Ensemble VC Launches Comprehensive AI Tool to derisk venture capital investments, With Partners Ranging From Sand Hill Road VCs to Silicon Valley's Top Lawyers
Ensemble co-founder and data scientist Gopi Sundaramurthy spent five years developing 'Unity,' which ranks prospective portfolio company teams based on hundreds of objective data points.
Unity then ranks teams — including teams with first-time founders — according to their likelihood of commercial success. Unity can then also help portfolio companies build teams with people most likely to excel in their roles, whether in biomanufacturing, machine learning engineering, downstream processing, go-to-market strategy, marketing and communication, HR or other functions.
'Leading venture capitalists are betting their limited partners' money on AI entrepreneurs. But the VC industry, for the most part, hasn't used AI itself to improve performance across all three major functions of its own industry — sourcing, selecting and servicing portfolio companies,' said Dr. Gopi Sundaramurthy, co-founder of Ensemble VC, former Head of Data Science at the Kauffman Fellows VC Fund, and the first data scientist at IBM Watson Health. 'We decided to tackle the trifecta.'
VC firms Draper Associates, Boost, Overmatch and others are already collaborating with Ensemble to use the tool, which can be trained on specific investment niches — from SaaS to military tech, fusion and space exploration. And Silicon Valley's preeminent law firm, Wilson Sonsini, is also using Unity to assess which startup clients to pursue.
'No matter how vast your network, human constraints always limited your network and thus your deal flow and potential,' said Tim Draper, the third-generation VC and founder of Draper Associates (formerly DFJ), Draper University, and the hit TV show, Meet The Drapers. His investments include Baidu, Hotmail, Tesla, SpaceX, AngelList, SolarCity, Ring, Twitter, DocuSign, Coinbase and Robinhood. 'Unity helps eliminate the human constraints.'
Derisking VC
Unity scrapes millions of points on the Internet — from yesterday's X posts and SEC filings to alma maters, obscure details on LinkedIn, and stock performance on secondary markets — to assess founders, team members and anyone else on an early-stage team.
Ensemble's system instantly generates navigable market maps, tracking deep networks of investors, employees, and founders as they move across industries. Unity searches dynamically — by investor, company, geography, and sector — ensuring that the firm doesn't miss entrepreneurs or their seed-stage, high-performing startups simply because they don't yet fit pre-existing patterns.
Unity also tracks where talent is moving. The data platform provides a real-time view of technical talent flow, anticipating industry shifts before they materialize. This combination of direct technical experience and proprietary data insights gives Unity users an unmatched ability to spot and back the best companies before the market catches up.
About Ensemble VC
Ensemble VC is an early-stage investor based in Austin, TX. The firm takes a product-centric approach to investing, leveraging the firm's comprehensive data platform to intelligently and scalably support founders. Ensemble invests early in highly technical emerging technologies that span from AI to defense technology. For more information about Ensemble, please visit www.ensemble.vc
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNET
5 hours ago
- CNET
New Speed Test Results Reveal the Fastest Internet Service Provider in the US
There's been a lot of talk about internet speed lately. From various company taglines -- "Don't take slow for an answer" -- to the latest news about Japan's internet data transmission record, it's all about the speed. This week, Ookla released its Speedtest Connectivity Report for the first six months of 2025, and AT&T Fiber topped the list as the country's fastest fixed internet service provider. (Ookla is owned by the same parent company as CNET, Ziff Davis.) What does that mean? Does it tell us that AT&T offers the fastest internet plan available to customers nationwide? No. This report doesn't look at an ISP's top speed (the fastest plan the company offers), but instead considers the average internet speed that subscribers experience across all levels of the provider's plans. Many variables exist (including the internet connection type), so when you sign up for internet service, you shouldn't assume AT&T will always be your fastest option. That said, Ookla's report shows AT&T Fiber at the top of its charts, registering a median download speed of just over 363 megabits per second in tests collected by Ookla from January through June 2025. It's the third Ookla speedtest report in a row (going back to the first half of 2024) in which AT&T Fiber has claimed the pole position. Overall, AT&T Fiber led Ookla's report with a 78.33 Speed Score, a unique metric the company uses to consider a provider's download and upload speeds and latency. Frontier Fiber, which is in the process of being purchased by Verizon, came close to nudging AT&T out of first place, recording a median download speed of 359Mbps and notching