Fidelity Private Shares vs Ledgy
Fidelity Private Shares wins · 18–10 (22 drawn)
Agenticness — how well agents can access and operate the productAgenticness
How well agents can access and operate the product
Agent access
ai-native userPoint an agent at llms.txt or agent-oriented docs
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10Probes explicitly confirm no llms.txt (404) and no markdown-based docs (404), and no OpenAPI spec found either. No evidence of any agent-oriented documentation format.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
Ledgynone0/10A direct probe found no llms.txt (404) and no discoverable OpenAPI/agent-oriented docs at standard locations, and no evidence pack item mentions an agent-facing docs format.
ai-native userRun the product headlessly / in CI for automation
weight 2 · round to LedgyFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10Fidelity Private Shares is a web-based equity/cap-table management platform with no documented API, CLI, or headless automation capability; probes for llms.txt, docs.md, and OpenAPI specs all returned 404, and no evidence describes CI/scriptable usage.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
Ledgy's API supports non-interactive, machine-to-machine authentication via OAuth 2.0 client_credentials with service accounts, which enables scripted/CI-style access without a human login (ledgy-docs-1, ledgy-docs-18, ledgy-docs-19). However, the documented API surface is very limited (only `auth` and `companyCaptable` operations), no CLI, SDK, or CI-specific tooling is evidenced, and llms.txt/openapi probes both 404, suggesting thin machine-readable API documentation. Missing for 10: a broader documented API/CLI for automating core workflows (grants, reports, compliance), explicit CI/automation examples, and discoverable OpenAPI spec.
- [claimed-docs] “Requests are authenticated with an OAuth 2.0 access token belonging to a service account.”
- [claimed-docs] “Exchange the credentials for an access token using the OAuth 2.0 `client_credentials` grant”
- [claimed-docs] “you can discover it from the authorization server metadata at `https://app.ledgy.com/auth/oidc-idp/.well-known/oauth-authorization-server`”
- [claimed-docs] “The auth operation is a basic interface designed for authentication purposes. The operation user can authenticate their credentials and obta…”
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://docs.ledgy.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.ledgy.com/openapi.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/swagger.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/api…”
ai-native userConnect an agent via an official MCP server
weight 3 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10Fidelity Private Shares is a SaaS platform for equity/cap-table management, so an official MCP server for agent connectivity is a fair axis, but no evidence shows one exists—probes for llms.txt, docs.md, and OpenAPI endpoints all returned 404s, and no documentation mentions MCP or agent integration.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
Ledgynone0/10Ledgy is a cap table/equity management platform; it exposes an OAuth-authenticated API with specific operations (auth, companyCaptable) but no evidence of an official MCP server for agent connectivity. Probes for llms.txt and OpenAPI specs both returned 404, and no MCP-related documentation appears anywhere in the evidence.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://docs.ledgy.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.ledgy.com/openapi.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/swagger.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/api…”
- [claimed-docs] “The auth operation is a basic interface designed for authentication purposes. The operation user can authenticate their credentials and obta…”
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
ai-native userUse an official CLI
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10Fidelity Private Shares is a cap-table/equity management SaaS with a web UI, workflows, and integrations, but there is no mention of a CLI anywhere in the evidence; probes for llms.txt, docs.md, and OpenAPI specs all returned 404, suggesting no developer/CLI tooling is exposed.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
ai-native userDrive the product through a documented public API
weight 3 · round to LedgyFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of any public/documented API; probes for OpenAPI spec, llms.txt, and docs-md all returned 404, and no docs mention an API for programmatic access.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
Ledgy documents a public API with OAuth 2.0 client_credentials auth, service accounts, and specific operations (auth, companyCaptable) that can be driven programmatically, which supports AI-native automation. However, probes show no discoverable OpenAPI spec or llms.txt, and only two operations are evidenced, suggesting limited API surface documentation for broader agentic use. Missing for 10: a full API reference/OpenAPI spec, broader endpoint coverage beyond auth/captable, and independent corroboration of real-world API usage.
- [claimed-docs] “Requests are authenticated with an OAuth 2.0 access token belonging to a service account.”
- [claimed-docs] “The auth operation is a basic interface designed for authentication purposes. The operation user can authenticate their credentials and obta…”
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
- [claimed-docs] “Exchange the credentials for an access token using the OAuth 2.0 `client_credentials` grant”
- [claimed-docs] “you can discover it from the authorization server metadata at `https://app.ledgy.com/auth/oidc-idp/.well-known/oauth-authorization-server`”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://docs.ledgy.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.ledgy.com/openapi.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/swagger.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/api…”
ai-native userIssue scoped/least-privilege API credentials for an agent
weight 2 · round to LedgyFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of any API at all, let alone scoped/least-privilege API credentials for agent use; probes for OpenAPI/API discovery all returned 404s, and none of the docs mention API keys, tokens, or credential scoping.
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
Ledgy supports OAuth 2.0 service accounts with credentials 'scoped per integration', short-lived tokens, immediate revocation, and a client_credentials grant flow, which are solid least-privilege primitives that could be used to provision an agent's credentials. However, there's no evidence of fine-grained scope/permission configuration (e.g., read-only vs write, specific data-domain scopes) or any agent-specific tooling/framing. Missing for 10: granular permission-scope controls beyond 'per integration', explicit agent-oriented credential issuance workflow, and independent corroboration of least-privilege enforcement.
- [claimed-docs] “If you still authenticate with an API key, migrate to a service account: the credentials are scoped per integration, the tokens are short-li…”
- [claimed-docs] “Exchange the credentials for an access token using the OAuth 2.0 `client_credentials` grant”
- [claimed-docs] “Revoke deletes the service account and invalidates its outstanding access tokens right away.”
- [claimed-docs] “If credentials have been exposed, revoke rather than rotate — rotation leaves already-issued tokens usable for up to 24 hours.”
- [claimed-docs] “To rotate without downtime, create a second service account, move the integration over to it, and revoke the first one once the switch is co…”
ai-native userBuild against official SDKs
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of any official SDK, public API, or developer library exists; probes for llms.txt, docs.md, and OpenAPI specs all returned 404, and all documentation refers only to end-user workflows for equity management.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
Ledgynone0/10Evidence only shows raw OAuth 2.0 API operations (auth, companyCaptable) with no mention of official SDKs/client libraries in any language, and probes confirm no discoverable OpenAPI spec or llms.txt that would support SDK generation. missing for 10: no official SDK packages, no language-specific client libraries, no SDK documentation or GitHub repos referenced anywhere in the pack.
- [claimed-docs] “Requests are authenticated with an OAuth 2.0 access token belonging to a service account.”
- [claimed-docs] “The auth operation is a basic interface designed for authentication purposes. The operation user can authenticate their credentials and obta…”
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://docs.ledgy.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.ledgy.com/openapi.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/swagger.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/api…”
ai-native userSubscribe to events via webhooks
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of any webhook subscription mechanism or event API; probes for API/OpenAPI specs return 404, and no docs mention webhooks or event notifications for external systems.
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
Agentic features
ai-native userGet AI-generated insights and suggestions from my data inside the product
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of any AI-generated insights, suggestions, or analytics features; the product is described entirely as a cap table/equity management workflow tool with manual reports, scenario modeling, and document generation—none of which involve AI-driven analysis of user data.
Ledgynone0/10No evidence of any AI-generated insights, analytics, or suggestions feature within Ledgy; the evidence pack only covers cap table management, compliance, reporting, and API authentication mechanics. Missing for 10: any mention of AI/ML-driven analysis, natural-language insights, or suggestion features derived from user data.
ai-native userDelegate tasks to a built-in AI assistant inside the product
weight 3 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of any built-in AI assistant or agentic delegation feature; the platform is a cap table/equity management workflow tool with no mention of AI capabilities anywhere in docs or probes.
ai-native userOperate the product with natural-language commands
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of any natural-language command interface, chatbot, or AI assistant feature; the product is a form/workflow-driven equity management platform with no NLP capability mentioned. Probes for llms.txt, docs-md, and openapi also all returned 404, indicating no AI-native interface exists.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
Ledgynone0/10No evidence of any natural-language command interface, chatbot, or AI assistant in Ledgy; the product is described entirely as a cap-table/equity-management platform with REST-style API operations (auth, companyCaptable) and UI-based workflows. Probes for llms.txt and OpenAPI specs both failed, and no documentation mentions natural-language interaction.
