SaaS Valuation Compression Analyzer
Analyze SaaS company valuation compression between funding rounds.
How to use it
Claude Code
- Run the line below. It pulls the whole folder into
~/.claude/skills/saas-valuation-compression. - Describe your job in plain words. Claude Code follows the skill from there.
npx degit himself65/finance-skills/plugins/market-analysis/skills/saas-valuation-compression#main ~/.claude/skills/saas-valuation-compressionFor one project only, change the path to .claude/skills/saas-valuation-compression.
Claude (web or desktop app)
- On this page open ⋯ → Download .md.
- Save it as SKILL.md in a folder, zip the folder, then Customize → Skills → + → Create skill → Upload a skill.
- Pick the file and Save. Claude shows the name and description and runs a security scan.
- Check the skill is switched on.
- Start a new chat and describe your job in plain words. The AI follows the skill from there.
ChatGPT or another app
- ChatGPT: make a Project and paste it into Instructions.
- Neither? Paste it at the top of a new chat — it works for that chat.
Not working?
- Check which app you pasted it into — the steps above name the right one.
- Some skills need the paid tier of Claude or ChatGPT.
Paste into Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor.
Source of SaaS Valuation Compression Analyzer
Show the full text209 lines
| name | description |
|---|---|
| saas-valuation-compression | > Analyze SaaS company valuation compression between funding rounds. Use this skill whenever the user asks about: how much a SaaS company's valuation multiple changed between rounds, why the ARR multiple compressed or expanded, comparing a company's compression to macro benchmarks, or explaining what drove valuation changes for any VC-backed software company. Trigger on phrases like "valuation compression", ARR multiple", "round-to-round valuation", "multiple change", or when the user asks to compare a company's funding rounds. Always use this skill for any multi-round SaaS valuation analysis — do not try to answer from memory alone. |
SaaS Valuation Compression Analyzer
What This Skill Does
For a given SaaS company, research its funding history and compute ARR-based valuation multiples at each round. Then explain the compression (or expansion) using a structured framework that covers macro rates, growth trajectory, narrative shifts, and comparables.
Always render the output as an inline visualization (using the Visualizer tool) plus a concise prose explanation. Do not just return a wall of numbers.
Step-by-Step Workflow
1. Gather Data via Web Search
Search for each of the following. Run searches in parallel where possible.
For the target company:
[company] funding rounds valuation ARR revenue[company] Series [X] raised valuationfor each round[company] annual recurring revenue ARR [year]for each round date[company] investors lead investor [round]
For macro context:
SaaS ARR valuation multiples [year] private market- Use the known benchmark table below as fallback if search is thin.
For narrative context:
[company] AI customers product announcement [year]— AI narrative premium?[company] growth rate churn NRR [year]— fundamentals shift?
2. Build the Data Model
For each funding round, extract or estimate:
| Field | How to get it |
|---|---|
| Round name | Direct from search |
| Date | Direct from search |
| Amount raised | Direct from search |
| Post-money valuation | Direct or compute from ownership %; if unavailable, note as estimated |
| ARR at round date | Search explicitly; if not found, estimate from customer count x ARPC or interpolate |
| ARR multiple | valuation / ARR |
| Lead investor | Direct |
ARR estimation heuristics (when not public):
- Seed/Series A: ARR often $500K–$3M
- Series B: typically $5M–$20M
- Series C: typically $20M–$60M
- Cross-check against customer count x average deal size if available
3. Compute Compression Metrics
For each consecutive round pair (e.g., B → C):
multiple_compression_pct = (later_multiple - earlier_multiple) / earlier_multiple × 100
valuation_growth_pct = (later_val - earlier_val) / earlier_val × 100
arr_growth_pct = (later_arr - earlier_arr) / earlier_arr × 100
Key insight: valuation_growth = arr_growth + multiple_change
If ARR grows faster than the multiple compresses, absolute valuation still rises.
4. Attribute Compression to Causes
Use this checklist. For each cause, rate it: Primary / Contributing / Not applicable.
