Investment decision criteria: a scoring checklist

What belongs in an investment decision criteria checklist?

A checklist holds one question per criterion, and each question has a rating from 1 to 10. Seven criteria cover most files: team, market, unit economics, financial leeway, governance, exit route, and fit with the investor mandate. Each criterion is a question that a named person can answer with evidence, for example how many months of cash the target holds, or how the board reaches decisions.

Seven is a practical size. Fewer criteria leave a gap that surprises the committee later, and more criteria dilute the weights until each one barely moves the total. The checklist is written before the pitch deck is opened. That order keeps the criteria tied to the mandate of the investor and gives each file the same test.

How should an investment decision checklist weight its criteria?

Weights tell the checklist what matters most for this mandate, and they sum to 100. A growth investor may give the team 25 and unit economics 20, while an income investor may give financial leeway 25. Each committee member distributes the 100 points alone, and the average becomes the fixed weight set for every file in the batch.

Fixed weights make files comparable. When the weights change from one file to the next, the totals measure the mood of the meeting and lose their link to the quality of the file. Review the weights once a quarter, record the date of each change, and apply the new set to files opened after that date.

Which evidence backs each criterion in an investment decision?

Every rating carries one sentence of evidence and a source. A rating of 7 on market carries a sentence such as: the 3 largest customers hold 2-year contracts, seen in the data room on 14 October. The named source lets a colleague check the number in minutes and shows the committee which ratings rest on documents and which rest on opinion.

Mark each rating as documented, reported, or assumed. Documented ratings come from contracts, accounts, or registries. Reported ratings come from management statements. Assumed ratings come from the reviewer. A checklist where most ratings are assumed tells the committee to collect more facts before the vote, which is a useful result in itself.

When should a single criterion stop an investment decision?

A gate rule lets one criterion stop the file whatever the total says. A common rule reads: any rating of 4 or lower triggers a review, and a rating of 2 or lower on governance pauses the file until the owner answers in writing. Gates protect the committee from a high total built on one strong criterion that hides a weak one.

Write gates before scoring, and keep them few. Three gates are easy to remember and easy to audit. Each gate names a trigger, an owner, and a next step, such as a request for a second source or a reduced ticket. A gate that fires opens a conversation with the seller and records the answer for the file.

What does a scored investment decision checklist look like in practice?

Take an illustrative target with the 7 criteria and the weights team 20, market 15, unit economics 20, financial leeway 15, governance 10, exit route 10, and mandate fit 10. The ratings are 8, 7, 6, 5, 7, 6, and 9. The weighted points are 160, 105, 120, 75, 70, 60, and 90.

The points add up to 680, so the total is 6.80 out of 10. Financial leeway at 5 is the lowest rating, and no rating falls to 4, so no gate fires. The target lands below a hurdle of 7.00 set in advance. The committee therefore asks for 2 facts on cash and debt before the next meeting. All figures here are illustrative.

Where should the hurdle score sit for an investment decision?

The hurdle is the total a file must reach to move forward, and the committee sets it before the first file arrives. A hurdle of 7.00 on a 10-point scale asks for strong ratings across most criteria. A lower hurdle suits an early look at many files, and a higher hurdle suits the final vote on a large ticket.

Use two lines. A screen line, say 6.00, decides which files receive a deeper review, and a vote line, say 7.00, decides which files reach a decision. Files between the lines return with a list of open facts. This two-line setup keeps the committee focused on the few files that deserve the most time.

How does a decision engine extend an investment decision checklist?

A checklist captures the judgment of the committee. The EQOS Asia decision engine adds a second reading: it measures a situation on 9 structural dimensions, coherence, integrity, resonance, care, trust, transparency, clarity, stability, and energy, and returns a φ(S) score between 0 and 1 (EQOS Asia method page, as of October 2026). A score above 0.618 falls in the OK zone.

The two readings complement each other. The checklist ranks files on investor criteria, and the engine tests the structure behind the target and names its 3 priority risks. The Λ simulator offers a first try on a real file, and the Decision tier at US$910 models the investment from your documents in 48 to 72 hours (EQOS Asia pricing page, as of October 2026).

Frequently asked questions

About the author

Stéphane Jambu

President, EQOS Forecast Asia

Stéphane Jambu leads EQOS Forecast Asia and works as a consultant in e-commerce, search visibility, and AI. LinkedIn profile