- [claimed-docs] “The auth operation is a basic interface designed for authentication purposes. The operation user can authenticate their credentials and obta…”
- [claimed-docs] “The `companyCaptable` operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the quer…”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://docs.ledgy.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.ledgy.com/openapi.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/swagger.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/api…”
Api quality
ai-native userExplore an interactive API reference with runnable examples
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of any API reference, interactive docs, or runnable examples; probes for OpenAPI specs and llms.txt all returned 404, and all documentation is support-article style for end users, not developers.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
Ledgynone0/10Evidence shows only text descriptions of two API operations (auth, companyCaptable) with no interactive reference, no runnable examples/sandbox, and explicit probes show no OpenAPI spec or llms.txt available.
- [claimed-docs] “The auth operation is a basic interface designed for authentication purposes. The operation user can authenticate their credentials and obta…”
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://docs.ledgy.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.ledgy.com/openapi.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/swagger.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/api…”
ai-native userDownload a machine-readable API spec (OpenAPI or equivalent)
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10Probes for OpenAPI/swagger endpoints and machine-readable docs all returned 404, and no evidence pack items mention an API spec of any kind.
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
Ledgynone0/10Probes for llms.txt and common OpenAPI/Swagger spec paths all returned 404, and no docs evidence links to a downloadable machine-readable API spec despite documenting individual operations like auth and companyCaptable.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://docs.ledgy.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.ledgy.com/openapi.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/swagger.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/api…”
- [claimed-docs] “The auth operation is a basic interface designed for authentication purposes. The operation user can authenticate their credentials and obta…”
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
ai-native userTest against a sandbox environment without touching production data
weight 1 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of a sandbox/test environment, staging mode, or API for testing without touching production data; the product is a cap-table/equity management SaaS with no documented sandbox or developer testing environment, and probes for API/dev docs returned 404s.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
ai-native userRely on versioned APIs with a documented deprecation policy
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of a public API at all — probes for OpenAPI/Swagger specs and llms.txt all returned 404, and no documentation mentions API versioning or a deprecation policy.
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
Ledgynone0/10No evidence of API versioning scheme or a documented deprecation policy; docs cover auth, rotation, and specific operations but nothing about version numbers, changelogs, or deprecation timelines. OpenAPI/spec probes also failed (404s), reinforcing absence of formal versioned API documentation.
Automation depth — how much of the product can run unattendedAutomation depth
How much of the product can run unattended
ai-native userPerform bulk operations across many items at once
weight 2 · round to LedgyThe docs mention a specific bulk feature—uploading equity promises in bulk (doc-4)—showing some support for bulk operations, but there's no evidence of broader bulk actions across other item types (grants, stakeholders, documents) or any API/automation surface (probes confirm no OpenAPI/llms.txt) that an AI-native user could leverage. Missing for 10: general bulk-edit/bulk-action support across cap table items, programmatic/API access for automation, and evidence of scale beyond the single documented bulk-upload workflow.
- [claimed-docs] “For multiple promises, there is a process to upload equity promises in bulk.”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
Ledgy documents bulk operations for humans in-app (bulk granting, document/signature workflows, HRIS-driven bulk data accuracy), but there's no evidence of an API/automation surface allowing an AI-native user to programmatically perform bulk operations across many items — the API docs only show narrow operations like 'auth' and 'companyCaptable', and no bulk/batch endpoints or OpenAPI spec are found. missing for 10: API-level bulk/batch endpoints, evidence of programmatic multi-item operations, OpenAPI/spec confirmation of bulk actions.
- [claimed-docs] “Leverage the power of 70+ HRIS integrations to keep large volumes of data accurate.”
- [claimed-docs] “Automate your granting, document and signature workflows in bulk to make expansion easy.”
- [claimed-docs] “Grant share awards one by one, or in bulk, creating, signing and sharing contracts in just a few clicks.”
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
- [claimed-docs] “The auth operation is a basic interface designed for authentication purposes. The operation user can authenticate their credentials and obta…”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.ledgy.com/openapi.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/swagger.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/api…”
ai-native userDefine rules that trigger actions automatically on events
weight 3 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10Fidelity Private Shares offers built-in automation like data room syncing, workflow-tied document generation, and smart-linking, but there is no evidence of user-definable rules/triggers or an event-driven automation engine (e.g., 'if X happens, do Y') that an AI-native user could configure themselves. No API, webhooks, or rules-builder is documented, and probes for API/docs endpoints return 404.
- [claimed-docs] “your cap table and all the documents in your data room are tied together using a smart-linking feature”
- [claimed-docs] “your automatic Data Room works behind-the-scenes to add important documents as they are completed”
- [claimed-docs] “Board and stockholder approvals are automatically integrated into every relevant workflow in the platform.”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
ai-native userSchedule recurring jobs or workflows
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of any scheduling, recurring jobs, automation triggers, or workflow-orchestration API/feature; the product is a cap table/equity management SaaS with manual workflows and no automation or API layer (openapi/llms.txt probes all 404). This axis applies to any SaaS platform but there's no support for AI-driven scheduled/recurring automation.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
- [claimed-docs] “Workflows often have two paths - generative, where you can generate new documents to execute on the platform, and upload, where you can capt…”
Ledgynone0/10No evidence of scheduling, cron-like recurring jobs, or workflow automation triggers in Ledgy's API or product docs; the pack only covers auth, cap table, and reporting features. missing for 10: any scheduling/recurring job mechanism, workflow trigger API, or automation orchestration capability.
Cap table core — stories about cap table core in this arenaCap table core
Stories about cap table core in this arena
Certificates
founderIssue electronic share certificates that are legally signed in-platform and permanently linked to the cap table entry they represent
weight 2 · round to Fidelity Private SharesDocs describe e-signing of documents (docs-22, docs-37) and explicitly state that stock certificates and other documents are tied to the corresponding award agreement, board consent, and exercise actions (docs-34), plus a smart-linking feature connecting cap table entries to data-room documents (docs-7, docs-8). This directly supports issuing signed certificates linked to cap table records. missing for 10: independent/hands-on corroboration of certificate issuance workflow, explicit legal-validity/e-sign compliance details (e.g., ESIGN Act), and confirmation that the link is truly permanent/immutable rather than just dynamically updated
- [claimed-docs] “You can use your mouse to draw your signature, upload an image file of your signature, or type in your signature.”
- [claimed-docs] “the platform will email you a link to review and sign the document(s) involved in that step of the workflow”
- [claimed-docs] “the award agreement will be tied to the corresponding board consent, subsequent exercise actions, stock certificates, and other future relat…”
- [claimed-docs] “your cap table and all the documents in your data room are tied together using a smart-linking feature”
- [claimed-docs] “Do you want your capitalization table to automatically update and dynamically link directly to all supporting documents in a secured data ro…”
Ledgy's docs mention granting share awards and 'creating, signing and sharing contracts in just a few clicks' (ledgy-docs-12) and automating 'document and signature workflows' (ledgy-docs-10), indicating in-platform signing tied to grants/cap table entries. However, there is no explicit mention of legally binding e-signature certification or the certificates being permanently and immutably linked to the cap table record. missing for 10: explicit legal e-signature compliance details, proof of permanent/immutable linkage between certificate and cap table entry, independent verification of signature legality.
- [claimed-docs] “Grant share awards one by one, or in bulk, creating, signing and sharing contracts in just a few clicks.”
- [claimed-docs] “Automate your granting, document and signature workflows in bulk to make expansion easy.”
- [claimed-docs] “Bring historical transaction data into your cap table, with documents attached for maximum visibility and accuracy.”