Macro / Rate Environment
- Was the earlier round during 2020–2021 ZIRP bubble? (adds ~2–5x artificial premium)
- Was the later round during 2022–2023 rate hikes? (removes bubble premium)
- Was the later round during or after the April 2026 Software Meltdown? (public SaaS down 40–86% from 52w highs; tariff/trade-war driven selloff crushed multiples sector-wide — even high-growth names like Figma -87%, monday.com -80%, HubSpot -70%, ServiceNow -58%)
- Reference: SaaS private market median multiples by period:
| Period | Approx Median ARR Multiple (private) | Context |
|---|---|---|
| 2019 | ~8–12x | Pre-pandemic baseline |
| 2020 | ~12–18x | ZIRP begins, multiple expansion |
| 2021 Q1–Q3 peak | ~35–45x | Peak bubble |
| 2022 H2 | ~15–20x | Rate hikes begin, first compression wave |
| 2023 trough | ~8–12x | Rate plateau, valuation reset |
| 2024 | ~12–18x | AI narrative recovery, selective re-rating |
| 2025 H1 | ~16–22x | Continued AI-driven recovery |
| 2025 H2–2026 Q1 | ~10–16x | Tariff shock / trade-war selloff begins |
| 2026 Q2 (Apr meltdown) | ~6–10x | Software Meltdown — broad sector crash, public SaaS down 40–86% from 52w highs |
(These are rough private market estimates. Public SaaS multiples are ~30–50% lower. The April 2026 figures reflect the acute selloff; private marks typically lag public by 1–2 quarters.)
Growth Deceleration
- Did YoY ARR growth rate slow materially between rounds? (most common cause)
- Did NRR/net retention drop?
Narrative Shift
- Did the company lose a major product story (e.g., lost PLG thesis, missed category leadership)?
- Did competitors emerge or incumbents catch up?
AI Premium (positive or negative)
- Does the company serve AI-native companies (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.) as customers? → premium
- Did the company pivot to AI narrative credibly? → premium
- Did the company fail to articulate AI story? → discount vs peers
- Note: In the Apr 2026 meltdown, even strong AI narratives did not protect multiples — Snowflake (-53%), Datadog (-46%), MongoDB (-48%) all cratered despite AI tailwinds. AI premium may be necessary but not sufficient in a macro-driven selloff.
Competitive / Market
- Market saturation signal (e.g., Okta pressure on WorkOS, Auth0 competition)
- Customer concentration risk revealed
Investor Supply / Demand
- Was the later round smaller and more selective? → price discipline
- New tier of lead investor (e.g., Tier 1 growth fund vs seed fund)? → may signal higher or lower conviction
5. Build the Visualization
Use the Visualizer tool to render:
- Metric cards row — valuation at each round, ARR at each round, multiple at each round, compression %
- Line chart — ARR multiple over time for the company vs macro SaaS median
- Bar chart — valuation growth vs ARR growth vs multiple change (decomposition)
- Comparison bar — company compression vs 2–3 peer comparables (Vercel, Netlify, Fastly, or sector peers)
- Cause attribution table inline in prose (Primary / Contributing / N/A per factor)
See design guidance: use teal for positive/growth, coral for compression/negative, gray for macro baseline, blue for valuation figures. Follow the CSS variable system throughout.
6. Write the Prose Summary
Structure as:
- One-sentence verdict — e.g., "Multiple compressed 36% but ARR grew 5x, so absolute valuation rose 3.8x."
- Primary cause — the #1 factor explaining compression
- Narrative premium/discount — AI story, category leadership, or lack thereof
- Comparable context — how does this company's compression compare to peers?
- Forward implication — what would need to be true for the multiple to expand at next round?