a Speed Score of 78.30. Third place was held by Verizon Fios, the company's own fiber internet service, while the cable internet providers Cox, Xfinity and Spectrum rounded out the rest of Ookla's list. Ookla Ookla is an internet speed-test company that collects data via its tool, which gathers insights from millions of daily customer uses. CNET frequently uses those findings to help inform our internet service provider reviews, as well as our city and state geo pages. Locating local internet providers Why do we care about speed tests? In CNET's ISP reviews, we stress that speed test data can be a helpful diagnostic tool -- a snapshot of your internet connection performance at any given moment. For example, it can help you pinpoint when and where your connection may be laggy. But it's not an exact science. Many things can affect a speed test, including whether or not you're using Wi-Fi or a hardwired Ethernet connection, the time of day you're running the test and so on. To be included in Ookla's Speedtest Connectivity Report, an ISP must appear in 3% or more of the data collected during the six-month window. That means some fiber-optic internet providers across the country might perform especially well, but if they're more regional and unable to hit that 3% minimum share of the national market, they won't appear in the top. Google Fiber is a good example. It was the fastest provider in nine of the country's top 100 cities (second only to AT&T Fiber), but it didn't reach enough households to meet Ookla's mark for national inclusion. Yes, nabbing the top spot is certainly something a company like AT&T can brag about. Last year, after the first of its three wins in a row, CEO John Stankey said in a press release, "The Ookla results confirm what we already knew in the market: the fiber experience wins by a mile. Pair our award-winning fiber with the largest wireless network in North America, and AT&T is the clear choice to connect customers anytime, anywhere.' But just because a company wins kudos as the fastest ISP in the country -- or a particular state or city -- doesn't automatically make it the best internet provider for you. Though AT&T Fiber places highly in CNET's overall ISP rankings (and is tied with T-Mobile 5G Home Internet for the highest score among all internet providers in the most recent American Customer Satisfaction Index report), it might not be available in your area. There may also be a smaller or more regional provider that might make more sense for you. Speed test results can be important factors when choosing a broadband provider, but they shouldn't be your only consideration.
Fast Company
9 hours ago
- Fast Company
LinkedIn's Aneesh Raman says the career ladder is disappearing in the AI era
As AI evolves, the world of work is getting even better for the most creative, curious, and growth-minded employees. So says Aneesh Raman, LinkedIn's chief economic opportunity officer. Raman has intriguing and urgent insights on why the career ladder is disappearing—and how AI will help transform it into more of a climbing wall, with a unique path for each of us. Learn which parts of the workforce Raman sees as most affected by AI, and why he remains 'radically pro-human' as the very nature of work dramatically shifts. This is an abridged transcript of an interview from Rapid Response, hosted by Bob Safian, the former editor-in-chief of Fast Company. From the team behind the Masters of Scale podcast, Rapid Response features candid conversations with today's top business leaders navigating real-time challenges. Subscribe to Rapid Response wherever you get your podcasts to ensure you never miss an episode. You wrote an opinion piece for The New York Times with a headline about the bottom rung of the career ladder breaking, and it went viral. Did that surprise you? I've been in the arena for moments of big change before—when I was with CNN, when I was with President Obama—so I have a sense of what it's like when cultural conversations start to take hold. With this one, I didn't know what exactly was going to happen. I did an op-ed in The New York Times last year, and that one—it percolated here or there, but it wasn't like this one. And so this one really hit, I think, an underlying tension that we're all feeling that something big is underway. That it isn't playing out cleanly, quickly, everywhere all at once. It's not like the pandemic, where we all just know what's happening and then our life changes overnight, but that it is coming to us eventually. And evidently, entry-level work is the place where we're all able to focus first, as a place where something real and big is happening. And that's what I've been encouraged by. Because a lot of what I wrote this op-ed for was to provoke the conversations about AI and work, which is: 'What do we do about this, and how do we get to better?' And there's speculation about where AI hits the workforce hardest. The CEO of Anthropic has pointed to white-collar jobs. You're talking about entry-level tasks. Are those two different scenarios based on different assumptions, or is it two parts of the same thing? The thing I can say with certainty is that this