Skip to content
datatruth Get your Truth Score

For company leaders

The same AI proposal carries a different risk from every seat.

Every AI proposal assumes your data is fine. Nobody has checked. Before you sign one or commit an AI budget, we compare the systems it depends on, record by record, and say in writing what your data can actually support. Built for CEOs and CFOs of mid-market companies, roughly €20M to €500M revenue, and the leaders around them.

Starts with a 30-minute call. Commits you to nothing.

Illustrative example, not a client.

Real sample

See what comes back before you book. A full Truth Score Read on 72,837 records in 7 exports from CRM, finance and HR. It scored 59 out of 100, Band C, significant work needed: 823 finance customers with no CRM account, and only 13% of deals reconcile to invoices.

Read the sample memo

Real engine output on generated test data, not a client.

The moments

Four moments to call us. All before the money moves.

The momentLands withWhat we testStart with
An AI proposal is on the table. CEO or CFO, with the CRO or COO The proposal, claim by claim, against the data it would need Truth Score Read
Next year’s AI budget is being set. CFO The largest AI line first, then every line, with an effort estimate for every gap Truth Score Read, then AI Investment Review
The board or an investor wants an AI plan. CEO Every AI bet in the business, tested and ranked AI Investment Review
A pilot has stalled. COO The exceptions, traced back through the systems they came from Truth Score Read

What you get

One signed memo. Six things in it.

A Truth Score Read compares exports from two or more systems, plus the proposal or plan if there is one, and ends in a signed memo we walk you through.

Truth Score Read · Example CoPage 1 of 1

AI churn prediction, tested against CRM and billing

Red flags between systems

  • High

    117 customers active in CRM with no matching billing account.

    CRM ↔ Billing

  • Medium

    52 active accounts owned by people who have left.

    HR ↔ CRM

Leverability read

  • Customer churn prediction

    Renewal dates missing on 38% of contracts

    Needs work
Truth Score67Band B · Minor issues
Our verdict

Fix first. Give every customer one ID and fill renewal dates, then start the model on the segment where both already hold.

Fix first

  1. P1

    One customer ID across CRM and billing

  2. P2

    Renewal dates on every active contract

ScopeCRM, billing and HR exports, 2,379 customers. Live configuration and access logs not reviewed.

Checked by hand · Signed off by DataTruth · Ref EX-0412

Illustrative example, not a client.

  1. Red flags between systems

    The gaps between your systems, with record counts and sample records, checked by hand.

  2. Leverability read

    Which AI ideas you can use now, after fixes, or not at all, with the reason in your own records.

  3. Truth Score™

    A score out of 100 for how far your data can be trusted, on six weighted pillars.

  4. Our verdict

    A clear call on the decision: sign, fix first or walk away. Where only part of the data holds, the memo names where to start.

  5. A short fix list

    What to fix first, who owns it and how you’ll know it’s done.

  6. A scope line

    Exactly which systems and records were checked, and what wasn’t.

Who does what

You decide. We check. Your team fixes.

  • The CEO or CFO

    Commissions it

    The memo is addressed to the person who signs the contract or the budget, and says plainly what to do next.

  • Department heads and your data lead

    Bring the evidence

    They own the proposals and know where the data lives. They run the exports and tell us how the systems fit together. The verdict is about the data, not them.

  • Your team or any outside firm

    Does the fixing

    We never fix what we find. The fix list is written so anyone can pick it up, with an owner, an effort estimate and a test for done on every item.

Where you start

Start with one decision.

A Truth Score Read on the proposal or budget line closest to a signature. It stands on its own: you can stop at the memo. When the question becomes every AI bet in the business, the AI Investment Review ranks them all.

Every fee fixed and agreed before we start. None moves with the verdict.

  1. Step 0

    A 30-minute call

    Is this worth testing? Which systems matter. Commits you to nothing.

    30 minutes

  2. Step 1Start here

    Truth Score Read

    One decision, tested against exports from two or more systems. A signed memo and a walk-through.

    Within 5 working days of complete exports

  3. Step 2Then, if it’s worth it

    AI Investment Review

    Every AI bet tested and ranked, the plan tested play by play, a remediation roadmap and a board readout.

    About 2 weeks

  4. Step 3

    AI Value Tracking

    Is the data under each AI investment still holding up? An independent re-read, every quarter.

    Quarterly

Why you can rely on it

Everyone in the room gains if you sign. We gain nothing either way.

We sell no AI, no software and no fixes. We take no referral fees, commissions or margin from anyone. Our fee is fixed before we start, so a ‘sign’ pays us exactly what a ‘walk away’ does.

Questions

Before you book the call.

The questions a leadership team asks before anyone runs an export.

Book the call
Who should commission it?

The CEO or CFO: the person who signs the AI contract or the budget. Department heads hold the AI budgets being reviewed and know where the data lives, but the memo is addressed to whoever has to make the call.

Do we need a proposal on the table?

No, but it helps. With a proposal, a budget paper or a plan attached, we test it claim by claim. Without one, the Truth Score Read tells you what your data can support today, so the next proposal starts from evidence.

How much of our team’s time does it take?

A 30-minute call, one person running standard exports from the systems that matter, and a walk-through call when the memo is ready. An AI Investment Review adds a few short conversations with the owner of each AI bet. No logins and nothing installed.

What does the memo stand behind?

The findings in it, on the exports in its scope line. Our engine matches the customers, people, deals and invoices across the exports you send. Every red flag is checked by hand against sample records before sign-off. It is a written view on whether the data can carry a specific AI decision; it is not an audit opinion and it does not forecast the return.

You’re new. Why should we trust the verdict?

We are new, and we would rather say so. That is why the method is published, including the cap that stops strong pillars hiding a weak one. Every finding points to records you can check yourself, and the scope line says exactly what we didn’t check. You can stop at the memo; nothing obliges you to go further. Our first clients get a founding rate in exchange for a private reference call once they’re happy, only with their consent. We never name a client, fund or target publicly without written consent.

Do you put our data into an AI model?

The Truth Score is rule-based: the same data, scored on the same date, gives the same score, and no AI model decides it. We do use a language model (Anthropic’s Claude, through its commercial API) to read the plan or proposal you send and to help draft the memo’s wording from our findings. A person checks every line before it reaches you. If you’d rather we didn’t use it on your engagement, say so and we do that part by hand.

What happens to our data?

It arrives as exports only, under NDA and our data processing agreement. No logins and nothing installed. The full list of sub-processors comes with our data processing agreement, before any data moves. Any transfer outside the EU is covered by Standard Contractual Clauses. Raw exports are deleted after the engagement; we keep quality metrics, not your records.

What does it cost?

A fixed fee, agreed before we start, that never moves with the verdict. It is a small fraction of the proposal it tests; if it wouldn’t be, we’ll tell you on the call.

Test it before you sign it. Whichever seat you’re in.

Exports from two systems in. The gaps between them, and a verdict, in writing within 5 working days of complete exports.

Starts with a 30-minute call. Commits you to nothing.

Get your Truth Score