Output Format
Always produce:
- Inline visualization (Visualizer tool) — comes first
- Prose summary (5–8 sentences) — follows the visualization
- Optional: flag data confidence level if ARR had to be estimated
Known Benchmarks & Comparables (pre-loaded)
Use these as context when search results are thin or for the comparison chart.
| Company | Round pair | Earlier multiple | Later multiple | Compression % | Primary cause |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vercel | D → E (2021→2024) | ~140x | ~32x | -77% | ZIRP unwind + growth decel |
| WorkOS | B → C (2022→2026) | ~105x | ~67x | -36% | Partial ZIRP unwind; defended by AI narrative |
| Netlify | B → stalled (2021→?) | ~90x | N/A | N/A | No new round; AI narrative absent |
| Fastly | Public (2021 peak→2024) | ~35x rev | ~3x rev | -91% | No AI pivot, growth decel |
| Stripe | — | — | — | — | Private; est. flat/compressed 2021→2023 down round |
| HashiCorp | Acquired by IBM 2024 | — | — | — | Acq at ~8x ARR vs ~40x peak |
April 2026 Software Meltdown — Public SaaS Drawdowns
As of April 9, 2026, a broad tariff/trade-war driven selloff crushed public software valuations. Use these as reference for how private multiples will lag-compress over the following 1–2 quarters.
| Ticker | Company | Δ from 52w High | Sector relevance |
|---|---|---|---|
| FIG | Figma | -86.7% | Design/dev tools — worst hit |
| MNDY | monday.com | -80.2% | Work management SaaS |
| TEAM | Atlassian | -75.7% | Dev tools / collaboration |
| HUBS | HubSpot | -69.9% | Marketing/CRM SaaS |
| WIX | WIX | -65.1% | Website builder |
| GTLB | GitLab | -63.6% | DevOps |
| CVLT | Commvault | -61.7% | Data protection |
| WDAY | Workday | -59.1% | HR/Finance SaaS |
| NOW | ServiceNow | -57.8% | Enterprise IT workflows |
| INTU | Intuit | -56.0% | FinTech/SMB SaaS |
| SNOW | Snowflake | -52.8% | Data cloud |
| KVYO | Klaviyo | -52.9% | Marketing automation |
| DOCU | DocuSign | -52.3% | eSignature |
| MDB | MongoDB | -47.9% | Database |
| SAP | SAP | -47.6% | Enterprise ERP |
| DDOG | Datadog | -45.7% | Observability |
| APP | AppLovin | -47.6% | AdTech/mobile |
| CRM | Salesforce | -42.5% | CRM market leader |
| ADBE | Adobe | -34.6% | Creative/doc SaaS |
| ZM | Zoom | -13.9% | Video/collab (already de-rated) |
Source: @speculator_io, April 9, 2026. Average drawdown across tracked software names: ~50–55%.
Edge Cases
- Down round: Multiple and absolute valuation both dropped. Note dilution implications.
- No public ARR: Use customer count x estimated ARPC, and label as estimate with +/- range.
- Single round only: Compute multiple vs sector median for that date; can't do compression analysis. Explain this.
- Pre-revenue: Use forward ARR or GMV multiple if applicable; note the different basis.
- Acqui-hire / strategic acquisition: Acquisition price often reflects strategic premium or distress, not pure ARR multiple — flag this.
