Nine independent reviewers score your document without seeing each other's work. One reconciler resolves the disagreement into a verdict you can act on.
Each of the nine seats reviews the proposal in isolation. No seat sees another seat's notes or score before submitting its own.
The reconciler only resolves disagreement across the nine scores into the two composites. It does not introduce new judgments of its own.
Your document goes in. A two score verdict with ten dimensions comes out.
| Axis | Ask one model yourself | A single overall score | VerdictTank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Independence | ✗One perspective, one set of blind spots | ✗Cannot tell you where the score came from | ✓Nine seats score independently before reconciliation |
| What you learn | ✗A paragraph you have to interpret yourself | ✗A single number and nothing else | ✓Two composite scores plus ten dimension breakdowns |
| Where the risk hides | ✗Wherever that one model happened to look | ✗Averaged away, invisible | ✓Surfaced by dimension, not buried in an average |
| Revision loop | ✗One shot, no structure | ✗No audit trail to check | ✓Submit, score, revise, resubmit with a full audit trail |
Every submission, regardless of industry or stage, returns the same shape: two scores, ten dimensions, one verdict. The three examples below are illustrative samples, not real customer proposals.
A 74 and a 61 do not tell a founder anything by themselves. Legal and Regulatory Posture at 5 and Competitive Defensibility at 5 tell them exactly where to spend the next two weeks.
That is the difference between a score and a verdict: a verdict points somewhere.
Upload your proposal draft in its current state, gaps and all.
Nine reviewers score independently, then the reconciler issues a verdict.
Two scores, ten dimensions, and the specific gaps holding you back.
Close the flagged gaps and run it again to watch the scores move.
A separate tier for agencies and resellers running the panel under their own brand for their own clients, not a step up from Enterprise for a single team. Includes multi client workspaces and branded verdict reports.
Talk to usYour documents are processed by 9 independent review providers. We disclose the one exception plainly rather than making a blanket claim we cannot back up.
We say this plainly because a review product that hides how it handles your document has already failed the trust test before the first score comes back.
If you want a cheerleader, this is not it. VerdictTank is built for founders and teams who want the gaps in a proposal surfaced before an investor or partner finds them. If you are not planning to revise based on the verdict, a single opinion from a friend will feel better and cost you nothing, but it will not tell you what to fix.
The dimension breakdown exists so you can see exactly which score you disagree with and why. Revise the section that drove the low dimension score and resubmit. The loop is built for that back and forth, not for a single unappealable judgment.
Nine independent seats review your document in parallel, then the reconciler resolves them into one verdict. Most submissions return a complete verdict in minutes, not days.
Submit a draft and get a verdict back with the two scores and ten dimensions behind it.