The Corvesco Method
Core Principles

Three core convictions underpin every Corvesco allocation. Below them, eight proprietary scoring agents evaluate every opportunity with precision and discipline.

01 — Conviction
High-Conviction Positioning

We concentrate capital into a small number of deeply researched positions. Diversification dilutes returns — conviction compounds them. Every allocation requires a thesis, a catalyst, and a clearly defined asymmetric edge.

02 — Asymmetry
Asymmetric Risk Management

We pursue positions where the upside materially outweighs the downside. Protecting capital in adverse conditions is not a constraint on returns — it is the foundation that makes exponential compounding possible.

03 — Compounding
Exponential Compounding

Time and rate of return are the only inputs that matter at scale. We optimize for sustained high-rate compounding over market cycles — resisting short-term noise in pursuit of generational wealth creation.

The Framework
The Scoring Core Principles
Founder Score
Weight: 20%
0–10

The highest-weighted agent. Founder quality is the single most predictive factor in exponential value creation. We invest in the person as much as the company.

Key Criteria
Vision & Category Thinking — sees markets others don’t, 10-year thesis with clarity
Track Record — prior exits, pattern of shipping and scaling
Equity Ownership — >10% stake signals commitment
Talent Magnetism — attracts world-class operators and engineers
1–3 · Weak
First-time, limited equity, unclear vision
4–7 · Capable
Solid operator, meaningful stake
8–10 · Elite
Serial builder, >15%, missionary conviction
Growth Score
Weight: 20%
0–10

We evaluate quality and sustainability of growth, not raw velocity. Growth that improves unit economics is a flywheel. Growth bought with CAC spend is a treadmill.

Key Criteria
Revenue Growth Rate — target >40% YoY; acceleration is strongly positive
Net Revenue Retention — NRR >120% signals expansion from existing customers
Organic vs Paid Ratio — virality and word-of-mouth score far higher than paid
Gross Margin Trajectory — expanding margins signal improving unit economics
1–3 · Slow
<20% YoY, declining NRR, heavy paid
4–7 · Solid
20–60% YoY, NRR 100–120%
8–10 · Exceptional
>60% organic, NRR >130%, accelerating
Scalability Score
Weight: 15%
0–10

Does the model become more profitable as it grows? The ideal investment reaches near-zero marginal cost — revenue scaling independently of headcount or operational complexity.

Key Criteria
Marginal Cost Architecture — does serving customer #10,000 cost the same as #1?
Revenue Per Employee — rising ratio signals true operational leverage
Network Contribution — each new user makes the product more valuable for all
1–3 · Linear
Headcount scales with revenue
4–7 · Leveraged
SaaS-like margins, some leverage
8–10 · Infinite
Near-zero marginal cost, >70% margins
Rerating Score
Weight: 15%
0–10

Multiple expansion from “unknown” to “recognized” can deliver 3–5x returns independent of revenue growth. We seek businesses on the cusp of institutional discovery.

Key Criteria
Valuation vs Peers — meaningful discount to comparable category leaders
Institutional Ownership — low current ownership with rising interest signals discovery
Catalyst Timeline — index inclusion, analyst initiation, large contract wins
1–3 · Priced
At or above peer multiples
4–7 · Moderate
Slight discount, 1–2 catalysts
8–10 · Significant
Deeply discounted, multiple catalysts
Disruption Score
Weight: 10%
0–10

True disruption redefines market boundaries. We seek businesses attacking large, structurally vulnerable incumbent markets with a technology wedge incumbents cannot replicate.

Key Criteria
TAM Magnitude — target markets >$50B with expansion potential
Incumbent Vulnerability — legacy tech debt, complacency, structural inability to respond
Adoption Curve Timing — 1–5% penetration phases offer the longest runway
1–3 · Incremental
Marginal improvement, mature market
4–7 · Disruptive
Clear vulnerability, large TAM
8–10 · Defining
Redefines boundaries, early adoption
Moat Defensibility
Weight: 10%
0–10

Growth without a moat is temporary. We prize structural barriers that widen automatically as the business scales, making competition increasingly irrational over time.

Key Criteria
Switching Costs — cost of leaving must be prohibitive for customers
Network Effects — each new user increases value for all existing users
Data Moat — proprietary datasets impossible to replicate without years of operation
1–3 · Narrow
Commodity, no switching costs
4–7 · Moderate
One or two moat sources
8–10 · Wide
Multiple sources, moat compounds
Risk Penalty
Applied Last
0–30%

The only agent that reduces the composite. Applied as a percentage deduction to the weighted total. Asymmetry only works when the downside is bounded and understood.

Risk Categories
Balance Sheet Fragility — runway <18 months, high burn, dilutive raises
Customer Concentration — >20% single customer creates binary risk
Regulatory & Key Person — adverse legal exposure or single-founder dependency
0–5% · Low
Clean balance sheet, diversified
6–15% · Moderate
One or two manageable risks
16–30% · High
Multiple active risks, pressure
VC Rating
Weight: 10%
0–10

Elite VC firms conduct deep diligence before committing. Tier-1 backing independently corroborates our analysis and signals the business has survived rigorous institutional scrutiny.

Key Criteria
Investor Tier — Sequoia, a16z, Benchmark, Accel, General Catalyst score highest
Valuation Discipline — entry at reasonable multiple vs fundamentals
Insider Activity — insiders buying at current prices is a strong positive signal
1–3 · None
No institutional backing
4–7 · Validated
Tier-2/3 institutional backers
8–10 · Elite
Tier-1 lead, strong board