| 1 | |
| 2 | name saas-valuation-compression |
| 3 | description > |
| 4 | Analyze SaaS company valuation compression between funding rounds. Use this skill |
| 5 | whenever the user asks about: how much a SaaS company's valuation multiple changed |
| 6 | between rounds, why the ARR multiple compressed or expanded, comparing a company's |
| 7 | compression to macro benchmarks, or explaining what drove valuation changes for |
| 8 | any VC-backed software company. Trigger on phrases like "valuation compression", |
| 9 | "ARR multiple", "round-to-round valuation", "multiple change", or when |
| 10 | the user asks to compare a company's funding rounds. Always use this skill for |
| 11 | any multi-round SaaS valuation analysis — do not try to answer from memory alone. |
| 12 | |
| 13 | |
| 14 | # SaaS Valuation Compression Analyzer |
| 15 | |
| 16 | ## What This Skill Does |
| 17 | |
| 18 | For a given SaaS company, research its funding history and compute ARR-based valuation |
| 19 | multiples at each round. Then explain the compression (or expansion) using a structured |
| 20 | framework that covers macro rates, growth trajectory, narrative shifts, and comparables. |
| 21 | |
| 22 | Always render the output as an inline visualization (using the Visualizer tool) plus a |
| 23 | concise prose explanation. Do not just return a wall of numbers. |
| 24 | |
| 25 | |
| 26 | |
| 27 | ## Step-by-Step Workflow |
| 28 | |
| 29 | ### 1. Gather Data via Web Search |
| 30 | |
| 31 | Search for each of the following. Run searches in parallel where possible. |
| 32 | |
| 33 | **For the target company:** |
| 34 | `[company] funding rounds valuation ARR revenue` |
| 35 | `[company] Series [X] raised valuation` for each round |
| 36 | `[company] annual recurring revenue ARR [year]` for each round date |
| 37 | `[company] investors lead investor [round]` |
| 38 | |
| 39 | **For macro context:** |
| 40 | `SaaS ARR valuation multiples [year] private market` |
| 41 | Use the known benchmark table below as fallback if search is thin. |
| 42 | |
| 43 | **For narrative context:** |
| 44 | `[company] AI customers product announcement [year]` — AI narrative premium? |
| 45 | `[company] growth rate churn NRR [year]` — fundamentals shift? |
| 46 | |
| 47 | ### 2. Build the Data Model |
| 48 | |
| 49 | For each funding round, extract or estimate: |
| 50 | |
| 51 | | Field | How to get it | |
| 52 | |---|---| |
| 53 | | Round name | Direct from search | |
| 54 | | Date | Direct from search | |
| 55 | | Amount raised | Direct from search | |
| 56 | | Post-money valuation | Direct or compute from ownership %; if unavailable, note as estimated | |
| 57 | | ARR at round date | Search explicitly; if not found, estimate from customer count x ARPC or interpolate | |
| 58 | | ARR multiple | `valuation / ARR` | |
| 59 | | Lead investor | Direct | |
| 60 | |
| 61 | **ARR estimation heuristics (when not public):** |
| 62 | Seed/Series A: ARR often $500K–$3M |
| 63 | Series B: typically $5M–$20M |
| 64 | Series C: typically $20M–$60M |
| 65 | Cross-check against customer count x average deal size if available |
| 66 | |
| 67 | ### 3. Compute Compression Metrics |
| 68 | |
| 69 | For each consecutive round pair (e.g., B → C): |
| 70 | |
| 71 | |
| 72 | multiple_compression_pct = (later_multiple - earlier_multiple) / earlier_multiple × 100 |
| 73 | valuation_growth_pct = (later_val - earlier_val) / earlier_val × 100 |
| 74 | arr_growth_pct = (later_arr - earlier_arr) / earlier_arr × 100 |
| 75 | |
| 76 | |
| 77 | Key insight: `valuation_growth = arr_growth + multiple_change` |
| 78 | If ARR grows faster than the multiple compresses, absolute valuation still rises. |
| 79 | |
| 80 | ### 4. Attribute Compression to Causes |
| 81 | |
| 82 | Use this checklist. For each cause, rate it: Primary / Contributing / Not applicable. |
| 83 | |
| 84 | **Macro / Rate Environment** |
