built by 1752vc, a VC firm evaluating 4,000+ startups a year.

Add a comment

Replies

Best
Maker
📌

Hey Product Hunt 👋

We're 1752vc, a GTM-focused VC and Accelerator based in California that receives 4,000+ applications every year.

Something true about venture generally, not just us: most decks get passed on, and almost none of those founders are ever told why. That isn't investors being cruel. There's simply no version of the job where you write thousands of pieces of real feedback a year, so the honest reason stays in the room and the founder only gets a polite no.

So we built the thing we couldn't do by hand. Upload a deck and the Pitch Deck Analyzer reads it slide by slide the way an investor does, scored across 3,000+ investor attributes and trained on 25,000+ real decks and the decisions that followed them.

• It's calibrated on investor decisions, not design opinion. Of everything it has flagged so far, only 2% was cosmetic. And that is on purpose. Nobody has ever passed on a company because of a font.
• It tells you which slide, and which problems are load-bearing. The average deck comes back with a dozen flags, and they are not equal. You get them separated by severity and tied to the slide that caused them, so you're not polishing the cover slides while the financials sink you.
• It doesn't end at a grade. We're a fund, not a tool company. Knowing what's wrong only matters if you fix it and go back out, and for the decks that clear the bar, that road leads to investments from us.

2,000 founders have run their decks through the analyzer during alpha - before we'd announced anything! One thing that became clear in the results: what quietly costs founders the meeting usually isn't design, or market size, or even traction. It's the deck arguing against itself. A claim in one slide that doesn't survive the next, and almost nobody catches that in their own material.

Everyone here gets a 5 free deck reviews using the promo code above, no credit card needed. Try it and let us know what it caught that you didn't expect. Especially if you've raised before: does the feedback track with what investors actually told you? Those are the only tests that matter.

We're here all day.

 the market size slide. everyone puts a TAM/SAM/SOM breakdown but investors can tell in seconds if you actually understand your market or just pulled numbers from a report. that's the one i'd want the most honest feedback on.

Maker

  I love the market size slide because you're absolutely right - most founders get this horribly wrong, copying and pasting from a report they saw (and don't even source it). The analyzer specifically flags when your market sizing logic has no connective tissue: when the numbers are there but the path from TAM to your actual addressable doesn't exist. That's the kind of information that actually moves the needle when fundraising.

Maker

   The market-size slide is such a sharp call-out, Riya - it's one of the fastest credibility tells there is. Investors can spot copy-pasted TAM numbers in seconds, and the analyzer flags exactly that: when the numbers are there but the path from TAM down to your real addressable market has no connective tissue. Thanks for weighing in!

 This sounds like a really useful tool for founders. Getting honest feedback on a pitch deck before sending it to investors can save so much time and uncertainty.

I especially like the idea of understanding what investors are actually thinking as they go through each slide. Looking forward to seeing the full launch🎉

Maker

  Thank you! That's exactly the gap we're closing - founders shouldn't have to guess what investors are thinking. Building a scalable startup is hard; this is something we can "control" and solve for. You'll notice the slide-by-slide feedback is not generic - it will sometimes force you to revisit strategy.

Maker

   Thank you, Gabriella! 🙏 Taking the guesswork out of what investors are thinking on each slide is exactly the gap we're closing...founders shouldn't have to guess. Really appreciate the support ahead of launch.

 One thing I've learned as a founder is that a pitch deck isn't just about telling your story - it's about answering the questions investors are already thinking.

The biggest challenge for me has been finding the right balance between vision and evidence. You know your product inside out, but it's hard to judge whether your deck clearly communicates market opportunity, differentiation, traction etc.

Maker

   You've put your finger on exactly what the analyzer scores for. Vision without evidence reads as hand-waving; evidence without vision reads as a small idea. It flags the slides where you're asking investors to take a leap with no proof point underneath — and the ones where a strong signal is buried under too much narrative. That balance is where conviction is won or lost.

