Inside the OpenSeed Report: More Than a One-Line Star Rating

#Overall Star Rating + Verdict + Progress Label

The top of the report opens with three pieces of information you can take in at a glance.

• Overall star rating (out of 5 stars) — the average score of 15 reviewers, converted into stars
• Verdict label — 'promising,' 'needs review,' or 'revise and resubmit'
• Percentile label — where you rank against the 3.5-star cutoff that typically clears the first round of Korea's pre-startup grant program

The star rating isn't a simple average — the weighting adjusts by industry and stage. The same 3.8-star score might show as 'promising' if it clears the 3.5-star grant-program cutoff, but as 'needs review' if you're evaluated at the Series A stage.

#Seven Evaluation Categories

Fifteen reviewers each evaluate your plan across seven core categories, and each category receives its own star rating in 0.5-point increments.

#142 Checkpoints

Each of the seven categories contains 15-25 detailed checkpoints, for a total of 142. Within 'clarity of problem definition,' for example, you'll find:

• Is the target customer specified down to company type, job function, or age group?
• Is the frequency and severity of the pain point expressed in numbers?
• Are current alternatives and their limitations clearly stated?
• Is the cost customers currently pay — in money or time — quantified?
• Is there evidence of at least 5 direct interviews or a survey?

For each checkpoint, a system agent searches your document directly for supporting evidence and marks it with a checkmark, an X, or a warning icon.

#Comments from Each Reviewer

The report displays each of the 15 reviewers' comments separately — the result of viewing the same business plan through different lenses.

• Financial analyst reviewer — focuses on revenue model, unit economics, and cash burn
• Market analyst reviewer — validates TAM/SAM/SOM and compares competitors
• Team evaluator — domain experience, execution track record, team cohesion
• Technical reviewer — technical moat, implementation difficulty, patentability
• GTM reviewer — strategy for the first 100 customers, channels, CAC sanity-check
• Government-grant reviewer — fit with the PSST framework, comparison to the passing bar
• Risk reviewer — red flags and potential grounds for rejection

Each reviewer scores independently, so you can see the distribution — which reviewer was the most generous, and which was the toughest.

#Sentence-Level Rewrites

Suggestions for turning weak sentences into strong ones appear directly inline in your document. For example:

Rewrites appear as side comments next to your original text, and an 'Apply' button lets you swap in the suggested version instantly.

#Comparison Against Successful Applicants

Your star rating is shown against the distribution of top applicants who succeeded on the same track — benchmarked against N first-round winners of Korea's 2026 pre-startup grant program.

• Where your overall star rating falls within the percentile distribution of successful applicants
• Which of the 7 evaluation categories are stronger or weaker than the successful-applicant average
• The 3 keywords most often emphasized by successful applicants in your same star-rating range

The distribution data is used only in anonymized, aggregate form — individual successful applicants' business plans are never disclosed.

#How to Use the Report

• Step 1 — get a sense of your overall level from the star rating and verdict
• Step 2 — identify your 1-2 lowest-scoring categories
• Step 3 — go into your document and directly address the X's and warnings among that category's checkpoints
• Step 4 — apply rewrite suggestions to replace weak sentences
• Step 5 — run a re-analysis (50% off at ₩2,500) to confirm your star rating improved