Migration
ops userMigrate an existing cap table — from a spreadsheet or another platform — with guided import, validation, and reconciliation against source documents
weight 2 · round drawnThe docs mention bulk upload of equity promises and marketing language that implies moving off spreadsheets, but there is no dedicated guided cap-table migration workflow with validation or reconciliation against source documents described. Missing for 10: explicit migration/import tool for existing cap tables, validation rules, and reconciliation against source documents or historical filings.
- [claimed-docs] “For multiple promises, there is a process to upload equity promises in bulk.”
- [claimed-docs] “without spreadsheets or surprises”
Ledgy mentions bringing in historical transaction data with attached documents, implying some import capability, but there is no evidence of a guided import wizard, data validation, or reconciliation process against source documents. Missing for 10: guided import/migration workflow, validation checks, reconciliation reporting, and evidence of spreadsheet/platform migration support.
- [claimed-docs] “Bring historical transaction data into your cap table, with documents attached for maximum visibility and accuracy.”
Source of truth
founderMaintain my full cap table — share classes, certificates, SAFEs, and option grants — as a live single source of truth that investors and auditors rely on
weight 3 · round drawnFidelity Private Shares is a dedicated cap table management platform with first-party docs describing core cap table maintenance (share classes, certificates, options, vesting), bulk-uploading equity promises/SAFEs, convertible note generation, smart-linking of cap table to supporting documents in an automated data room, and integration of board/stockholder approvals into workflows so records stay live and auditable (ASC 718 reporting, 409A support). This directly matches the founder's need for a single live source of truth relied on by investors and auditors. Missing for 10: no independent/third-party corroboration (e.g., customer case studies or reviews) confirming real-world reliability as an investor/auditor-trusted source of truth, and no explicit mention of preferred/common share class distinctions beyond general cap table language.
- [claimed-docs] “For multiple promises, there is a process to upload equity promises in bulk.”
- [claimed-docs] “your cap table and all the documents in your data room are tied together using a smart-linking feature”
- [claimed-docs] “Do you want your capitalization table to automatically update and dynamically link directly to all supporting documents in a secured data ro…”
- [claimed-docs] “your automatic Data Room works behind-the-scenes to add important documents as they are completed”
- [claimed-docs] “Board and stockholder approvals are automatically integrated into every relevant workflow in the platform.”
- [claimed-docs] “This article will walk you through the process of generating a Convertible Note (or Bridge Note).”
- [claimed-docs] “the award agreement will be tied to the corresponding board consent, subsequent exercise actions, stock certificates, and other future relat…”
- [claimed-docs] “We organize everything you may need to create ASC 718 reports, including grant types, vesting schedules and Stock Incentive Plan details.”
- [claimed-docs] “the platform will generate an Excel file (.xlsx) with ASC 718 report calculations”
Ledgy's docs describe core cap-table functionality: bringing in historical transactions with attached documents, share classes/grants, reporting, and API access to cap table data (companyCaptable operation), positioning it as a live system of record used by companies and relied on for compliance/audit reporting. missing for 10: independent/third-party corroboration (e.g., investor or auditor testimonials) that Ledgy is trusted as the authoritative source of truth, and explicit documentation of SAFE instrument support.
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
- [claimed-docs] “Bring historical transaction data into your cap table, with documents attached for maximum visibility and accuracy.”
- [claimed-docs] “Build reports based on your needs: play with columns and views and aggregate grouping to see your data, your way.”
- [claimed-docs] “Generate a broad suite of financial reports instantly to account for equity under IFRS 2, UK GAAP or US GAAP, with tranche-level details in …”
- [claimed-docs] “Automated error flags and crystal-clear visuals let you easily identify and resolve compliance risks.”
- [claimed-docs] “The `companyCaptable` operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the quer…”
Compliance filings — stories about compliance filings in this arenaCompliance filings
Stories about compliance filings in this arena
Stock comp
ops userProduce ASC 718 stock-based compensation expense reports my accountants can hand to auditors
weight 2 · round to Fidelity Private SharesFidelity Private Shares has a dedicated ASC 718 reporting workflow that organizes grant types, vesting schedules, and Stock Incentive Plan details, and generates an Excel (.xlsx) file with ASC 718 report calculations ready to hand to accountants/auditors; this is a named feature on the Growth plan tier. missing for 10: independent/auditor-side corroboration that the generated report satisfies actual audit requirements, and detail on customization/audit-trail support beyond the standard export.
- [claimed-docs] “the platform will generate an Excel file (.xlsx) with ASC 718 report calculations”
- [claimed-docs] “We organize everything you may need to create ASC 718 reports, including grant types, vesting schedules and Stock Incentive Plan details.”
- [claimed-docs] “move to our Growth plan with 409A valuations and ASC 718 reporting and more”
- [claimed-docs] “At the completion of this workflow, the platform will generate an Excel file (.xlsx) with ASC 718 report calculations.”
Ledgy explicitly advertises financial reports for equity compensation under US GAAP (which ASC 718 is part of) with tranche-level detail generated in one click, directly relevant to SBC expense reporting for auditors. However, the evidence never names ASC 718 specifically or describes audit-ready formatting/export conventions accountants expect. Missing for 10: explicit ASC 718 terminology, sample report/audit trail evidence, and confirmation of accountant-facing export formats.
- [claimed-docs] “Generate a broad suite of financial reports instantly to account for equity under IFRS 2, UK GAAP or US GAAP, with tranche-level details in …”
- [claimed-docs] “One-click equity compliance reports, custom views and exports, make meeting compliance deadlines a breeze.”
Us filings
ops userUS equity compliance — Rule 701 disclosure thresholds, Form 3921 filings, 83(b) elections — is tracked and generated from the cap table automatically
weight 2 · round to Fidelity Private SharesThe product explicitly offers '83(b) generation' as a plan feature and ASC 718 stock option expense reporting tied to cap table data, showing some automated compliance-filing support. However, there is no evidence of Rule 701 disclosure threshold tracking or Form 3921 filing generation/automation. missing for 10: Rule 701 disclosure threshold tracking, Form 3921 filing generation, and confirmation these are auto-generated (not just templates) from live cap table data.
- [claimed-docs] “Up to 25 stakeholders and less than $1M raised Cap table management Equity plan generation Data room Board consents Scenario modeling …”
- [claimed-docs] “We organize everything you may need to create ASC 718 reports, including grant types, vesting schedules and Stock Incentive Plan details.”
- [claimed-docs] “move to our Growth plan with 409A valuations and ASC 718 reporting and more”
- [claimed-docs] “At the completion of this workflow, the platform will generate an Excel file (.xlsx) with ASC 718 report calculations.”
Ledgynone0/10Evidence shows generic equity-compliance features (error flags, global mobility reporting, one-click compliance reports) but no mention of Rule 701 disclosure thresholds, Form 3921 filings, or 83(b) election tracking/generation — the specific US regulatory triggers named in the story are absent from the evidence pack.
- [claimed-docs] “Automated error flags and crystal-clear visuals let you easily identify and resolve compliance risks.”
- [claimed-docs] “Global mobility reporting helps you stay on top of equity and tax as your workforce moves across borders.”
- [claimed-docs] “One-click equity compliance reports, custom views and exports, make meeting compliance deadlines a breeze.”
Equity data access — stories about equity data access in this arenaEquity data access
Stories about equity data access in this arena
Agent access
ai-native userAn agent can draft securities (e.g. option grants) via the platform's programmatic surface and leave them queued for human board approval
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10There is no evidence of any programmatic API surface (probes for llms.txt, docs.md, and OpenAPI all return 404), so an agent cannot draft securities programmatically at all; workflows described are UI-driven, human-initiated processes.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
Ledgynone0/10The API surface documented is read-only (auth, companyCaptable) with no evidence of any write/create operations for securities like option grants, let alone a queued-for-approval workflow; granting is only described as a manual UI feature (bulk grant/sign in the app), not a programmatic agent-drafting capability. missing for 10: any documented API endpoint to create/draft a grant, any concept of an approval queue or draft state reachable via API, and evidence of an agent-facing programmatic interface for equity issuance.