Maker

   "A deck isn't just your story... it's answering the questions investors are already thinking." You put it perfectly, Anurag. That balance between vision and evidence is exactly what the analyzer scores for: it flags where you're asking for a leap with no proof underneath, and where a strong signal is buried under too much narrative. Thanks for the thoughtful note!

   i get that balance wrong every time. i keep cutting the vision slide down because it feels unserious sitting next to the numbers, and then the whole deck reads like a status report and nobody remembers it an hour later. lately i write the ask slide first and build backwards from there, which at least stops me over trimming.

 really useful idea, honest investor style feedback can make a huge difference for founders. Congrats on the launch!

Maker

 Thank you! Are you raising right now or past it? The feedback lands differently depending on where you are.

 I really appreciate the clean layout of the UI. It;s nice feeling the analyzer is not just llm logic but verified investor data. expert knowledge nor just scrapping 100 how to sides.

would you be able to share some analytics with us?

  • whats the spread of ranking A-F of the decks it has analyzed so far, maybe by stage?

  • Do the Series B-D decks get better in comparison to pre-seed, seed decks often created by less experienced founders?

  • whats the post common mistake people make?

  • whats the average ask size for pre-seed,seed and Series A. most of us cannot afford a pitch book subscriptions.

    thank you kindly for sharing his amazing tool with us!

Cool idea! Will def use it for our next round!

Maker

 Love it! We’re also quietly building a full fundraising module that should make your next raise a lot smoother — stay tuned, I think you’ll find it seriously useful.

   cant wait for that part. bora :)

Maker

   the wait will be worth it.

Maker

 Thanks, Liam! Perfect timing — we've quietly got a fuller fundraising module in the works too, so the next round should feel a lot smoother. Good luck with it!

Following. It's not one slide for me, it's the whole thing. The hard part is fitting what my app actually is, how it works, and what makes it different from competitors into a deck without drowning people in slides or packing every slide too full. I could stand on a soapbox and rattle off every feature and why each one sets us apart, but that's not how this game is played. And I have to get all of it across without giving away the secret sauce. Keeping it tight, keeping their attention, and still landing the difference is the piece I struggle with most. Does the analyzer flag when a deck is overloaded, or when it's holding back too much to tell the story?

Maker

 Totally get this - and this is exactly what we are building for. The analyzer flags both directions: it calls out slides that are overloaded (too many features/metrics competing for attention) and ones that are holding back so much the story doesn’t land. At pre-seed especially, it’s tuned to protect your through-line—problem, why-you, one proof point—so you can keep the secret sauce and still make the difference obvious. Try it out and tell us what worked and what didn’t—that kind of feedback is gold for us right now.

Maker

 The overloaded-vs-holding-back tension is so real... keeping the secret sauce while still landing the difference is genuinely hard. Short answer: yes, it flags both directions. Thanks for the great question, and would love your read once you run a deck through it!

I tried uploading our pitch deck, and the analysis turned out pretty good. For the most part, the analysis highlighted what information was missing, and it’s interesting that the recommendations even took into account that we might simply not have that information at this stage.

One interesting recommendation I received was regarding how we were phrasing the problem, even though I hadn’t initially considered that the phrasing might be misunderstood.

Maker

 glad it landed that way — stage-awareness was a hard thing to get right. Missing info at pre-seed isn't the same as a gap at Series A, and the analyzer is tuned to weigh it accordingly. The problem-framing flag is one of my favorites: how you phrase the problem quietly sets up everything after it, and it's the easiest thing to get subtly wrong. Thanks for putting it through a real deck.

Maker

 Thanks for putting a real deck through it, Maksim. The stage-aware feedback and the problem-framing flag are the parts we sweated most, so it's great to hear they landed. How you phrase the problem quietly sets up everything after it, and it's the easiest thing to get subtly wrong.