| 85 | Was the earlier round during 2020–2021 ZIRP bubble? (adds ~2–5x artificial premium) |
| 86 | Was the later round during 2022–2023 rate hikes? (removes bubble premium) |
| 87 | Was the later round during or after the April 2026 Software Meltdown? (public SaaS down 40–86% from 52w highs; tariff/trade-war driven selloff crushed multiples sector-wide — even high-growth names like Figma -87%, monday.com -80%, HubSpot -70%, ServiceNow -58%) |
| 88 | Reference: SaaS private market median multiples by period: |
| 89 | |
| 90 | | Period | Approx Median ARR Multiple (private) | Context | |
| 91 | |---|---|---| |
| 92 | | 2019 | ~8–12x | Pre-pandemic baseline | |
| 93 | | 2020 | ~12–18x | ZIRP begins, multiple expansion | |
| 94 | | 2021 Q1–Q3 peak | ~35–45x | Peak bubble | |
| 95 | | 2022 H2 | ~15–20x | Rate hikes begin, first compression wave | |
| 96 | | 2023 trough | ~8–12x | Rate plateau, valuation reset | |
| 97 | | 2024 | ~12–18x | AI narrative recovery, selective re-rating | |
| 98 | | 2025 H1 | ~16–22x | Continued AI-driven recovery | |
| 99 | | 2025 H2–2026 Q1 | ~10–16x | Tariff shock / trade-war selloff begins | |
| 100 | | **2026 Q2 (Apr meltdown)** | **~6–10x** | **Software Meltdown — broad sector crash, public SaaS down 40–86% from 52w highs** | |
| 101 | |
| 102 | *(These are rough private market estimates. Public SaaS multiples are ~30–50% lower. The April 2026 figures reflect the acute selloff; private marks typically lag public by 1–2 quarters.)* |
| 103 | |
| 104 | **Growth Deceleration** |
| 105 | Did YoY ARR growth rate slow materially between rounds? (most common cause) |
| 106 | Did NRR/net retention drop? |
| 107 | |
| 108 | **Narrative Shift** |
| 109 | Did the company lose a major product story (e.g., lost PLG thesis, missed category leadership)? |
| 110 | Did competitors emerge or incumbents catch up? |
| 111 | |
| 112 | **AI Premium (positive or negative)** |
| 113 | Does the company serve AI-native companies (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.) as customers? → premium |
| 114 | Did the company pivot to AI narrative credibly? → premium |
| 115 | Did the company fail to articulate AI story? → discount vs peers |
| 116 | Note: In the Apr 2026 meltdown, even strong AI narratives did not protect multiples — Snowflake (-53%), Datadog (-46%), MongoDB (-48%) all cratered despite AI tailwinds. AI premium may be necessary but not sufficient in a macro-driven selloff. |
| 117 | |
| 118 | **Competitive / Market** |
| 119 | Market saturation signal (e.g., Okta pressure on WorkOS, Auth0 competition) |
| 120 | Customer concentration risk revealed |
| 121 | |
| 122 | **Investor Supply / Demand** |
| 123 | Was the later round smaller and more selective? → price discipline |
| 124 | New tier of lead investor (e.g., Tier 1 growth fund vs seed fund)? → may signal higher or lower conviction |
| 125 | |
| 126 | ### 5. Build the Visualization |
| 127 | |
| 128 | Use the Visualizer tool to render: |
| 129 | |
| 130 | **Metric cards row** — valuation at each round, ARR at each round, multiple at each round, compression % |
| 131 | **Line chart** — ARR multiple over time for the company vs macro SaaS median |
| 132 | **Bar chart** — valuation growth vs ARR growth vs multiple change (decomposition) |
| 133 | **Comparison bar** — company compression vs 2–3 peer comparables (Vercel, Netlify, Fastly, or sector peers) |
| 134 | **Cause attribution table** inline in prose (Primary / Contributing / N/A per factor) |
| 135 | |
| 136 | See design guidance: use teal for positive/growth, coral for compression/negative, gray for macro baseline, blue for valuation figures. Follow the CSS variable system throughout. |
| 137 | |
| 138 | ### 6. Write the Prose Summary |
| 139 | |
| 140 | Structure as: |
| 141 | **One-sentence verdict** — e.g., "Multiple compressed 36% but ARR grew 5x, so absolute valuation rose 3.8x." |