- [claimed-docs] “The auth operation is a basic interface designed for authentication purposes. The operation user can authenticate their credentials and obta…”
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
- [claimed-docs] “The `companyCaptable` operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the quer…”
- [claimed-docs] “The `auth` operation is a basic interface designed for authentication purposes. The operation user can authenticate their credentials and ob…”
- [claimed-docs] “Grant share awards one by one, or in bulk, creating, signing and sharing contracts in just a few clicks.”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.ledgy.com/openapi.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/swagger.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/api…”
ai-native userHave an agent pull my current cap table programmatically and reconcile it against my data room before a financing
weight 3 · round to LedgyFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of any API, export endpoint, or programmatic access mechanism—probes for llms.txt, docs.md, and OpenAPI all return 404s, and all documented features are UI-based workflows (cap table, data room smart-linking, scenario modeling) with no mention of agent-accessible data pulls or reconciliation tooling.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
- [claimed-docs] “your cap table and all the documents in your data room are tied together using a smart-linking feature”
- [claimed-docs] “Do you want your capitalization table to automatically update and dynamically link directly to all supporting documents in a secured data ro…”
Ledgy exposes an OAuth2-authenticated API with a companyCaptable operation that lets an agent programmatically pull cap table data, which is the core enabler for this story. However, there is no evidence of a documented reconciliation/data-room comparison capability, no data-room API, no openapi/llms.txt discoverability (both probes 404), and no example of an agent workflow tying cap table pulls to data-room reconciliation. Missing for 10: data-room integration/API, reconciliation logic or workflow support, machine-readable API spec (openapi.json/llms.txt) for agent discovery, independent/hands-on evidence of this workflow.
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
- [claimed-docs] “The `companyCaptable` operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the quer…”
- [claimed-docs] “Exchange the credentials for an access token using the OAuth 2.0 `client_credentials` grant”
- [claimed-docs] “Requests are authenticated with an OAuth 2.0 access token belonging to a service account.”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://docs.ledgy.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.ledgy.com/openapi.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/swagger.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/api…”
Api access
developerPull the full capitalization table — stakeholders, share classes, securities, and vesting states — through a documented programmatic API
weight 3 · round to LedgyFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of any programmatic API for accessing cap table data — probes for OpenAPI/Swagger specs and llms.txt all returned 404, and no documentation mentions an API, SDK, or export endpoint for stakeholders/share classes/securities/vesting data. All evidence pertains to UI-based workflows, reports, and third-party integrations (Gusto) rather than a documented developer API.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
Ledgy docs describe a documented, OAuth2-authenticated API with a `companyCaptable` operation that retrieves 'cap table data' for a company, which is the correct programmatic-access mechanism a developer would need. However, the evidence never enumerates the specific fields (stakeholders, share classes, securities, vesting states) returned by that operation, and probes for a public OpenAPI/swagger spec all 404, so the schema depth and completeness cannot be confirmed. Missing for 10: field-level schema documentation confirming stakeholders/share classes/securities/vesting data, and an accessible OpenAPI/reference spec.
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
- [claimed-docs] “The `companyCaptable` operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the quer…”
- [claimed-docs] “Exchange the credentials for an access token using the OAuth 2.0 `client_credentials` grant”
- [claimed-docs] “Requests are authenticated with an OAuth 2.0 access token belonging to a service account.”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.ledgy.com/openapi.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/swagger.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/api…”
Partner access
developerThird parties my company authorizes — law firms, HRIS vendors, wealth managers — can access scoped slices of equity data on our behalf without full admin credentials
weight 2 · round to LedgyFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of a developer-facing API, scoped access tokens, or third-party delegated access mechanism for law firms, HRIS vendors, or wealth managers; the evidence pack shows only end-user workflows (data room, cap table, board consents) and explicit probe failures for API/docs endpoints (llms.txt, openapi.json all 404). This is a fair axis for an equity management platform since such products commonly support advisor/auditor access roles, but no such capability is documented.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
Ledgy's docs show OAuth 2.0 service accounts that are credential-scoped per integration, short-lived, and revocable, which supports the general concept of granting a third-party integration access without sharing admin credentials, and the 70+ HRIS integrations point to real external vendor connectivity. However, there's no explicit documentation of granular data-slice scoping (e.g., read-only cap-table subsets) or of onboarding named third-party personas like law firms or wealth managers specifically, only generic 'auth' and 'companyCaptable' API operations. Missing for 10: explicit fine-grained permission/data-scope controls per third party, documented support for law-firm/wealth-manager use cases, and any admin UI showing how a developer restricts a partner's access scope.
- [claimed-docs] “Requests are authenticated with an OAuth 2.0 access token belonging to a service account.”
- [claimed-docs] “If you still authenticate with an API key, migrate to a service account: the credentials are scoped per integration, the tokens are short-li…”
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
- [claimed-docs] “Leverage the power of 70+ HRIS integrations to keep large volumes of data accurate.”
- [claimed-docs] “Exchange the credentials for an access token using the OAuth 2.0 `client_credentials` grant”
- [claimed-docs] “The `auth` operation is a basic interface designed for authentication purposes. The operation user can authenticate their credentials and ob…”
Equity issuance — stories about equity issuance in this arenaEquity issuance
Stories about equity issuance in this arena
Bulk issuance
ops userUpload or issue securities in bulk — a batch of grants or historical transactions — instead of entering them one at a time
weight 2 · round to LedgyThere is direct first-party documentation of a bulk-upload workflow for equity promises ("For multiple promises, there is a process to upload equity promises in bulk"), which supports batch issuance rather than one-at-a-time entry. However, the evidence lacks detail on format/template specifics, historical transaction backfill support, error handling, or independent/hands-on corroboration of the bulk process. Missing for 10: detailed documentation of the upload template/CSV format, confirmation it covers historical transactions (not just promises), and independent verification of successful bulk imports.
- [claimed-docs] “For multiple promises, there is a process to upload equity promises in bulk.”
- [claimed-docs] “Vesting schedules that you use frequently can be saved as a predefined schedule.”
Docs explicitly support bulk historical transaction import ('Bring historical transaction data into your cap table') and bulk grant issuance ('Grant share awards one by one, or in bulk, creating, signing and sharing contracts in just a few clicks'), plus bulk automation of granting/document/signature workflows. missing for 10: no independent/hands-on corroboration of bulk upload UX, no detail on file format (CSV/template) or size limits, no evidence of error handling during bulk upload.
- [claimed-docs] “Bring historical transaction data into your cap table, with documents attached for maximum visibility and accuracy.”
- [claimed-docs] “Automate your granting, document and signature workflows in bulk to make expansion easy.”
- [claimed-docs] “Grant share awards one by one, or in bulk, creating, signing and sharing contracts in just a few clicks.”
Option grants
founderIssue options to a new hire with a board approval flow and a 409A-compliant strike price in one end-to-end workflow
weight 3 · round to Fidelity Private SharesDocs show board/stockholder approvals are automatically integrated into workflows and tied to award agreements, FMV-based strike pricing (with override option), predefined vesting schedules, and Gusto integration that can auto-grant equity from offer-letter promises — covering the core founder journey of approving and issuing a compliant option grant to a new hire. 409A compliance is supported via third-party valuation providers feeding FMV into the grant workflow rather than a single in-house step. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on corroboration of the full flow, and a concrete example specifically for a 'new hire' offer-to-grant scenario end-to-end.
- [claimed-docs] “Board and stockholder approvals are automatically integrated into every relevant workflow in the platform.”
- [claimed-docs] “the award agreement will be tied to the corresponding board consent, subsequent exercise actions, stock certificates, and other future relat…”
- [claimed-docs] “Select Yes to allow grants to be priced above or below FMV.”
- [claimed-docs] “We work with third party 409A Valuation Report providers based on your company's individual needs.”
- [claimed-docs] “Automatically grant equity from promises in offer letters”
- [claimed-docs] “Vesting schedules that you use frequently can be saved as a predefined schedule.”