will affect every worker, in every company, in every sector, in every society. When it impacts every worker in every company, I don't know. It'll depend on where you work, what you do, but it's going to hit everyone. And it's going to hit everyone in a way that can lead to better for everyone, which I know we'll talk about. What I don't think anyone can do right now is in any absolute way predict net employment. We don't know so much of what's about to hit, and so much of where it goes depends on what we do as humans right now to shape this new economy as it forms. So we know historically, jobs have been disrupted, and new jobs have been created, every time we've gone into a new economy. It's unclear to me whether we'll see more jobs changing than new jobs emerging, and it's going to take a bit for us to figure that out. But what we know is happening right now is that everyone's job is changing on them, even if they are not changing jobs. And that's where we should be focused. And the data about roles that you see on LinkedIn's platform, the overall jobs numbers that come from the government, are fairly solid. Everything's happening and everything's not happening, because there's no, again, universal way. It's not an either/or situation. So I think a lot of what we've got to push beyond is this: Are entry-level jobs going away? Are they going to stay? It's neither. It's both. It's yes. So when I think about entering a new economy and I look back across economic anthropology and economic history, there are generally four phases. The first phase is disruption. This new technology becomes real. And this is, I think, a technology equivalent to general-purpose technologies like the steam engine, like electricity, like the internet. We're in that zone. So we already know that's happening. Any number of metrics of people using AI at work, we've got data. Nearly 90% of C-suite leaders globally say, 'AI adoption is a top priority for 2025.' So this technology is here, and it's in the day-to-day. Now, the second thing that happens when you enter a new economy is that jobs change. And a lot of what I looked at early on with AI is: 'Is AI going to be more like electricity or like the internet?' And the reason I ask that is that electricity changed everything for everyone, but it actually didn't change much for humans at work. We still largely did physical labor. We just did it in the factory rather than the farm. The internet came, and it fundamentally started to change work for humans. Suddenly, it wasn't just physical labor but intellectual labor that became valued by our economy. So the first thing I was looking at is, 'Okay, disruption's here. Jobs are going to change. How are they going to change?' A new economy's on the way that I'm calling the innovation economy. Because our core skills as humans, the things that differentiate our species—the ability to imagine, to invent, to communicate complex ideas, to organize around complex ideas—those are going to come to the center of work. And that's a whole new set of skills that our economy has never fully valued. In fact, we've derided those skills often as soft skills or people skills that are nice to have, not must-haves. So we're already starting to see in our data that communication is, like, the number one skill across job postings, not coding. All the jobs on the rise, aside from just general AI fluency or deep AI knowledge—if you're going for that small set of jobs explicitly about building AI—are all things like critical thinking, strategic thinking, closing that deal as a salesperson, persuasion, storytelling. So we're already seeing that jobs are going to shift; they're going to shift more to unique human capability. And then the fourth phase will come where we'll see a new economy emerge. And part of what I'm waiting for, and I don't think we have these signals yet, is new job titles. Mine got made up eight to nine months ago. Moderna's got a new chief digital and people officer that they've created. New roles will emerge that aren't just AI, because we're seeing head of AI jobs have gone up, I think, three times in five years. But also new business starts, like a whole new era of innovation that's going to happen through these tools. So there are some signals I'm waiting for. A different organizational workflow, like org charts become work charts. You have project-based work. There are a bunch of signals we'll start to see over the next year or two that start to suggest where and how the new economy is taking hold. You looked historically at electricity and the internet, and it sounds like you're saying it's more like the internet. But it's also going to be something completely different that we don't even really know yet what it is. Well, we know that whatever the role of humans at work is, it's going to be more human than work has ever been. And what's really important about that is . . . I always start with, 'Well, let's evaluate the status quo we've got before we A, get afraid of changing it, or B, want to imagine what it should become.' Work has never been human-centric, ever. The story of work is the story of technology at work, not humans at work.
