Launched this week
Fundraisly: ultimate AI agent for fundraising. It analyzes 300K+ investors and millions of deals, identifies the relevant ones actively investing in your space, maps warm paths to them from your own network, then covers the rest with targeted cold outreach. The result: 20-40 qualified investor meetings. Built by founders who raised over $1B.
Payment Required
Launch Team / Built With
Really interesting - curious how you handle the warm path mapping when someone's network is mostly in a different industry. I'm coming from institutional finance/tax consulting, so my warm connections are mostly family offices and healthcare executives, not traditional tech VCs. Does the system weight domain-relevant investors even when they're not traditional tech VCs? Congrats on the launch
Fundraisly
@joe_rucker Really relevant question and actually a more common situation than most founders admit.
A few things work in your favor here. Family offices are a significant part of our investor database and many are actively deploying into tech, especially at early stage where ticket sizes align. So your existing warm connections to family offices aren't a liability, they may be direct paths to capital that's less competitive than traditional VC.
Healthcare executives as angels or check-writers is also a pattern we see a lot in healthtech, medtech, and enterprise SaaS with healthcare verticals.
The system doesn't penalize domain mismatch, it maps your warm paths as they are, then supplements with targeted cold outreach to traditional tech VCs where your network has gaps. So in practice you'd be running two tracks in parallel: leveraging your existing institutional finance connections where they're relevant, and building new warm paths into tech VC through the LinkedIn expansion layer.
Fundraisly
@joe_rucker Appreciate the support!
Fundraisly
@joe_rucker appreciate you taking the time to understand the nuance here - and thank you for the support.
Hey there
Are you in any way incentivized in a successful fundraising by your customers?
I mean, is your business model is “pay for our service” or rather “pay for your result”?
Fundraisly
@shishkinii Great question - and yes, we're deeply incentivized in every raise we work on.
Every campaign directly impacts our reputation, which means we only take on founders we genuinely believe in and go all-in when we do.
On the commercial side: right now our model is service-based (you pay for the platform and campaign execution). We're actively working toward a success fee structure, which is the natural evolution, but that requires us to obtain a brokerage license first. We're in that process.
Fundraisly
@shishkinii Ivan, good question :) Feels like we managed to get to the heart of it.
Spiritme
Do follow-ups go out automatically? That's where a lot of outreach starts feeling robotic.
Fundraisly
@nikita_bogdanov1 Yes, follow-ups are automated, but that's exactly where we put the most work in to make sure they don't feel that way.
The sequences are written per campaign, not pulled from a generic template. Timing, tone, and content are calibrated based on the investor's profile, thesis, and recent activity, so each touchpoint feels like a considered follow-up, not a drip sequence.
We also monitor replies in real time. The moment an investor responds, they're pulled out of the sequence and handed off for a human conversation. No one gets a follow-up after they've already replied.
The goal is that an investor reads it and thinks "this founder did their homework", not "this is a mass campaign."
Fundraisly
@nikita_bogdanov1 Nikita, curious how Anna’s answer landed for you?
Threedio
Skeptical about quality, ngl. Used a similar service last year, won't name names. They booked 12 meetings, but 8 were with associates at funds that did not invest at the stage or check size we needed. By the third call I was burning founder time just to hear "too early for us." How are you screening for stage fit beyond what a fund says on its website?
Fundraisly
@anna_titova That's exactly the stage-fit problem we try to avoid. We don't rely only on what a fund says on its website; we look at recent investments, check-size patterns, partner activity, and whether similar companies actually got funded. The outreach also includes your deck and context, so investors know why they're being asked to take the call.
Fundraisly
@anna_titova Ha, yes - exactly the pain. Curious what your honest read would be if you ever try Fundraisly.
The painful part is usually not just finding investors but knowing who is actually relevant right now. I like that this focuses on active investors instead of just another large database. How do you tell if a fund is currently investing in a specific space not just historically interested?
Fundraisly
@ada_johnsen We track activity signals, not just historical categorization. That includes: recent deal flow (what they've actually closed in the last 6–18 months), fund lifecycle stage (are they in active deployment or winding down?), partner-level activity (which specific partner is leading deals in your space right now), and public signals like LP updates, portfolio announcements, and conference participation.
The output isn't "this fund has fintech in their thesis", it's "this partner closed two B2B fintech deals in the last 8 months and is speaking at a fintech event next week." That's the difference between a cold list and a warm target.
Fundraisly
@ada_johnsen Anna took the smart part - I’ll take the easy one and say thank you for the interest 🙂
The carry-over data from Seed to Series A is useful. But does it capture why someone passed, or just that they did? Coming back to the same fund at a later stage is a different conversation depending on the reason. Congrats on the launch!
Fundraisly
@jared_salois We capture pass signals where they're available, sometimes that's explicit feedback from the conversation, sometimes it's inferred from the stage of diligence they reached before going quiet, sometimes it's patterns across multiple investors that point to a specific objection (valuation, market size, team gap).
Honest caveat: investors rarely give written rejection reasons, so we're often working with incomplete signal. But even partial context is valuable, knowing a fund passed at first meeting vs. after a partner call tells you something very different about where you stand with them at Series A.
The carry-over is most powerful when combined with what's changed since the Seed. If a fund passed on traction and you've since 3x'd revenue, that's a re-open conversation. If they passed on market size and your thesis hasn't changed, probably not worth the relationship capital.
Fundraisly
@jared_salois Appreciate the support!
Fundraisly
@jared_salois Jared, Anna covered this one well. From my side - thank you for the support
Good luck with the product ⭐️
Can I use Fundraisly only for the investor research part?
Fundraisly
@smetanka Yes, the lighter network analysis plan is built for that. It maps your existing connections to relevant investors and gives you a more focused funnel without running the full outreach campaign.
Fundraisly
@smetanka Research-only is supported. The lighter plan exists for exactly that: mapping the network and seeing where the funnel sits before deciding how aggressive to get.
Fundraisly
@smetanka Appreciate the support!
Fundraisly
@smetanka thanks for the support Alex!