Ledgy's docs show granting workflows (bulk grants, contract signing, custom vesting) but there is no evidence of a board approval step or 409A-compliant strike price calculation anywhere in the pack. missing for 10: board approval workflow, 409A strike price compliance, end-to-end integration of these into a single grant flow.
- [claimed-docs] “Automate your granting, document and signature workflows in bulk to make expansion easy.”
- [claimed-docs] “Switch up vesting schedules for different groups, or create custom vesting to reflect your needs.”
- [claimed-docs] “Grant share awards one by one, or in bulk, creating, signing and sharing contracts in just a few clicks.”
Vesting
ops userDefine custom vesting schedules — cliffs, milestones, acceleration on exit — and the platform tracks vested vs unvested automatically
weight 2 · round to Fidelity Private SharesDocs confirm predefined/custom vesting schedules can be created and reused for grants, and the platform provides ASC 718 reporting that organizes vesting schedules and grant types — implying vested/unvested tracking. However, there is no explicit evidence of milestone-based vesting, acceleration-on-exit triggers, or automatic real-time vested-vs-unvested calculation logic being described. Missing for 10: explicit support for milestone/performance-based vesting, acceleration-on-exit clauses, and detailed automatic vested/unvested tracking mechanics.
- [claimed-docs] “Selecting from a predefined vesting schedule will expedite both processes by prepopulating the vesting details for you and ensure consistenc…”
- [claimed-docs] “Vesting schedules that you use frequently can be saved as a predefined schedule.”
- [claimed-docs] “We organize everything you may need to create ASC 718 reports, including grant types, vesting schedules and Stock Incentive Plan details.”
- [claimed-docs] “the platform will generate an Excel file (.xlsx) with ASC 718 report calculations”
Ledgy's own equity-plan-automation page confirms custom vesting schedules ('Switch up vesting schedules for different groups, or create custom vesting') and bulk granting workflows, which supports the core ask, but there is no explicit evidence of cliff/milestone/acceleration-on-exit configuration or of automatic vested-vs-unvested tracking mechanics. Missing for 10: explicit cliff/milestone/acceleration-on-exit setup details, documentation of automatic vested/unvested calculation logic, and independent corroboration beyond marketing copy.
- [claimed-docs] “Switch up vesting schedules for different groups, or create custom vesting to reflect your needs.”
- [claimed-docs] “Automate your granting, document and signature workflows in bulk to make expansion easy.”
- [claimed-docs] “Grant share awards one by one, or in bulk, creating, signing and sharing contracts in just a few clicks.”
Fundraising modeling — stories about fundraising modeling in this arenaFundraising modeling
Stories about fundraising modeling in this arena
Investor relations
founderMy investors get their own portal view of their holdings and can receive structured updates without emailing me for the cap table
weight 1 · round to Fidelity Private SharesThe platform offers stakeholders a 'My Equity' self-service view of their grants and exercise options, and a smart-linked data room that automatically shares relevant documents, which could reduce founder-investor emailing about holdings. However, there is no explicit evidence of a dedicated investor-facing portal (distinct from employee/optionholder equity view) or of proactive 'structured updates' (e.g., scheduled reports, dashboards) being pushed to investors. Missing for 10: dedicated investor portal distinct from employee equity view, evidence of structured/periodic investor update delivery, and any investor-specific reporting feature.
- [claimed-docs] “click on My Equity to view your available grants. Grants with an Exercise Now button have options available for exercise.”
- [claimed-docs] “Grants with an Exercise Now button have options available for exercise.”
- [claimed-docs] “your cap table and all the documents in your data room are tied together using a smart-linking feature”
- [claimed-docs] “your automatic Data Room works behind-the-scenes to add important documents as they are completed”
Ledgynone0/10The evidence pack covers API authentication, cap table data, equity plan automation, compliance, and trading/settlement features, but contains no mention of an investor portal, investor login access, or structured update/reporting features aimed at external investors. missing for 10: investor portal login, investor-facing update/reporting workflow, evidence of reducing founder-investor email traffic.
Safes
founderCreate, send, and e-sign SAFEs or convertible notes in-platform, and they land on the cap table with their conversion terms modeled
weight 3 · round to Fidelity Private SharesDocs show founders can generate and e-sign a Convertible Note in-platform (docs-21, docs-22, docs-37) and that award/agreement documents are automatically tied to cap table records via smart-linking (docs-7, docs-34), supporting the notes-to-cap-table linkage. However, SAFEs specifically are never mentioned, and there is no explicit description of how conversion terms (valuation cap, discount) are modeled or reflected in cap table math. Missing for 10: explicit SAFE support, and documentation of automatic conversion-term modeling on the cap table.
- [claimed-docs] “This article will walk you through the process of generating a Convertible Note (or Bridge Note).”
- [claimed-docs] “You can use your mouse to draw your signature, upload an image file of your signature, or type in your signature.”
- [claimed-docs] “the platform will email you a link to review and sign the document(s) involved in that step of the workflow”
- [claimed-docs] “your cap table and all the documents in your data room are tied together using a smart-linking feature”
- [claimed-docs] “the award agreement will be tied to the corresponding board consent, subsequent exercise actions, stock certificates, and other future relat…”
Ledgynone0/10Evidence covers cap table reporting, equity plan automation, share grants, compliance, and API auth, but there is no mention of creating/sending/e-signing SAFEs or convertible notes, nor of automatic conversion-term modeling on the cap table. missing for 10: SAFE/convertible note creation workflow, e-signature for investment instruments, conversion term modeling on cap table.
- [claimed-docs] “Bring historical transaction data into your cap table, with documents attached for maximum visibility and accuracy.”
- [claimed-docs] “Grant share awards one by one, or in bulk, creating, signing and sharing contracts in just a few clicks.”
- [claimed-docs] “Build reports based on your needs: play with columns and views and aggregate grouping to see your data, your way.”
Scenario modeling
ops userRun exit waterfall analyses showing proceeds per share class and stakeholder under different exit values, honoring preferences and participation
weight 2 · round to Fidelity Private SharesThe product offers scenario modeling for hypothetical future rounds with IRR and cash-on-cash calculations, which touches exit/return analysis, but there is no evidence of a dedicated waterfall analysis feature that models proceeds per share class/stakeholder honoring liquidation preferences and participation rights across different exit values. Missing for 10: explicit waterfall modeling of exit proceeds by share class, evidence of handling preference stacks (participating vs non-participating, multiples), and stakeholder-level payout breakdowns under varying exit scenarios.
- [claimed-docs] “explore hypothetical future rounds, and export scenarios to review with your team”
- [claimed-docs] “Internal Rate of Return and Cash-on-cash calculations”
- [claimed-docs] “you can feel more confident using our scenario modeling and planning features... explore hypothetical future rounds, and export scenarios to…”
Ledgynone0/10The evidence pack covers API authentication, cap table reporting, equity plan automation, compliance, and trading/settlement, but contains no mention of exit waterfall analysis, liquidation preferences, participation rights, or proceeds-per-share modeling under different exit scenarios. Missing for 10: any documentation of exit waterfall/scenario modeling, preference stack handling, participation calculations, or proceeds distribution by exit value.
founderModel a priced round — dilution, option pool top-up, SAFE conversion, pro-forma ownership — and share the scenario with counsel and investors
weight 3 · round to Fidelity Private SharesFidelity Private Shares documents a dedicated scenario-modeling feature covering hypothetical future rounds, IRR/cash-on-cash calculations, and exporting scenarios for team review, plus a related automated-equity-financing tool to model rounds and generate term sheets/financing documents. However, the evidence doesn't explicitly confirm modeling of option pool top-ups, SAFE conversions, or pro-forma ownership tables within the scenario tool, nor direct 'share with counsel/investors' collaboration workflow for scenarios specifically (only general document sharing/data room features are shown). Missing for 10: explicit SAFE conversion modeling, explicit option pool top-up modeling in scenario tool, pro-forma ownership output, and evidence of sharing a scenario directly with external counsel/investors.