Business Insider
10 hours ago
- Business Insider
'Grammatically correct and emotionally vacant': The pitfalls of relying on AI too much in your job hunt
Job seekers are going overboard using AI. With so many relying on tools like ChatGPT to cut corners, recruiters say they're getting stuck with piles of robotic-sounding résumés and applicants who appear to be cheating during video interviews. While the recruiters BI spoke with said there's nothing wrong with using AI to save time writing, research a prospective employer, or practice answering common questions, they warn that applicants are denting their odds of success by becoming too dependent on it. They say the timing of the trend is especially bad given how many people are looking for jobs. "In this market, you've got to stand out," said Steve Levy, a recruiter in Long Island, New York. When it comes to résumés, it's not just the well-known overuse of em dashes that's tipping off recruiters. It's also the eerie perfection of the documents themselves. "Every sentence is grammatically correct, evenly spaced, and emotionally vacant," said Levy, who's been a recruiter for nearly four decades. "Real résumés have scuff marks." Buzzwords and blunders Another telltale sign is that résumés written with AI feature the same formatting and hollow buzzwords, such as "dynamic," "innovative," and "cross-functional." Many also contain the same phrases such as "accelerated time-to-market" and "exceeding stakeholder expectations." Rather than use these, job hunters should find ways to insert personal touches that add substance to their résumés, said Tejal Rives, a hiring manager in Tempe, Arizona, for a large tech company. "There's no harm in using AI or templates, but the customization is not there," she said. "You're hurting your chances by sounding like everyone else." AI tools have a tendency to introduce factual errors in résumés, which are often apparent to recruiters because dates, numbers, and other details are inconsistent with what is on a candidate's LinkedIn profile or what the person says during the interview process. "Take a real fine-tooth comb to what AI produces for you," said Desiree Goldey, a recruiter in Austin, Texas, who reviews an average of 500 résumés a week and estimates that about half are written with AI to the point that it's noticeable. "Yes, it saves you time, but you have to go back and look at it." Overall, résumés written by AI tend to come across as soulless, she added. The human element is just missing and that's a turn-off. "You're not portraying yourself with any authenticity," Goldey said. "You become this robot and nobody is going to hire a robot." AI shows up in interviews, too Some candidates are also sneaking a peek at AI apps on their phones while interviewing with recruiters over video apps such as Zoom. Recruiters say these individuals repeat the questions they've been asked out loud, then sneak glances to the side of the screen at whatever AI program they're using so they can read the results it spits out. They also usually take a brief pause before answering. Goldey said it's fine to practice interviewing with AI, but when it's time to go on camera, she expects candidates to look at her the whole time — not their phones. "To use AI in an interview to me is a no," she said. "It's the worst thing you could do." Bonnie Dilber, a senior talent-acquisition manager for a fully remote software company, said she's seen such behavior rising over the past few months. She recalled an instance in which a candidate went even further by using an AI filter to impose their face on another person's body. The other individual — the one who could only be seen from the neck down — answered the recruiter's questions. "You could see the filter glitch," she said. Dilber suspects people are going to such lengths because they lack confidence in their interviewing skills and believe AI will give them an edge. Or, she said they could be engaging in fraudulent activity, such as trying to understand the interview process so they can sell the information they glean to job seekers. She and other recruiters on her team use an AI platform that records interviews for generating transcripts and summarizing what's discussed. If they sense something is fishy, they'll review the footage. "Recording the interviews for us is a huge way that we can catch these things," Dilber said. "I imagine a future in which maybe to begin an interview, you have to scan an ID." Have a job-search story to share? Contact the reporter via email at sneedleman@ here ' s our guide to sharing.
