1. State the thesis in a form that can be tested
Replace 'the US is our next growth market' with a specific statement about the buyer, the problem, the acquisition route and the operating model. Then identify the evidence needed for that statement to remain credible.
Separate facts already observed from forecasts and management judgments. A credible company can still have a lightly evidenced expansion hypothesis; diligence should make that distinction explicit rather than conceal it inside an aggregate growth forecast.
2. Inspect the quality of demand evidence
Review opportunities by stage, origin and buying context. Ask which are paid, which depend on exceptional conditions and which have progressed through the approval process expected of future target accounts.
PRISM's signal-misread dimension examines where traction is mistaken for conversion. Read the expansion thesis through that distinction: what shows activity, and what shows the motion converting to revenue?
- Identify the budget owner and the operational user.
- Distinguish contracted revenue from pipeline and pilots.
- Check discounts, bespoke delivery and founder relationship effects.
- Record losses and stalled opportunities, not just reference wins.
3. Trace the path from sale to delivery
The plan should account for procurement, onboarding, implementation, support and renewal, not just lead generation and sales hiring. Map dependencies across the European and US teams and identify responsibilities that are currently unowned.
PRISM's execution dimension asks whether infrastructure can carry the motion. The Risk Verdict addresses structural risk; legal, tax and employment decisions remain outside that assessment.
4. Connect the downside to capital exposure
Test what changes if the sales cycle is longer, conversion weaker or delivery more resource-intensive than planned. Identify which costs can be paused and which would be difficult to unwind without harming the company.
Do not treat a revised revenue forecast as a complete downside model. Review the operating consequences, founder attention and funding needs of maintaining both the home market and the expansion during that delay.
5. Define decision gates before the commitment
An approval can be conditional. Specify the evidence required before adding headcount, increasing acquisition spend or making another difficult-to-reverse commitment.
Each gate needs an accountable owner, a review date and an action if the evidence is absent. Founders and investors should agree what would justify continuing, changing the motion or pausing before the pressure of a missed target arrives.
6. Read model claims within their actual scope
If using an external assessment, ask what population each metric describes, when the evaluation took place and what remains uncertain. Case-log size, model-training samples, cross-validation metrics and prospectively verified outcomes are not interchangeable.
Exported publishes a scoped evidence record and a PRISM methodology explanation. A sample Risk Verdict is a dated deliverable, not a substitute for a company-specific assessment or the current validation record.
Is expansion diligence only for venture-capital teams?
No. Founders and boards can use this review before allocating an expansion budget, whether or not a financing round is involved. The core question is which evidence justifies the next commitment and what happens if the thesis is wrong.
Does a risk assessment replace investment judgment? No. It is one input alongside financial, legal, technical and other diligence; it does not establish a valuation or guarantee returns.
Exported's framework and source material
These notes explain Exported's published PRISM framework and Risk Verdict scope. The questions are a reading guide, not additional research findings or a company-specific assessment. The website's current evidence record and the sample Verdict's dated snapshot remain separate. This is not legal, tax, immigration or investment advice.