- [claimed-docs] “explore hypothetical future rounds, and export scenarios to review with your team”
- [claimed-docs] “Internal Rate of Return and Cash-on-cash calculations”
- [claimed-docs] “Model your next round, generate your term sheet, and create financing documents”
- [claimed-docs] “you can feel more confident using our scenario modeling and planning features... explore hypothetical future rounds, and export scenarios to…”
- [claimed-docs] “This article will walk you through the process of generating a Convertible Note (or Bridge Note).”
Ledgynone0/10The evidence pack covers API authentication, cap table management, equity plan automation, compliance, and trading/settlement, but contains no mention of fundraising round modeling, dilution scenarios, option pool top-ups, SAFE conversion modeling, pro-forma ownership tables, or sharing scenarios with counsel/investors. Nothing in the pack addresses this specific fundraising-modeling capability.
Governance boardroom — stories about governance boardroom in this arenaGovernance boardroom
Stories about governance boardroom in this arena
Board approvals
founderBoard consents and stockholder approvals are drafted, routed for e-signature, and archived against the transactions they authorize
weight 2 · round to Fidelity Private SharesDocs explicitly describe drafting board/stockholder consents via dedicated workflows, e-signature routing (mouse/upload/type signature, email link to sign), and automatic archiving/linking of executed documents to the transactions they authorize (e.g., award agreements tied to board consents, exercises, and certificates) via the smart-linked data room. This directly matches the story's draft→route for e-signature→archive-against-transaction workflow. missing for 10: independent/hands-on corroboration beyond vendor docs.
- [claimed-docs] “This article will show you how to create a written consent for board directors or stockholders and solicit approvals using the Board Consent…”
- [claimed-docs] “Board and stockholder approvals are automatically integrated into every relevant workflow in the platform.”
- [claimed-docs] “You can use your mouse to draw your signature, upload an image file of your signature, or type in your signature.”
- [claimed-docs] “the platform will email you a link to review and sign the document(s) involved in that step of the workflow”
- [claimed-docs] “the award agreement will be tied to the corresponding board consent, subsequent exercise actions, stock certificates, and other future relat…”
- [claimed-docs] “your cap table and all the documents in your data room are tied together using a smart-linking feature”
- [claimed-docs] “your automatic Data Room works behind-the-scenes to add important documents as they are completed”
Ledgynone0/10Evidence covers cap table management, equity compliance reporting, HRIS integrations, and API authentication, plus e-signature use for grant contracts, but there is no mention of board consents or stockholder approval workflows being drafted, routed for signature, and archived against specific authorizing transactions.
Counsel access
ops userMy outside counsel can work directly in the platform with law-firm roles — preparing documents and updating records without emailing spreadsheets
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10The evidence pack covers cap table management, workflows, board consents, ASC 718, data room, and integrations, but nowhere mentions outside counsel access, law-firm-specific roles/permissions, or attorney collaboration features within the platform. No documentation references external counsel logins, role-based access for law firms, or counsel-specific document preparation capabilities.
Ledgynone0/10No evidence of a law-firm/counsel-specific role or external-counsel collaboration workflow; docs mention only generic 'segment permissions for team members' and API/service-account access, nothing about outside counsel drafting documents or updating records in-platform.
- [claimed-docs] “Segment permissions for team members, ad”
Data room
ops userShare a permissioned, diligence-ready data room — cap table views plus underlying documents — with counsel and investors
weight 2 · round to Fidelity Private SharesDocs clearly describe an automated, smart-linked data room that ties cap table entries to underlying documents (grants, consents, financing docs) and is marketed as 'secured' — a core diligence-ready data room capability offered across pricing tiers. However, there is no explicit documentation of granular, role-based permissioning for external parties like counsel or investors (e.g. view-only access, watermarking, expiring links) — missing for 10: explicit external-party permission controls, evidence of investor/counsel-specific access workflows, and any hands-on/independent confirmation of the sharing experience.
- [claimed-docs] “your cap table and all the documents in your data room are tied together using a smart-linking feature”
- [claimed-docs] “Do you want your capitalization table to automatically update and dynamically link directly to all supporting documents in a secured data ro…”
- [claimed-docs] “your automatic Data Room works behind-the-scenes to add important documents as they are completed”
- [claimed-docs] “every time you make a change, the resulting docs are automatically collected and organized”
- [claimed-docs] “Up to 25 stakeholders and less than $1M raised Cap table management Equity plan generation Data room Board consents Scenario modeling …”
Evidence shows Ledgy attaches documents to cap table records (ledgy-docs-7) and offers permission segmentation for team members (ledgy-docs-23), which are building blocks for a shared, permissioned repository, but there is no explicit mention of a dedicated 'data room' feature, external counsel/investor access controls, or diligence-specific sharing workflow. Missing for 10: explicit data-room/document-sharing feature description, external party (counsel/investor) access permissioning, and any hands-on or documented workflow for diligence sharing.
- [claimed-docs] “Bring historical transaction data into your cap table, with documents attached for maximum visibility and accuracy.”
- [claimed-docs] “Segment permissions for team members, ad”
- [claimed-docs] “Build reports based on your needs: play with columns and views and aggregate grouping to see your data, your way.”
Integrations hris — stories about integrations hris in this arenaIntegrations hris
Stories about integrations hris in this arena
Hris sync
ops userStakeholders sync from my HRIS/payroll system (e.g. Gusto, Rippling) so new hires and terminations flow into equity records automatically
weight 2 · round to Fidelity Private SharesDocs explicitly describe a Gusto integration that syncs hiring, onboarding, and equity data, eliminating duplicate entry, and auto-granting equity from offer-letter promises, which directly supports the HRIS-sync story. However, evidence is limited to Gusto only (no Rippling or other payroll systems), and there's no explicit mention of termination events flowing into equity records. Missing for 10: explicit termination/offboarding sync, multi-HRIS support (e.g. Rippling), and independent confirmation of automatic new-hire equity creation beyond offer-letter promises.
- [claimed-docs] “eliminating the need to re-enter employee information in multiple solutions”
- [claimed-docs] “Sync relevant hiring, onboarding, and equity data between Fidelity Private Shares and Gusto — no need for error-prone, duplicate data entry”
- [claimed-docs] “Automatically grant equity from promises in offer letters”
Ledgy claims '70+ HRIS integrations to keep large volumes of data accurate' for equity plan automation, implying HRIS/payroll sync is supported, but there is no detail on which systems (e.g., Gusto, Rippling), how new hire/termination events flow into equity records, or sync mechanics/frequency. Missing for 10: named HRIS/payroll connectors, description of automated new-hire/termination event handling, setup/configuration docs, and independent or hands-on confirmation of the sync working.
- [claimed-docs] “Leverage the power of 70+ HRIS integrations to keep large volumes of data accurate.”
Openness — open source, data portability, and self-hosting storiesOpenness
Open source, data portability, and self-hosting stories
ai-native userDo everything through the API that I can do in the UI
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of any public API at all—probes for OpenAPI/Swagger specs all returned 404, and no docs mention an API, SDK, or programmatic access to cap table, equity, or workflow features. Without an API, there is no way to perform UI actions programmatically.
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
Ledgynone0/10The API surface documented is limited to authentication and a single read-only companyCaptable query — nothing evidencing parity with the extensive UI functionality (bulk grants, vesting schedules, compliance reports, trading/settlement, HRIS integrations, financial reporting). No OpenAPI spec or broader endpoint catalog was found (probes 404), so there's no evidence the API covers most UI capabilities let alone all of them.
- [claimed-docs] “The auth operation is a basic interface designed for authentication purposes. The operation user can authenticate their credentials and obta…”
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
- [claimed-docs] “The `companyCaptable` operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the quer…”
- [claimed-docs] “The `auth` operation is a basic interface designed for authentication purposes. The operation user can authenticate their credentials and ob…”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.ledgy.com/openapi.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/swagger.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/api…”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://docs.ledgy.com/llms.txt”
ai-native userExport all of my data in open formats and leave
weight 3 · round to Fidelity Private SharesThe platform supports exporting specific reports (ASC 718 calculations as .xlsx, scenario modeling exports) but there is no evidence of a comprehensive account/data export function that would let a user extract their full cap table, documents, and equity data in open formats to leave the platform. missing for 10: full data export/migration tooling, open-format bulk export (CSV/JSON) of cap table and data room contents, documented account closure/data portability process, and any independent confirmation of export completeness.
