SEQUENCE // BENCHMARK SYSTEM v2.4.1 // LIVE—214 closed rounds indexed

Your deck.
Their term sheets.

Every metric below is drawn from Series A decks that closed in Q3 2025. The left column is where most pre-IND founders land. The right is where funded ones were.

Q3 2025 · n=214
Sequencing of story beats vs. median funded deck — 214 closed Series A rounds, Q3 2025
METRIC
TYPICAL DECK
FUNDED MEDIAN
GAP
Problem statement position
Slide 3–4
Slide 1–2
−2 slides early
Mechanism of action clarity
Qualitative only
Quantified + visual
MISSING DATA
Competitive moat framing
Feature list
IP + clinical gap
Repositioning required
Clinical path narrative
Post-IND section
Slide 4 anchor
−5 slides early
Team credibility placement
Slide 14
Slide 6–7
−7 slides early
Ask clarity score
62 / 100
88 / 100
−26 pts
Narrative coherence index
71 / 100
84 / 100
−13 pts
* Typical deck profile based on 847 pre-diagnostic submissions, 2024–2025Score my deck→
214
Closed rounds indexed
Q3 2025
68%
Avg gap in data density
vs. funded median
7.8
Excess slides (avg)
pre-IND founders
23 days
Avg time saved to close
post-diagnostic
// DECK DIAGNOSTIC

Where do you rank?

Input four parameters. Get your percentile ranking against 200+ closed biotech Series A rounds. No email required for this step.

INPUT PARAMETERS
DIAGNOSTIC OUTPUT
AWAITING INPUT
Complete all four parameters to generate your percentile ranking against the Q3 2025 benchmark dataset.
// PIPELINE BENCHMARKS
n=214 rounds

Stage-by-stage.
No aggregation.

Aggregated benchmarks flatten the signal. These are stage-specific. A Phase I deck that performs like a preclinical deck loses the room in the first 10 minutes.

Closed rounds
Top gap (passed)
PH-I · 39 rounds

Phase I Ongoing

58%
close rate
14
Slide median
3.4
Data figs/slide
+1.8 figs
Vs. passed avg
TOP GAP IN PASSED DECKS

Interim safety data absent in 44% of passed decks

IND-E · 48 rounds

IND-Enabling

34%close rate
Slide median15
Data figs/slide2.1

Safety profile absent in 71% of passed decks

PRE-C · 61 rounds

Preclinical (in vivo)

22%close rate
Slide median17
Data figs/slide1.6

MoA visualization missing in 83% of passed decks

LEAD · 29 rounds

Lead Optimization

11%close rate
Slide median18
Data figs/slide0.9

No differentiated IP narrative — 91% of passed decks

IND-F · 37 rounds

IND Filed / Cleared

47%close rate
Slide median16
Data figs/slide2.8

Clinical path timeline absent in 62% of passed decks

Full benchmark dataset: 214 rounds × 47 variables × 6 stages

Including investor firm breakdowns, lead partner patterns, and slide-position heatmaps

See Full Dataset →
// INVESTOR ATTENTION ANALYSIS

Where they stop reading.
And why.

Eye-tracking and time-on-slide data from 214 partner-level reviews. The gap between funded and passed decks is not where founders expect it.

#
SLIDE
FUNDED ATTENTION
PASSED ATTENTION
ΔGAP
01
Cover / Title
12
8
+4
02
Problem StatementHIGH SIGNAL
94
67
+27
03
Solution OverviewHIGH SIGNAL
88
72
+16
04
Mechanism of ActionHIGH SIGNAL
91
54
+37
05
Preclinical DataHIGH SIGNAL
96
61
+35
06
Team / Founders
82
44
+38
07
Market Size
71
39
+32
08
Competitive Landscape
78
48
+30
09
Clinical RoadmapHIGH SIGNAL
89
52
+37
10
IP / Moat
84
41
+43
11
Financials / Ask
76
58
+18
12
Appendix (avg)
18
22
+-4
DECK A — CLOSED $42M SERIES A

Anon. Oncology Platform · IND Filed · Sep 2025

89
SEQUENCE SCORE
15
slides
✓ CLOSED $42M
  • →Lead with Phase I POC data on slide 2 — before market size
  • →MoA animated figure on slide 3, zero text
  • →Competitive landscape: patent map, not bullet list
  • →Ask quantified: "18-month runway to Phase II readout"
  • →Appendix: 4 slides only (full PK/PD, safety tables)
DECK B — PASSED BY SAME FIRM

Anon. CNS Spinout · Preclinical · Sep 2025

41
SEQUENCE SCORE
26
slides
✗ PASSED — SAME FIRM
  • →Market size on slide 2 — investors don't trust it yet
  • →MoA: 3 text-heavy slides, no visualization
  • →Competitive section: 2x2 matrix with 4 players
  • →Ask: "$15M to advance program" — no milestone anchor
  • →Appendix: 11 slides — 42% of deck

Key finding: Both decks went to the same partner at the same firm in the same week. Deck A closed in 34 days. Deck B was passed after the first meeting. The difference was not the science — it was the structure of the argument.

// DIAGNOSTIC SUBMISSION

Stop guessing.
Get the readout.

Submit your deck for a full slide-level diagnostic. We run it against 214 closed rounds and return a ranked gap analysis with specific revision targets. 48-hour turnaround.

FULL DIAGNOSTIC INCLUDES
  • ✓
    Slide-level gap map
    Every slide scored vs. funded median
  • ✓
    Narrative sequencing report
    Exact reorder recommendations
  • ✓
    Data density analysis
    Which slides need figures, which need cuts
  • ✓
    Percentile breakdown
    6 dimensions, stage-matched cohort
  • ✓
    Revision priority list
    Ranked by investor attention impact
  • ✓
    30-min debrief call
    With a Sequence analyst
TURNAROUND
48 hrs
From submission to full diagnostic report

Not ready to share your deck? Get the full benchmark dataset by email.

RUN MY DECK DIAGNOSTIC

Your deck is encrypted at rest and in transit. We do not share, train on, or retain your materials beyond the diagnostic window.Privacy policy →