Calculate financing exit waterfall

Calculate a financing exit waterfall across coherent outcomes with debt and transaction costs, preferred seniority, equal-rank pro-rata shortfall, liquidation preferences, participating residual, iterative participation caps and endogenous class-by-class conversion; require a pure no-profitable-deviation conversion equilibrium, exact payout reconciliation and verified security/scenario evidence before reporting stakeholder payout, MOIC, annualized return and downside.

What it's for

Lets a CEO, founder or investor see who receives what at low, medium and high exits after seniority, participation caps and rational conversion—not just nominal ownership percentages.

What you give it

Inputs split into evidence read from your connected systems, calibration your team owns, and numerical controls that affect precision but never the result's meaning.

Field Type Role Required
conversion_tolerance number ≥ 0, ≤ 0.01 Your calibration Optional
holding_period_years number > 0, ≤ 100 Your calibration Yes
max_detail_rows integer ≥ 1, ≤ 500 Numerical control Optional
maximum_reconciliation_error number ≥ 0 Your calibration Optional
maximum_unverified_probability_mass number ≥ 0, ≤ 1 Your calibration Optional
scenarios array of objects (6 fields) ≥ 2 items Evidence Yes
security_classes array of objects (10 fields) ≥ 2 items Evidence Yes
tail_probability number > 0, ≤ 0.5 Your calibration Optional

Each security_classes record

Field Type Required
as_converted_shares number (> 0) Yes
evidence_verified boolean Yes
id string (non-empty) Yes
invested_capital number (≥ 0) Yes
liquidation_preference_multiple number (≥ 0) Yes
participating boolean Yes
participation_cap_multiple number (≥ 0) Yes
security_type one of "common", "preferred" Yes
seniority_rank integer (≥ 1, ≤ 1000) Yes
stakeholder_group string (non-empty) Yes
Example input
{
  "holding_period_years": 5,
  "scenarios": [
    {
      "debt_and_senior_claims": 0,
      "evidence_verified": true,
      "gross_exit_value": 80,
      "id": "downside",
      "probability": 0.4,
      "transaction_costs": 0
    },
    {
      "debt_and_senior_claims": 0,
      "evidence_verified": true,
      "gross_exit_value": 1000,
      "id": "upside",
      "probability": 0.6,
      "transaction_costs": 0
    }
  ],
  "security_classes": [
    {
      "as_converted_shares": 100,
      "evidence_verified": true,
      "id": "founder-common",
      "invested_capital": 0,
      "liquidation_preference_multiple": 0,
      "participating": false,
      "participation_cap_multiple": 0,
      "security_type": "common",
      "seniority_rank": 100,
      "stakeholder_group": "founders"
    },
    {
      "as_converted_shares": 25,
      "evidence_verified": true,
      "id": "series-a-preferred",
      "invested_capital": 100,
      "liquidation_preference_multiple": 1,
      "participating": false,
      "participation_cap_multiple": 0,
      "security_type": "preferred",
      "seniority_rank": 1,
      "stakeholder_group": "series-a-investors"

Truncated for display — the full payload is 48 lines.

What you get back

This is the actual output of running the example above — computed by the same function the platform calls, not an illustration.

Example output
{
  "configuration": {
    "conversion_tolerance": 0,
    "holding_period_years": 5,
    "maximum_reconciliation_error": 0.01,
    "maximum_unverified_probability_mass": 0,
    "tail_probability": 0.4
  },
  "decision": "financing_exit_waterfall_supported",
  "expected_payout_by_stakeholder_group": {
    "founders": 480,
    "series-a-investors": 152
  },
  "failed_gates": [],
  "guardrails": [
    "The solver pays non-converted preferences in seniority order, shares equal-rank shortfalls pro rata, distributes residual by as-converted shares, iteratively enforces participation caps, and accepts only conversion choices with no profitable unilateral class deviation.",
    "All scenarios must share one cap table, security-rights version, exit-value perimeter and debt/cost basis. The output is scenario economics, not legal, tax, securities, valuation, fiduciary or investment advice.",
    "Stakeholder-group payouts are aggregate contractual outcomes. They must not be used to evaluate employee performance, infer intent, or assign personal credit for company value."
  ],
  "method": "seniority_participation_cap_and_endogenous_conversion_waterfall",
  "scenario_diagnostics": [
    {
      "converted_security_class_ids": [
        "series-a-preferred"
      ],
      "distributable_equity_value": 1000,
      "maximum_unilateral_conversion_regret": 0,
      "payout_reconciliation_error": 0,
      "probability": 0.6,
      "pure_conversion_equilibrium": true,
      "scenario_id": "upside"
    },
    {
      "converted_security_class_ids": [],
      "distributable_equity_value": 80,
      "maximum_unilateral_conversion_regret": 0,
      "payout_reconciliation_error": 0,
      "probability": 0.4,
      "pure_conversion_equilibrium": true,
      "scenario_id": "downside"
    }
  ],
  "security_class_diagnostics": [
    {

Truncated for display — the full payload is 81 lines.

How it works

Statistical audit & measurement — Check whether a number is fit to decide on: coverage, timing, reconciliation, and the gaps a dashboard hides.

  1. 1 Freeze a counsel-approved security-rights version and coherent exit scenarios, subtract debt/senior claims and transaction costs once, and enumerate every preferred-class conversion combination within the bounded class count.
  2. 2 For each combination, pay non-converted preferences by seniority, allocate equal-rank shortfalls pro rata, distribute residual by as-converted shares and iteratively redistribute amounts above participating caps.
  3. 3 Accept a conversion profile only when no preferred class improves by unilaterally toggling conversion; then reconcile total payouts and aggregate expected/lower-tail payouts, conversion, MOIC, annualized return and capital-loss probability by class and stakeholder group.