- [claimed-docs] “the platform will generate an Excel file (.xlsx) with ASC 718 report calculations”
- [claimed-docs] “At the completion of this workflow, the platform will generate an Excel file (.xlsx) with ASC 718 report calculations.”
- [claimed-docs] “explore hypothetical future rounds, and export scenarios to review with your team”
- [claimed-docs] “you can feel more confident using our scenario modeling and planning features... explore hypothetical future rounds, and export scenarios to…”
Ledgynone0/10Evidence shows API access via cap table/company queries and report exports (custom views/exports), but there is no mention of a full open-format data export/portability feature enabling a user to take all their data and leave the platform; no llms.txt or OpenAPI spec found either.
- [claimed-docs] “One-click equity compliance reports, custom views and exports, make meeting compliance deadlines a breeze.”
- [claimed-docs] “Build reports based on your needs: play with columns and views and aggregate grouping to see your data, your way.”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://docs.ledgy.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.ledgy.com/openapi.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/swagger.json, https://docs.ledgy.com/api…”
Privacy posture — data-handling and privacy storiesPrivacy posture
Data-handling and privacy stories
ai-native userChoose where my data is stored (region/residency)
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence anywhere in the pack of data residency/region selection options for stored data; Fidelity Private Shares is an equity/cap-table management SaaS with no mention of configurable data storage location or AI-native data controls.
ai-native userPrevent my data from being used to train AI models
weight 3 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence in the pack addresses AI training data usage, opt-out controls, or any AI-related privacy policy for Fidelity Private Shares; the product is a cap table/equity management platform with no mention of AI model training at all.
Ledgynone0/10Ledgy's evidence pack covers API authentication, cap table, equity plan, compliance, and trading features, but contains no mention of AI training data usage, opt-out controls, or data-use policies for AI models. This is a fair question for a SaaS platform handling sensitive company data, so absence of evidence yields 'none' rather than 'na'. Missing for 10: any policy statement, opt-out mechanism, or documentation addressing whether customer data is used for AI/ML model training.
ai-native userControl data retention and deletion
weight 2 · round drawnFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10Fidelity Private Shares is a cap-table/equity management platform; the evidence covers vesting schedules, ASC 718 reports, board consents, data rooms, integrations, etc., but there is no mention of AI data usage, retention policies, or user-controlled deletion of data related to AI features. No documentation addresses data retention/deletion controls at all.
Ledgynone0/10Evidence covers credential/access-token revocation and rotation, but there is nothing about data retention policies, data deletion of user/company data, or export/erasure controls for AI-native use. missing for 10: data retention policy documentation, data deletion/erasure workflow, export controls tied to AI agent usage.
Reporting exports — stories about reporting exports in this arenaReporting exports
Stories about reporting exports in this arena
Audit trail
ops userEvery change to the cap table is captured in an audit log — who changed what, when, and under what authorization
weight 1 · round to Fidelity Private SharesThe docs show that equity changes are tied to underlying approval documents (award agreements linked to board consents, exercises, and certificates) and that a 'Change Board Members' workflow can record historical or current changes, plus an automated data room that collects docs whenever changes are made — implying some traceability of who authorized what and when. However, there is no explicit description of a dedicated audit log or change history feature that shows user, timestamp, and authorization for every cap table edit. Missing for 10: explicit audit-log/change-history feature, user-level attribution of edits, exportable audit trail report.
- [claimed-docs] “the award agreement will be tied to the corresponding board consent, subsequent exercise actions, stock certificates, and other future relat…”
- [claimed-docs] “every time you make a change, the resulting docs are automatically collected and organized”
- [claimed-docs] “The Change Board Members workflow will allow you to initiate or record changes to your Board of Directors, whether to document a change that…”
- [claimed-docs] “Board and stockholder approvals are automatically integrated into every relevant workflow in the platform.”
Ledgynone0/10No evidence of a change/audit log tracking who changed what, when, or under what authorization for the cap table; evidence covers authentication, API scoping, and reporting features but nothing about audit trails or change history. Missing for 10: any mention of audit log, change history, user attribution for edits, or authorization trail.
Exports
ops userExport my complete cap table and full transaction history to open formats (Excel/CSV) at any time — my ownership data is never held hostage
weight 2 · round to LedgyDocs confirm some exports exist — ASC 718 reports generate as Excel (.xlsx) and scenario models can be exported — but there is no evidence of a general, complete cap table or full transaction history export to CSV/Excel, nor any explicit no-lock-in/anytime-export guarantee. missing for 10: evidence of full cap table CSV/Excel export, full transaction history export, and any statement about unrestricted/anytime data portability.
- [claimed-docs] “the platform will generate an Excel file (.xlsx) with ASC 718 report calculations”
- [claimed-docs] “At the completion of this workflow, the platform will generate an Excel file (.xlsx) with ASC 718 report calculations.”
- [claimed-docs] “explore hypothetical future rounds, and export scenarios to review with your team”
- [claimed-docs] “you can feel more confident using our scenario modeling and planning features... explore hypothetical future rounds, and export scenarios to…”
- [claimed-docs] “Up to 25 stakeholders and less than $1M raised Cap table management Equity plan generation Data room Board consents Scenario modeling …”
Ledgy's docs mention building custom reports/views and 'custom views and exports' for compliance reporting, plus an API (companyCaptable operation) for pulling cap table data, which implies some export capability. However, there is no explicit confirmation of Excel/CSV format exports, no documentation of a full transaction-history export, and no statement guaranteeing unrestricted, anytime data portability without vendor lock-in. missing for 10: explicit CSV/Excel export format documentation, full transaction-history export scope, explicit anti-lock-in / data-portability guarantee.
- [claimed-docs] “The companyCaptable operation is a Ledgy interface for one specific company. The operation user can retrieve cap table data about the querie…”
- [claimed-docs] “Build reports based on your needs: play with columns and views and aggregate grouping to see your data, your way.”
- [claimed-docs] “One-click equity compliance reports, custom views and exports, make meeting compliance deadlines a breeze.”
- [claimed-docs] “Bring historical transaction data into your cap table, with documents attached for maximum visibility and accuracy.”
Stakeholder experience — stories about stakeholder experience in this arenaStakeholder experience
Stories about stakeholder experience in this arena
Education
employeeThe platform explains my equity in plain language — tax treatment, exercise windows, dilution — not just numbers
weight 1 · round to Fidelity Private SharesThe platform provides employee-facing tools like a 'My Equity' view and an exercise workflow (with 83(b) generation and exercise windows shown via 'Exercise Now' buttons), which touch on equity mechanics, but there is no evidence of plain-language explanations of tax treatment or dilution for employees specifically. Missing for 10: plain-language tax treatment guidance, dilution explanations tailored to employees, and any educational/explainer content beyond transactional workflows.
- [claimed-docs] “Select the number of shares you want to exercise. Sign the Exercise Documents and secure spousal consent (if applicable).”
- [claimed-docs] “click on My Equity to view your available grants. Grants with an Exercise Now button have options available for exercise.”
- [claimed-docs] “Up to 25 stakeholders and less than $1M raised Cap table management Equity plan generation Data room Board consents Scenario modeling …”
- [claimed-docs] “Grants with an Exercise Now button have options available for exercise.”
Ledgynone0/10Evidence covers API auth, cap table admin features, compliance reporting, and trading/settlement, but nothing addresses employee-facing plain-language explanations of tax treatment, exercise windows, or dilution impact. Missing for 10: employee education content, tax explainer tools, exercise window guidance, dilution simulators aimed at employees.
