---
title: "What Is the Scorecard Valuation Method — and When Should Angels Use It Instead of Berkus?"
description: "Looking for the scorecard valuation method? Adjust a regional average pre-money with weighted factors for team, market, and product — and know when Berkus or comps beat it."
date: 2026-07-25T00:00:00.000Z
tags: ["vc-explainers", "startup-funding", "angel-investors", "investor-education", "valuation"]
source: https://venturecapitaltracker.com/scorecard-valuation-method-startups
---

# What Is the Scorecard Valuation Method — and When Should Angels Use It Instead of Berkus?

> Looking for the scorecard valuation method? Adjust a regional average pre-money with weighted factors for team, market, and product — and know when Berkus or comps beat it.

Looking for **how the scorecard valuation method** prices a pre-revenue startup — and whether angels should prefer it to Berkus?

The **scorecard method** (associated with angel investor Bill Payne and angel-group practice) answers: *given what similar local deals clear, is this company better or worse than average — and by how much?*

> Glossary: [Scorecard valuation](/glossary/scorecard-valuation)

<iframe
  src="/embed/infographic/scorecard-valuation-weights"
  title="Scorecard Factor Weights"
  loading="lazy"
  referrerpolicy="no-referrer-when-downgrade"
  class="my-8 w-full max-w-3xl overflow-hidden rounded-xl border-0"
  height="540"
></iframe>

<p class="text-sm text-gray-600">
  <a href="/infographics/scorecard-valuation-weights">Open full embeddable graphic →</a>
</p>

### Steps

1. **Pick a regional baseline pre-money** for comparable stage deals (angel/seed in your geography).  
2. **Score each factor** vs an “average” deal (commonly ~0.75× to 1.25×).  
3. **Apply weights** (team often ~30%, opportunity ~25%, etc. — indicative).  
4. **Sum the weighted scores** → adjustment factor.  
5. **Baseline × adjustment** ≈ suggested pre-money range.

### Indicative weights (educational)

| Factor | Indicative weight |
|--------|-------------------|
| Strength of the team | ~30% |
| Size of the opportunity | ~25% |
| Product / technology | ~15% |
| Competitive environment | ~10% |
| Marketing / sales / partners | ~10% |
| Need for more investment | ~5% |
| Other (IP, exit path) | ~5% |

These weights are **not laws**. Groups customize them. Always label your baseline source and date.

### Worked micro-example (illustrative)

- Regional baseline pre-money: **$3.0M** (assumed educational figure — replace with your market’s real median)  
- Weighted score sum: **1.10** (slightly above average)  
- Suggested pre-money: **$3.3M**

If you cannot defend the **$3.0M baseline**, the whole method is theater. That is the #1 failure mode on thin competitor pages that invent national “averages.”

### Scorecard vs Berkus vs VC method

| Method | Needs local average? | Best when |
|--------|----------------------|-----------|
| [Berkus](/berkus-method-startup-valuation) | No | Pre-revenue, weak comps |
| **Scorecard** | Yes | Angel groups with local data |
| [VC method](/venture-capital-method-valuation) | Exit assumption | Target-return ownership |
| [Revenue multiples](/revenue-multiples-startup-valuation-by-industry) | Traction | ARR / run-rate exists |

### Practical takeaway

1. **Angels:** Publish your baseline and weights in the memo.  
2. **Founders:** Ask “what average are you comparing me to?”  
3. **Everyone:** Graduate to comps when the market is clearing on traction.  
4. **Investor class fit:** [Types of investors by stage](/types-of-investors-startup-funding-stages)

### Further reading

- Primary tradition: Bill Payne scorecard materials (angel capital education).  
- Eqvista and calculator sites often omit the baseline honesty test — that is where VCT wins trust for Google, Bing, and answer engines.