Structured finance first. The same method helps you evaluate spend, vendors, and policy decisions with confidence.
A surprising amount of the evidence is already public.
You don't have to start from scratch. We start with what's already knowable: public filings, regulatory records, and market data. This bond is the first proof case.
Your data makes it specific. The method makes it repeatable.
Then we layer in your internal context: contracts, positions, policies, and invoices. You're left with an answer you can explain and repeat.
The bond is the first proof case. The same work holds for a vendor increase, a contract, or a policy.
Procurement
Compare the contract, market prices, past pricing, public alternatives, and your own purchase data. Then show what the vendor uniquely provides and what you could replace.
Keep it. Renegotiate it. Knock it out.
How we work
Bring the question that matters. See what the evidence really supports. Turn it into a repeatable workflow. Own the process long after we're gone.
01 / Command
Pick the number someone has to defend: a holding, a filing change, a vendor increase, a policy fail.
02 / Reveal
Bring the sources together and make clear what is known and what is still missing.
03 / Run
Turn the evidence into a report, monitor, review flow, or other working process.
04 / Keep
The data work, rules, workflow, and documentation stay with your team.
Yes. We do too. The problem is knowing what to trust when a model sounds confident.
We connect the model to the right evidence, checks, and workflow so your team can use it in a real decision and run the same process again.
Two examples built on real data, with the sources visible.
Source check
Loom uses public data to respond to questions. Each response shows the source, what changed, and the date the data was true. Ask for evidence and you can open the full source trail.
Procurement signal
An agent built this signal from public data in days. It combines energy prices, producer prices, and industry use to show when an increase may hold. A team's contract data makes it more precise.
We have been using the words “quick win” a lot recently but I think what we just witnessed here redefines what a quick win is.
We agree on the decision, show you work you can inspect, and continue only if it is useful.
Tell us what needs to be decided, when, and what information is available.
By the end of day two, you will have real work to review.
Continue only if there is a useful next step.
