What is CIM analysis software?

Software that reads a Confidential Information Memorandum and produces a structured first pass: extracted financials, a score against the buyer's criteria, an indicative valuation, red flags and missing information. The good ones link every figure to its source; the rest produce a summary.

Can a general-purpose AI assistant do this?

It can summarise and answer questions about the document. It will not score against your mandate, compute a valuation by a stated method, refuse to invent a figure, or turn findings into a deal with diligence items — and it may not be an appropriate place to upload a confidential memorandum at all. Check the terms.

How accurate is AI extraction?

Accurate enough to remove the transcription from a first pass, not accurate enough to skip the check — which is why provenance matters. A tool that shows the page a figure came from can be verified in seconds; one that does not has to be re-read.

What should a first pass cost in time?

Minutes for the tool and a short read for the analyst, against hours by hand. The saving is real only if the output can be trusted without re-reading the memorandum, which brings you back to the tests above.

Evaluation guide

The Best CIM Analysis Software: What to Demand

Any large language model can summarise a Confidential Information Memorandum. That is the easy part, and the least useful. What a buyer needs from CIM analysis software is a first pass they can act on: figures with sources, a score against their own criteria, a valuation computed rather than generated, and a list of what the document leaves out. This page is the set of tests that tell the two apart.

Start my 14-day free trial Watch the Agent analyse a deal

£399/month
Unlimited users and deals
TrueValue Agent included
No credit card required

The failure modes to design against

A fluent summary with a wrong number in it is worse than no summary, because it is read. The most common failures of AI document tools on memoranda are, in order: a figure taken from the wrong year or the wrong table; an adjusted figure presented as a reported one; a projection presented as history; a figure the document never states, filled in from the model's expectations; and a valuation "estimated" by the model rather than computed from the extracted inputs by a method you could reproduce.

Each of these is invisible in the output unless the tool shows its sources. So the first and most important test is provenance: can you click a figure and see the page it came from?

The tests

Run these on a real memorandum, ideally one you have already analysed by hand.

Extraction

Every extracted figure links to the page or table it was read from.
Reported and adjusted EBITDA are extracted separately, with the add-backs listed.
Historical, management-stated and projected years are labelled as such and never merged.
A figure the document does not state is reported as not stated, never estimated.
PDF, Excel and Word inputs are handled; a page that cannot be read is reported as unread.

Judgement

The memorandum is scored against your criteria — an acquisition mandate you set as numbers — not a generic quality score.
An unknown criterion is flagged as unknown rather than scored as a miss.
Red flags name the passage they were read from and carry a severity.
Missing information is listed explicitly: the years, metrics and evidence the document should contain and does not.

Valuation

The indicative valuation is computed by a stated method from the extracted inputs, with the assumptions shown.
It runs through the same engine as a full valuation, so the first pass and the later work reconcile.
The model cannot alter a computed figure.

What happens next

The analysis becomes a deal with the figures and findings on it, not a PDF report to be retyped.
Findings become diligence questions.
The tool records what it did, so a second analyst can see the first analyst's pass.

Confidentiality

Documents are stored in your own private storage, encrypted at rest and in transit, isolated per workspace.
The processing terms for AI extraction are written down in a data processing agreement you can read.
Roles control who in your team sees a memorandum; access is logged.

How TrueValue answers the tests

The CIM Analyzer extracts company details and each financial year's revenue, gross profit, EBITDA, add-backs and SDE, plus recurring revenue, customer concentration, owner involvement and growth rate, and records a figure the document does not state as not stated. Mandate fit is scored against the numeric criteria you set, with unknowns named rather than penalised. The screening score is a versioned rule set, so the same document scores the same twice. The indicative valuation runs through the same five-method engine as a full valuation, on the memorandum's stated figures only. Strengths, red flags and missing information are findings that become diligence items when the CIM is promoted to a deal in one click.

The TrueValue Agent runs the same analysis on any memorandum that lands on a deal and files a proposal with the evidence attached. Every figure it writes is checked against the figures it read; an unsourced figure is refused. Documents live in your workspace's private storage and the processing terms are in the data processing agreement.

What TrueValue does not do: it does not read scanned pages that cannot be recognised as text, it does not fill a gap in a memorandum with an industry estimate, and it does not decide whether to pursue. Those are, respectively, a limitation, a rule and a boundary.

On vendor comparisons

This page names no other vendor. Features and pricing in this category change monthly, and a comparison table copied from marketing pages would be wrong by the time you read it. Run the tests above on each candidate with the same memorandum.

Frequently asked questions

What is CIM analysis software?: Software that reads a Confidential Information Memorandum and produces a structured first pass: extracted financials, a score against the buyer's criteria, an indicative valuation, red flags and missing information. The good ones link every figure to its source; the rest produce a summary.
Can a general-purpose AI assistant do this?: It can summarise and answer questions about the document. It will not score against your mandate, compute a valuation by a stated method, refuse to invent a figure, or turn findings into a deal with diligence items — and it may not be an appropriate place to upload a confidential memorandum at all. Check the terms.
How accurate is AI extraction?: Accurate enough to remove the transcription from a first pass, not accurate enough to skip the check — which is why provenance matters. A tool that shows the page a figure came from can be verified in seconds; one that does not has to be re-read.
What should a first pass cost in time?: Minutes for the tool and a short read for the analyst, against hours by hand. The saving is real only if the output can be trusted without re-reading the memorandum, which brings you back to the tests above.

Go deeper

Run the tests on TrueValue

Upload a memorandum you have already analysed by hand and compare the first pass, figure by figure.

Start my 14-day free trial Watch the Agent analyse a deal