This is especially timely for us as we’re currently fundraising. One thing I’d love the analyzer to assess is whether the raise amount, use of funds, runway, and promised milestones actually form a credible path to the next round. Investors don’t evaluate those points in isolation and they want to see whether the hiring plan, GTM strategy, projections, and funding ask all connect. Does the analyzer stress-test that overall financing logic as well? Looking forward to trying it! 🚀

Maker

 Great! Investors don't read the ask in isolation; they're testing whether raise amount, runway, milestones, and hiring/GTM plan all connect into a credible path to the next round. The analyzer flags when those pieces don't add up to a fundable story — e.g. a raise that doesn't buy enough runway to hit the milestones you're promising. Would love your read on it once you try it.

Maker

 Good luck with the raise! 🚀 Whether the ask, runway, milestones, and GTM plan connect into a credible path to the next round is exactly the financing logic the analyzer stress-tests... it flags when the pieces don't add up to a fundable story. Hope it's useful when you run your deck through.

Love tools supported by actual data and not the AI fad. We'll test it out as soon as we get the deck ready 😂

Maker

 That's the whole thesis — it's trained on 25,000+ real decks and the investor decisions that followed, not vibes. Send it through the moment your deck's ready; the messier-but-honest draft is actually the most useful version to run it on. Excited to hear what it catches.

Maker

 "Data, not the AI fad" — that's the thesis in one line, Ivan. Trained on 25,000+ real decks and the investor decisions that followed. Send yours through the moment it's ready; the messier-but-honest draft is actually the most useful version to run it on. Excited to hear what it catches!

I would love to see this open-sourced, or an ability to push this through MCP, so we can run our own agents with the rules and iterate on ideas, instead of just getting a check-up. Great idea, best of luck with your launch!

Maker

 No open source or MCP endpoint today. Curious what you'd actually run against it, your own rules on top of ours or ours inside your agent loop? Either way it's in our roadmap, just not immediate.

   I could see mcp be useful. ir could ask for more details compared to the static/NON-interactive version of the pitch analzyer. having the scoring model be available through mcp could mean you get to really drill down into specifics rather than a pdf export you might hand to somebody and they cannot ask anybody follow up questions.

example in one run it flagged we had different(!) market share percentages in som/sam/tom. it flagged it but since I could not explain the reason (local market slice at start vs later nationwide close with some brand recognition maybe) I felt id wanted to ask if that would move the needle. mcp would offer this maybe!

   Taissa, yes, running the check with our own context and agent reasoning, automatically correcting and creating multiple options on how we can better communicate ideas behind the presentation. I love this about claude / codex design skills. They are able to give you multiple plausible options to check against. Sometimes you get pick one, sometimes you join multiple into a single picture. But the interactivity is incredibly helpful in a feedback loop.

Maker

 Much appreciated! MCP will most likely be in our near future so appreciate re-enforcement of the product roadmap!

 Looking forward to it! Many thanks Lucas

This seems really useful. If I were to raise funds again for my next venture, I'd definitely give this a shot.

Maker

 Appreciate that! When you're back in the raise, that's exactly the moment we built it for — feedback before the deck ever reaches an investor's inbox, so the first read they give you is your best one. Follow the page and you'll catch us at launch.

Maker

 Appreciate it, Conder! Whenever you're back in raise mode, that's exactly the moment we built this for. Follow the page and we'll catch you at launch. 🙌

the community behind 1752 and this product is very helpful and engaged. this analyzer helped find some blindspots in my deck already!

Maker

 Awesome! Glad you're using it!

 just need more credits now, I already ran out ;)

Congratulations on the launch! This is very needed for all startup founders!

Maker

 Thank you! And that's exactly the gap we were trying to close. Founders no longer need to guess why they got passed on. Run one through and tell me if it finds something you didn't expect.

Maker

 Thanks Richard! Always want to try and help the ecosystem in anyway we can!

123
Next