vs. writing the AI value creation slide without knowing who can execute it
Portfolio expansion risk across manufacturing companies.
Risk quantification + capital allocation strategy.
All client data is confidential. Information is used solely for assessment and not shared with third parties.
| F | C | S | A | M | I | Status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Company A | STRETCH | ||||||
| Company B | BLOCKED | ||||||
| Company C | READY | ||||||
| Company D | BLOCKED | ||||||
| Company E | STRETCH |
Portfolio Heatmap: 6 structural levers × N companies
Standardized structural coherence profiling across portfolio companies enables risk comparison and capital allocation decisions. Each company profiled on same 6-lever framework, benchmarked to manufacturing industry peers.
Output quantifies portfolio-level risk: achievable vs. constrained EBITDA impact, hold period deployment view, capital requirements sequenced across 3–5 year hold.
Board/IC-ready: which companies deploy Year 1, which require targeted investment (Year 2), which are above structural coherence without major builds (Year 3+). Operating partner playbook included.
Per-company time
1–2 hours (management interview)
Our turnaround
2–3 weeks (full portfolio)
Week 1
Data Collection
Week 2
Assessment
Week 3
Delivery
Portfolio Heatmap
6 dimensions × N companies with pattern identification
Tier Ranking + Hold Period View
READY (Year 1) / STRETCH (Year 2) / BLOCKED (Year 3+) per company
Valuation Impact Analysis
Portfolio-level AI value creation: achievable vs. at-risk EBITDA across all companies
Capital Allocation Strategy
Portfolio-level capex requirements sequenced across 3-year hold period
Cross-Portfolio Pattern Analysis
Shared gaps + portfolio-wide infrastructure opportunities with risk mitigation ROI
Board-Ready Report
Executive summary with tier rankings, capital allocation recommendations, operating partner playbook
Need per-company roadmaps? See Full Portfolio Diagnostic.
Falsifiable diagnosis. The infrastructure exists or it doesn't.
Excerpt from sample portfolio triage (Industrial holdings portfolio)
Fund: Summit Industrial Holdings Portfolio
Companies assessed: 8
Portfolio Expansion Risk Summary
| F | C | S | A | M | I | Status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Company A | STRETCH | ||||||
| Company B | BLOCKED | ||||||
| Company C | READY | ||||||
| Company D | BLOCKED | ||||||
| Company E | STRETCH | ||||||
| Company F | BLOCKED | ||||||
| Company G | READY | ||||||
| Company H | STRETCH |
Tier Distribution
Priority Recommendations
Proceed with AI initiatives. Infrastructure supports deployment.
Targeted investment in Accessibility can unlock. Estimated: $80-150K per company, 4-6 months to READY.
Hold AI initiatives. Foundation work required. Estimated: $200-400K per company, 10-14 months to READY.
Cross-Portfolio Opportunity
Shared Accessibility gap across 6/8 companies. Consider portfolio-wide API infrastructure initiative.
Estimated savings vs. individual builds: 30-40%
~$8,000 per company (5–10 companies)
Range: $60,000 – $80,000
Additional factors that may adjust pricing:
Before you write the AI value creation slide, know which portfolio companies can actually execute it.
CMC portfolio screening profiles each company's structural coherence across 6 structural levers using the same standardised framework. The output is a heatmap — 6 levers x N companies — that reveals which portfolio companies can execute AI within the hold period, which require targeted infrastructure investment, and which are above structural coherence. Typical screening covers 5-10 companies in 2-3 weeks.
The heatmap surfaces cross-portfolio patterns: shared infrastructure shortfalls that affect multiple companies, portfolio-wide capex requirements sequenced across the hold period, and operating range verdicts (Within Range / Near Ceiling / Above Coherence) per company. A single company assessment shows individual shortfalls; portfolio screening shows which $11.4M of EBITDA is constrained portfolio-wide and where capital allocation has the highest infrastructure ROI.
Each company is classified by comparing its per-lever structural coherence against the infrastructure requirements of its AI initiatives. Companies within operating range across all levers deploy Year 1. Companies near the structural ceiling deploy Year 2 with targeted investment. Companies above structural coherence in any binding lever require Year 3+ major infrastructure build. The binding constraint — the single most constrained lever — determines the tier, not an average.
Portfolio screening costs $60,000-$80,000 (~$8,000 per company for 5-10 companies) with 2-3 week turnaround. Each portfolio company provides 1-2 hours of management interview time. Deliverables include the portfolio heatmap, operating range verdicts with hold period view, valuation impact analysis (achievable vs. at-risk EBITDA), capital allocation strategy, cross-portfolio pattern analysis, and a board-ready executive report.