| 142 | **Primary cause** — the #1 factor explaining compression |
| 143 | **Narrative premium/discount** — AI story, category leadership, or lack thereof |
| 144 | **Comparable context** — how does this company's compression compare to peers? |
| 145 | **Forward implication** — what would need to be true for the multiple to expand at next round? |
| 146 | |
| 147 | |
| 148 | |
| 149 | ## Output Format |
| 150 | |
| 151 | Always produce: |
| 152 | Inline visualization (Visualizer tool) — comes first |
| 153 | Prose summary (5–8 sentences) — follows the visualization |
| 154 | Optional: flag data confidence level if ARR had to be estimated |
| 155 | |
| 156 | |
| 157 | |
| 158 | ## Known Benchmarks & Comparables (pre-loaded) |
| 159 | |
| 160 | Use these as context when search results are thin or for the comparison chart. |
| 161 | |
| 162 | | Company | Round pair | Earlier multiple | Later multiple | Compression % | Primary cause | |
| 163 | |---|---|---|---|---|---| |
| 164 | | Vercel | D → E (2021→2024) | ~140x | ~32x | -77% | ZIRP unwind + growth decel | |
| 165 | | WorkOS | B → C (2022→2026) | ~105x | ~67x | -36% | Partial ZIRP unwind; defended by AI narrative | |
| 166 | | Netlify | B → stalled (2021→?) | ~90x | N/A | N/A | No new round; AI narrative absent | |
| 167 | | Fastly | Public (2021 peak→2024) | ~35x rev | ~3x rev | -91% | No AI pivot, growth decel | |
| 168 | | Stripe | — | — | — | — | Private; est. flat/compressed 2021→2023 down round | |
| 169 | | HashiCorp | Acquired by IBM 2024 | — | — | — | Acq at ~8x ARR vs ~40x peak | |
| 170 | |
| 171 | ### April 2026 Software Meltdown — Public SaaS Drawdowns |
| 172 | |
| 173 | As of April 9, 2026, a broad tariff/trade-war driven selloff crushed public software valuations. Use these as reference for how private multiples will lag-compress over the following 1–2 quarters. |
| 174 | |
| 175 | | Ticker | Company | Δ from 52w High | Sector relevance | |
| 176 | |---|---|---|---| |
| 177 | | FIG | Figma | -86.7% | Design/dev tools — worst hit | |
| 178 | | MNDY | monday.com | -80.2% | Work management SaaS | |
| 179 | | TEAM | Atlassian | -75.7% | Dev tools / collaboration | |
| 180 | | HUBS | HubSpot | -69.9% | Marketing/CRM SaaS | |
| 181 | | WIX | WIX | -65.1% | Website builder | |
| 182 | | GTLB | GitLab | -63.6% | DevOps | |
| 183 | | CVLT | Commvault | -61.7% | Data protection | |
| 184 | | WDAY | Workday | -59.1% | HR/Finance SaaS | |
| 185 | | NOW | ServiceNow | -57.8% | Enterprise IT workflows | |
| 186 | | INTU | Intuit | -56.0% | FinTech/SMB SaaS | |
| 187 | | SNOW | Snowflake | -52.8% | Data cloud | |
| 188 | | KVYO | Klaviyo | -52.9% | Marketing automation | |
| 189 | | DOCU | DocuSign | -52.3% | eSignature | |
| 190 | | MDB | MongoDB | -47.9% | Database | |
| 191 | | SAP | SAP | -47.6% | Enterprise ERP | |
| 192 | | DDOG | Datadog | -45.7% | Observability | |
| 193 | | APP | AppLovin | -47.6% | AdTech/mobile | |
| 194 | | CRM | Salesforce | -42.5% | CRM market leader | |
| 195 | | ADBE | Adobe | -34.6% | Creative/doc SaaS | |
| 196 | | ZM | Zoom | -13.9% | Video/collab (already de-rated) | |
| 197 | |
| 198 | *Source: @speculator_io, April 9, 2026. Average drawdown across tracked software names: ~50–55%.* |
| 199 | |
| 200 | |
| 201 | |
| 202 | ## Edge Cases |
| 203 | |
| 204 | **Down round**: Multiple and absolute valuation both dropped. Note dilution implications. |
| 205 | **No public ARR**: Use customer count x estimated ARPC, and label as estimate with +/- range. |
| 206 | **Single round only**: Compute multiple vs sector median for that date; can't do compression analysis. Explain this. |
| 207 | **Pre-revenue**: Use forward ARR or GMV multiple if applicable; note the different basis. |
| 208 | **Acqui-hire / strategic acquisition**: Acquisition price often reflects strategic premium or distress, not pure ARR multiple — flag this. |
| 209 |
Discussion
Browse more free Claude skills.