Technology due diligence can be sourced from a specialist firm like Proof Edge, from a Big Four or strategy consultancy, from a generalist IT advisory, or, in some cases, from the fund’s own deal team. The quality and usefulness of the output varies significantly between these options.
At a glance
| Specialist firm | Big Four / strategy consultancy | Generalist IT advisory | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Senior practitioners | Lead and execute end-to-end | Partner involvement varies; often analyst-led | Varies |
| Technology operating experience | Core requirement | Rare at delivery level | Varies |
| AI assessment capability | Built in | Usually bolted on | Varies |
| Speed / deal-pace | Designed for it | Typically slower | Varies |
| Report written for investors | Standard | Often internal IT framing | Varies |
| Fixed-fee model | Standard | Day rates common | Varies |
The practitioner question
The most important difference between a specialist and a generalist is who does the work.
Useful technology due diligence requires practitioners who have built and run technology businesses at scale: people who have made architecture decisions, hired engineering teams, managed technical debt under pressure, and know what good and bad look like at first hand.
Generalist consultancies and Big Four firms typically field analysts and associates at the delivery level, with partner involvement in client management and report review. The practitioners conducting the assessment may have strong process skills, but limited direct operating experience in technology businesses.
At Proof Edge, every engagement is led and executed end-to-end by senior practitioners with 15–20 years of technology leadership experience, not analysts or junior reviewers.
The AI assessment gap
AI assessment has become a standard part of technology due diligence for any software business. For most generalist advisers, this capability is recent and surface-level, added to existing frameworks in response to market demand rather than developed through direct experience.
Proof Edge has hands-on experience building AI products and embedding AI strategy at scale. We assess AI capability, infrastructure, governance, and risk as a first-class component of every engagement, not as an optional module.
Report framing and investor usability
A technology due diligence report is not useful if investors can’t use it. Reports framed in internal IT language, full of technical terminology, structured for an engineering audience, and without commercial context, require translation before they inform a deal decision.
A useful tech DD report is written for investment committees: clear language, risk-rated findings, commercial framing, and actionable conclusions. This is a skill that requires understanding both the technology and the deal context.
Specialists who work exclusively with PE and M&A clients develop this fluency. Generalists who occasionally conduct tech DD alongside broader advisory work often do not.
Speed and deal-pace
Technology due diligence in a live deal runs to the deal timeline, which is typically short. A firm that cannot mobilise quickly and deliver a complete report in weeks is a friction point in the process.
Proof Edge is structured around deal timelines. A Technology Health Check takes 1 week. A Sell-Side Technology Report takes 3 weeks. These are not aspirational figures; they reflect how the engagement is scoped and delivered.
Large consultancies typically have longer mobilisation times, more complex commercial arrangements, and less flexibility on timeline.
Pricing model
Proof Edge charges a fixed fee, quoted up front at scoping. No day rates, no open-ended retainers, no scope creep surprises.
Many generalist advisers and Big Four firms price on day rates, which creates uncertainty and misaligned incentives. A fixed-fee model aligns the adviser’s incentives with a clearly defined, high-quality output.
What to look for when choosing a tech DD adviser
-
Who actually does the work? Ask specifically whether senior practitioners lead and execute the engagement, or whether analysts conduct the assessment with senior review. The answer matters.
-
What is their operating experience? Ask for specifics: what businesses has the lead practitioner built or run? At what scale? In what sectors? Relevant experience is directly transferable to quality of assessment.
-
Can they assess AI? If the target has any AI component, and most software businesses do, or claim to, verify that the adviser has genuine AI capability rather than a recently added module.
-
How is the report framed? Ask to see an example report structure. Is it written for investors, or for an IT audience?
-
What is the pricing model? Fixed fee with a defined scope is cleaner than day rates.
-
Can they move to deal timelines? Ask specifically about mobilisation time and typical delivery timeline.