Before you trust it

Every tool in the catalog ships with the conditions under which its answer is meaningful — and the conditions under which it should abstain instead of guessing.

Assumptions & guardrails

  • Metric definitions, weights, aggregate grain, sampling, missingness, dependence, and comparison windows correspond to the management claim being audited.
  • Security seniority, preference, participation, caps, as-converted shares and conversion rights are legally effective at the scenario date; all scenarios use one cap table, currency, exit-value perimeter, debt definition and cost basis.
  • Association, instability, or measurement quality is not a causal effect and must not be converted directly into an individual employment decision.
  • The result is contractual scenario economics—not legal, tax, securities, fiduciary, valuation or investment advice. Stakeholder-group payouts must never become employee performance scores or personal value attribution.

Minimum evidence

  • security_classes: at least 2 rows/items
  • scenarios: at least 2 rows/items
  • holding_period_years: required and organization-defined

How to validate it

Validate on future periods or held-out aggregate units, compare with a simple baseline, and require stability across plausible metric definitions and decision thresholds.

Calibrating it to your org

Same for everyone

The mathematical kernel, validation rules, method version, and JSON output semantics are organization-independent; no tenant-trained coefficients or company benchmark is embedded in the function.

Specific to you

  • version-matched legal security-rights snapshot joined to finance-approved coherent enterprise-to-equity exit scenarios without collapsing preferred classes into nominal fully diluted ownership
  • security rights and conversion availability, seniority and equal-rank semantics, participation/caps, share and invested-capital basis, exit/debt/cost/currency/tax perimeter, probabilities, holding period, evidence, tail and reconciliation appetite

Calibration workflow

  1. 1 Define the management decision, target outcome, aggregate unit, privacy boundary, cadence, and prediction/intervention horizon for this organization.
  2. 2 Build a tenant-scoped historical cohort using only information available before each prediction or decision; preserve zero periods, censoring, assignment probabilities, and unresolved outcomes when the method requires them.
  3. 3 Estimate statistical parameters on training history, but obtain costs, utilities, risk tolerance, practical-effect thresholds, capacity, and policy constraints from accountable decision owners.
  4. 4 Validate on later time windows or held-out aggregate units at the deployment grain, against a simple baseline and the function-specific validation strategy.
  5. 5 Deploy only if the returned decision clears evidence, overlap, calibration, robustness, and guardrail checks; warning, unsupported, schema-gap, and fallback decisions are abstentions.
  6. 6 Monitor realized outcomes, data drift, coverage, and decision regret; recalibrate at a governed cadence or after a detected regime/definition change, never merely because a stakeholder dislikes the result.

Call it from your AI

You don't wire up 388 tools in your MCP client. The GitRevio MCP server exposes 18 tools, three of which let an agent search the catalog, read a tool's schema, and run it — so the assistant finds this one on its own.

gitrevio_capabilities_search
  { "q": "calculate a financing exit waterfall across" }
  → finds "calculate_financing_exit_waterfall"

gitrevio_capability_describe
  { "capability_id": "calculate_financing_exit_waterfall" }
  → returns the input schema and agent guidance shown on this page

gitrevio_capability_run
  { "capability_id": "calculate_financing_exit_waterfall", "arguments": { ... } }
  → returns the result shown above

Works in Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor, Cline, Continue.dev, Goose and Aider. See the MCP server.

Related tools

Audit financing term sheet integrity

Audit startup financing terms as exact share, price, proceeds and ownership identities: include pre-money option-pool increases and converting instruments in the pricing denominator, keep secondary purchases out of company cash and post-money share creation, reconcile primary issuance, post-money equity value and reported investor ownership, and retain evidence failures and impossible fees or secondary sales.

Statistical audit & measurement

Optimize financing terms nash bargaining

Select financing terms through exact risk-adjusted Pareto and weighted Nash bargaining: evaluate full-cost founder and new-investor payoffs on identical exit scenarios, convert lower-tail payout into transparent certainty adjustments, enforce company cash, founder control, investor return, downside, evidence and individual-rationality constraints, remove dominated terms and maximize the weighted log product of surplus above governed disagreement values.

Constrained optimization

Allocate budget with CVAR constraint

Maximize expected portfolio return while keeping probability-weighted loss CVaR below a finance-owned tail-risk ceiling across aligned joint scenarios.

Constrained optimization

Audit budget constraint binding

Audit whether a claimed budget constraint genuinely blocks value after dependency-feasible portfolio reallocation, separating current-plan inefficiency from scarcity with scenario CVaR and a discrete budget shadow price.

Constrained optimization

Audit fundraising pipeline integrity

Audit a fundraising pipeline as point-in-time evidence rather than CRM theater: reconstruct monotone stage events, terminal status and primary proceeds, retain open opportunities as censored, reject forecasts made after resolution, detect duplicate active investor accounts, and gate the portfolio on mature-forecast support, Brier loss and calibration gap.

Forecasting & survival

Audit technology diligence evidence integrity

Audit a frozen technology diligence case against buyer-declared system/domain/claim scope, management assertions and fresh, rights-cleared, independently reviewed point-in-time evidence.

Statistical audit & measurement

See every tool in Investment & portfolio choice →

Ready to See Your Engineering work clearly?

Request a free demo