Exercising
employeeExercise my vested options online — including payment and the resulting share issuance — without paper forms
weight 2 · round to Fidelity Private SharesDocs clearly describe an online exercise workflow: employees see 'Exercise Now' on eligible grants, select share quantity, and e-sign exercise documents (with spousal consent if needed), and a later doc notes exercise actions link to resulting stock certificates. However, there is no explicit description of the payment step (how funds are collected/processed) during exercise, and issuance confirmation is only implied via linkage rather than documented as an automatic outcome. Missing for 10: explicit payment/funding mechanism during exercise, explicit confirmation of automated share issuance/certificate generation post-payment.
- [claimed-docs] “Select the number of shares you want to exercise. Sign the Exercise Documents and secure spousal consent (if applicable).”
- [claimed-docs] “click on My Equity to view your available grants. Grants with an Exercise Now button have options available for exercise.”
- [claimed-docs] “Grants with an Exercise Now button have options available for exercise.”
- [claimed-docs] “the award agreement will be tied to the corresponding board consent, subsequent exercise actions, stock certificates, and other future relat…”
Ledgynone0/10Evidence covers cap-table management, grant automation, financial reporting, and a trading/settlement/payout system (nominee, broker, paying agent, Airwallex payouts) for share transactions, but nothing describes an employee-facing online option-exercise workflow that includes paying the strike price and triggering share issuance without paper forms. missing for 10: documentation of an exercise request flow, payment collection for exercise price, and automated share issuance upon exercise.
- [claimed-docs] “Ledgy connects nominee, broker, and paying agent, all in one place to streamline global employee trading.”
- [claimed-docs] “Enable global employee payouts thanks to a direct integration with international paying agent, Airwallex. Employees can receive payments in …”
- [claimed-docs] “Employees can receive payments in 170 countries, and over 60 currencies, at competitive FX rates.”
- [claimed-docs] “One trading and settlement platform that enables participants and admins to keep track of past and current market orders from the moment the…”
Portal
employeeI get my own portal showing my grants, vesting progress, strike price, and what my equity could be worth under different outcomes
weight 3 · round to Fidelity Private SharesEvidence confirms an employee-facing "My Equity" portal where employees can view their grants and exercise options (docs-29, docs-38, docs-26), but there is no explicit documentation that this portal displays vesting progress, strike price, or scenario-based valuation of equity outcomes for individual employees — the scenario modeling feature (docs-10/11/33) appears aimed at company admins for financing rounds, not employee outcome projections. missing for 10: explicit vesting-progress visualization, strike-price display in the employee view, and employee-facing what-if/outcome valuation tools.
- [claimed-docs] “click on My Equity to view your available grants. Grants with an Exercise Now button have options available for exercise.”
- [claimed-docs] “Grants with an Exercise Now button have options available for exercise.”
- [claimed-docs] “Select the number of shares you want to exercise. Sign the Exercise Documents and secure spousal consent (if applicable).”
- [claimed-docs] “explore hypothetical future rounds, and export scenarios to review with your team”
- [claimed-docs] “you can feel more confident using our scenario modeling and planning features... explore hypothetical future rounds, and export scenarios to…”
Ledgynone0/10The evidence pack focuses on API authentication, cap table administration, compliance reporting, and trading/settlement features, but contains no mention of an employee-facing portal showing grants, vesting progress, strike price, or scenario-based equity valuation. missing for 10: any documentation of an employee equity portal, vesting progress visualization, strike price display, or outcome/scenario modeling tools.
Valuations 409a — stories about valuations 409a in this arenaValuations 409a
Stories about valuations 409a in this arena
International
ops userNon-US valuations and schemes — UK HMRC/EMI valuations, country-specific option plans — are supported for my international entities
weight 1 · round to LedgyFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10Evidence covers only US-centric equity management (409A valuations via third-party providers, ASC 718 reporting, cap table, board consents), with no mention of UK HMRC/EMI valuations, non-US option schemes, or international entity support. Fidelity Private Shares appears US-focused with no documented international/multi-jurisdiction capability.
Ledgy's docs show international financial reporting (IFRS 2, UK GAAP, US GAAP) and 'global mobility reporting' for cross-border equity and tax, implying some non-US support, but there is no explicit mention of UK HMRC/EMI valuation schemes or country-specific option plan types. Missing for 10: explicit HMRC/EMI valuation support, documentation of country-specific option plan templates, and independent confirmation of non-US scheme compliance.
- [claimed-docs] “Generate a broad suite of financial reports instantly to account for equity under IFRS 2, UK GAAP or US GAAP, with tranche-level details in …”
- [claimed-docs] “Global mobility reporting helps you stay on top of equity and tax as your workforce moves across borders.”
Us 409a
founderOrder an audit-ready 409A valuation in-platform, generated from my live cap table data, and get refreshed valuations on schedule
weight 3 · round to Fidelity Private SharesFidelity offers 409A valuations as part of its Growth plan and markets them as faster/more accurate, but its own docs state these are fulfilled via third-party 409A valuation providers rather than generated automatically in-platform from live cap table data (docs-16, docs-28, docs-32). There's no evidence of automatic generation tied to live cap table changes or scheduled/recurring refresh cadence. Missing for 10: proof of automated in-platform generation directly from cap table data, evidence of scheduled/recurring refresh workflow, and confirmation of 'audit-ready' output format beyond third-party report delivery.
- [claimed-docs] “We work with third party 409A Valuation Report providers based on your company's individual needs.”
- [claimed-docs] “move to our Growth plan with 409A valuations and ASC 718 reporting and more”
- [claimed-docs] “Get faster, more accurate, and competitively-priced 409A valuations.”
Not comparable on these axes
ai-native userPlug MCP servers into this product so it can use their tools
weight 3 · not comparableFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10No evidence of MCP server support or any AI/agent tool integration; the product is a cap table/equity management platform with integrations like Gusto, but nothing about MCP or plugging in AI tools. Probes for llms.txt, docs.md, and openapi all returned 404, confirming no AI-native integration surface.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
ai-native userSet up automations that run autonomously in the background
weight 2 · not comparableFidelity Private Sharesn/aFidelity Private Shares is a cap table/equity management SaaS platform, not an AI agent or automation-building tool; the story of setting up autonomous background AI automations is a category mismatch for this product type, not a missing feature.
Ledgynone0/10Evidence shows Ledgy offers workflow automation for cap table/equity management (bulk granting, HRIS integrations) and an API with OAuth service accounts, but nothing describes autonomous background automations that a user or AI agent can set up and let run independently (e.g., scheduled jobs, triggers, webhooks). No mention of automation-builder, scheduling, or agentic execution.
- [claimed-docs] “Leverage the power of 70+ HRIS integrations to keep large volumes of data accurate.”
- [claimed-docs] “Automate your granting, document and signature workflows in bulk to make expansion easy.”
- [claimed-docs] “Automated error flags and crystal-clear visuals let you easily identify and resolve compliance risks.”
ai-native userVersion, review, and roll back my automations
weight 1 · not comparableFidelity Private Sharesn/aFidelity Private Shares is a cap table/equity management platform, not an AI automation/agent tool; the concept of versioning, reviewing, and rolling back 'automations' does not apply to its workflow features, which are fixed compliance processes rather than user-configurable automations with version control.
ai-native userRead the product's source under an open license
weight 2 · not comparableFidelity Private Sharesnone0/10Fidelity Private Shares is a proprietary SaaS equity management platform with no mention of open-source licensing or public source code repository; probes for llms.txt, docs.md, and openapi specs all returned 404.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/llms.txt”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/support.md”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/openapi.json, https://www.fidelityprivateshares.com/swagger.js…”
ai-native userSelf-host the core product
weight 3 · not comparableFidelity Private Sharesn/aFidelity Private Shares is a proprietary SaaS equity-management platform hosted and operated by Fidelity; self-hosting the core product is not a conceivable option for this category of service, so the axis does not apply.
ai-native userOpt out of telemetry and usage tracking
weight 2 · not comparableFidelity Private Sharesn/aFidelity Private Shares is a cap-table/equity management platform, not an AI agent or AI-native tool with telemetry/usage-tracking settings relevant to AI feature usage; the evidence pack contains no AI-related features at all, making this axis a category error for this product type.