Audience research
Part of Startup funding audience research methods
A checklist for researching startup funding competitor services
Use this checklist to research startup funding competitor services in England: define the set, verify identity, compare audience, fees and evidence.
Competitor research should compare services that solve the same founder problem, not businesses that happen to use similar words. Fix the audience, decision and research date before collecting pages. This checklist covers publishers, funding databases, advisers, investor platforms and support programmes.
What to take away
- Fix the audience, decision and research date before collecting any competitor pages.
- Companies House confirms filed information only, not competence, solvency or service quality.
- Score only published criteria and mark unavailable evidence as unknown rather than zero.
- Search visibility and article volume show reach, not accuracy.
Define the comparison set
State the founder stage, sector, English geography and funding route. Record the inclusion and exclusion criteria before rating anything, and keep a dated list of URLs and evidence files.
Named England example
- Direct paid service
- Beauhurst, a London platform for UK company and funding data
- Direct paid service
- Crowdcube, an Exeter equity crowdfunding platform
- Free official alternative
- Find a grant
- Local support route
- Growth Hubs across England
- Manual workaround
- Warm introductions through the founder's network
Why it belongs
- Direct paid service
- Covers rounds, investors and company records
- Direct paid service
- A live route to retail investors
- Free official alternative
- Competes with paid discovery at no cost
- Local support route
- Regional advice and grant signposting
- Manual workaround
- The baseline for every paid service
Label each entry as a company, a product, a programme or an individual adviser.
The government's Find a grant service and business support finder may be alternatives to a paid discovery product even though they use a different operating model.
Beyond Find a grant, England-specific directories sit with local Growth Hubs, combined authority business pages and county council listings. Examples include the Greater Manchester Combined Authority and the West Midlands Growth Company. Coverage varies by area, so record the body that covers the address the founder trades from.
Verify identity and status
- Match the trading name to its legal entity and company number.
- Check filed status and officers through Companies House.
- Where a regulated activity may be involved, check the FCA Register and understand what the displayed permission covers.
- Identify group companies, appointed representatives and named contractual parties.
- Treat testimonials, logos and awards as claims requiring their own checks.
A Companies House entry confirms filed information, not competence, solvency or service quality. FCA registration also needs interpretation; do not write that every service supplied by a registered firm is regulated.
Verify identity and status
- Match trading name to legal entity
- Check filed status via Companies House
- Check FCA Register for regulated activity
- Identify group companies and representatives
- Treat testimonials and awards as claims
Compare the audience promise
- Capture who the service says it helps and which routes it covers.
- Note minimum company stage, revenue, round size or eligibility.
- Test whether England-wide language hides limited regional access.
- Record accessibility and support routes.
- Check whether unsuccessful or first-time founders appear in the evidence.
Examine the working method
- Follow discovery, intake, research, application, outreach and reporting steps.
- Distinguish automated matching from reviewed advice.
- Ask which source controls a grant rule or investor mandate.
- Note update frequency, correction practice and evidence date.
- Check how confidential documents are requested and shared.
Record price and commercial influence
- State fixed fees, subscriptions, success fees and cancellation terms separately.
- Identify investor, lender or programme referral payments.
- Check whether paid placement changes ordering or recommendations.
- Compare the same service scope rather than a headline starting price.
- Preserve tax treatment and assumptions beside any total.
Test the experience
Use a lawful, realistic research scenario. Do not submit false funding applications, impersonate a company or obtain restricted information. Review public pages and request normal pre-sales material. Interviews with past users require consent and balanced recruitment.
The column on the right is an illustrative entry for an unnamed service, not a rating of any named provider.
| Criterion | Weight | Score (0 to 3) or unknown | Illustrative entry |
|---|---|---|---|
| Source traceability | 20 | 2 | Rule traced to the official page and kept with a dated copy |
| Audience fit | 15 | 3 | States the stage, sector and English region served |
| Scope clarity | 15 | 1 | Scope omits matching and reporting |
| Fee transparency | 20 | unknown | No published fee and no note on commission |
| Privacy and accessibility | 15 | 2 | Retention policy published, access statement missing |
| Complaint handling | 15 | 1 | Named route given, no response time |
Adjust the weights to the decision and keep the evidence for each score in the working record.
Check content and claims
- Trace funding figures to their stated publisher and reporting period.
- Check whether old schemes are clearly archived or still presented as available.
- Separate educational material from personalised recommendations.
- Record disclaimers, correction dates and named editorial responsibility.
- Note whether favourable examples omit unsuccessful clients or material conditions.
Search visibility, social following and article volume show reach, not accuracy. Sample comparable pages and test claims against the official source. Keep screenshots only where the purpose and retention policy permit it, and link the live page in the working record.
Report without overclaiming
Present factual observations before the score. Explain weighting and show how an unknown affected the result. Give the subject a reasonable correction route for material errors.
One limitations statement covers the whole review. Work from published pages can confirm what a provider says about itself, but it cannot establish private service quality, investment outcomes, or the terms offered to an individual client.
Finish with limitations, conflicts and the next review date.
Before you act
- State the founder stage, sector, geography and funding route.
- Match each trading name to its legal entity and company number.
- Compare the same service scope rather than a headline starting price.
- Trace funding figures to their stated publisher and reporting period.
- Finish with limitations, conflicts and the next review date.
Common questions
What should a competitor comparison actually compare?
It should compare services that solve the same founder problem, not businesses that happen to use similar words. Define the comparison set first, including direct services, free official alternatives and manual workarounds, and record inclusion and exclusion criteria before rating anything.
How should regulatory status be treated in this research?
Check the FCA Register where a regulated activity may be involved and understand what the displayed permission covers. Registration needs interpretation, so do not write that every service supplied by a registered firm is regulated. Group companies and appointed representatives should also be identified.
What limits apply to testing a service?
Use a lawful, realistic research scenario. Do not submit false funding applications, impersonate a company or obtain restricted information. Review public pages and request normal pre-sales material, and get consent for interviews with past users through balanced recruitment.
