Equidam vs Eqvista vs Opagio: Valuation

Introduction

Equidam, Eqvista, and Opagio occupy the same broad founder-tooling market — supporting founders, advisors, and investors with valuation work — but each platform answers a different question. Equidam answers "what is my startup worth?" through a 160,000+ company benchmarking platform. Eqvista answers "what is the real-time share price of my company?" through a cap table plus 409A valuation plus Real-Time Company Valuation® product. Opagio answers "what intangible assets am I building, how are they growing, and how does that connect to my valuation?" through a continuous twelve-driver platform with asset-level method-specific valuation underneath.

The right choice depends on which question is the dominant one for the buyer right now. A pre-seed founder pricing a SAFE round will weigh different criteria than a Series B founder preparing for a strategic acquirer's diligence, and both will weigh different criteria than a CFO who needs a continuous register that supports the next 24 months of fundraising, lending, and exit conversations.

This three-way page is for founders, CFOs, and advisors shortlisting across all three. The two-way comparisons sit at Opagio vs Equidam and Opagio vs Eqvista. The page does not attack any platform — Equidam, Eqvista, and Opagio are credible operators each strong in their own domain.

TL;DR: Use Equidam for benchmark-grounded company-level valuation at pre-seed, seed, and Series A — the 160,000+ company dataset is a meaningful data moat at that moment. Use Eqvista when cap table, 409A, and equity admin are bundled with the valuation work — particularly relevant for US-domiciled startups needing a real-time view tied to the share register. Use Opagio when the conversation has to extend from "what is the company worth" to "what intangible assets are driving that value, and how do I track them over time" — for Series B+ fundraising, exit preparation, PE diligence, and audit-aligned PPA work.

About Equidam

Equidam is an Amsterdam-headquartered startup valuation platform. Per Equidam's public materials, the platform has valued 160,000+ companies across 90+ countries and 641 industries, applying five valuation methods (Berkus, Payne Scorecard, Startup Rating, VC Method, Revenue Multiples) coordinated into a single valuation output. The commercial model is a one-off engagement with 12-month access to the resulting valuation.

Equidam publishes the Valuation Delta® quarterly benchmarking report and offers a REST API plus MCP server (per Equidam's public materials, the first professional valuation tool on Anthropic's Model Context Protocol). In February 2026 Equidam announced a merger with Share Council, adding equity infrastructure with a stated goal of 1M co-owners by 2030.

Equidam's strength: Scaled benchmarking dataset for company-level startup valuation at pre-seed, seed, and Series A. The 160,000+ company dataset is a meaningful data moat that no competitor matches at the company-level question.

About Eqvista

Eqvista is a US-headquartered cap table and equity management platform that bundles 409A valuations and Real-Time Company Valuation® into the same product. Per Eqvista's public materials, the platform is the #1-rated 409A and equity management product on G2 and Clutch, with a stated target of $1T in client assets.

Eqvista covers stocks, options, RSUs, warrants, and convertibles in the equity admin layer; 409A valuations for option pricing compliance; and Real-Time Company Valuation® described by Eqvista as an AI-powered always-on valuation tied to the share register.

Eqvista's strength: Bundled cap table + equity admin + 409A + real-time valuation in a single platform. For US-domiciled startups needing the equity admin layer alongside compliance-grade valuation, the bundled product reduces tool sprawl.

About Opagio

Opagio is a UK-headquartered intangible asset platform organised around Opagio 12™ — a proprietary taxonomy of twelve value drivers covering customer capital, organisational capital, brand and reputation, human capital, technology, data, supplier and partnership capital, design and aesthetic capital, financial structure, regulatory and IP capital, sustainability and ESG capital, and innovation pipeline. Within those twelve drivers sits a comprehensive library of intangible asset types.

Opagio is delivered as a SaaS platform with three products: Opagio Growth Forecaster (free), Opagio Growth Forecaster Pro (paid Explore), and Opagio Intangibles (paid platform — the full discovery, valuation, and management environment). The Asset Valuator module applies asset-level methods (RFR, MPEEM, With and Without, Cost, DCF, market multiples) aligned to IFRS 3 / IAS 38 (UK and global) and ASC 805 (US).

Opagio's strength: Asset-level intangible decomposition through Opagio 12™, continuous measurement, multi-pathway support (borrow, protect, fundraise, exit), and audit-aligned output for Series B+ diligence, exit preparation, and PPA work.

Three-Way Side-by-Side

The table below sets out a founder-and-advisor view of the three platforms across the criteria that come up most often in shortlist conversations.

Three-way criteria

How the three platforms handle the same founder

Example — When Opagio is the better fit: A B2B SaaS founder is preparing for a Series B in 12 months with strategic acquirer conversations starting. Their enterprise value sits largely in customer relationships (NRR 124%), the proprietary data and engineering team, and the brand — alongside one granted patent. The investor's diligence team and the future acquirer's accountants will probe each asset individually. Opagio's twelve-driver decomposition and the Asset Valuator's method-specific output (MPEEM for customer relationships, RFR for the patent and brand, Cost for internally developed technology) support both conversations from a single register.

Example — When Equidam is the better fit: A pre-seed founder is closing a SAFE round and needs a defensible top-line valuation grounded in a large benchmarking dataset to anchor the price with their lead investor. The intangible register is thin (the business is months old), and the primary need is method coverage (Berkus, Scorecard, VC Method per Equidam's public materials) coordinated into a single number with quarterly Valuation Delta® market context. Equidam's 160,000+ company dataset is purpose-built for this moment.

Example — When Eqvista is the better fit: A US-domiciled startup at Series A has an equity register expanding rapidly (multiple SAFE conversions, an option pool, employee grants, recent SAFE-to-equity conversion). The team needs a 409A valuation for option pricing compliance, cap table management for the equity register, and a real-time valuation view that updates as the share base evolves. Eqvista's bundled cap table + 409A + Real-Time Company Valuation® reduces the tool count and integrates valuation directly with the equity admin layer. The asset-level decomposition is not the immediate need; the integrated equity workflow is.

Which Platform Owns Which Job

A useful framing is to map each platform to the specific founder job it is built to do.

Equidam owns the round-pricing job at pre-seed, seed, and Series A. The 160,000+ company benchmarking dataset, the method mix (Berkus, Payne Scorecard, Startup Rating, VC Method, Revenue Multiples per public materials), and the Valuation Delta® market-context report are purpose-built for the moment when a founder needs a defensible top-line valuation to anchor a round price. The Share Council merger extends Equidam's footprint toward "valuation + cap table" but the core competency remains company-level valuation at scale.

Eqvista owns the US cap table + 409A + real-time valuation job. For a US-domiciled startup that needs equity admin (cap table, option pools, share grants, warrants, convertibles), compliance-grade 409A valuation for option pricing, and a real-time valuation view tied to the equity register, Eqvista's bundled product reduces tool sprawl. The Real-Time Company Valuation® AI-powered feature is differentiated. Eqvista's positioning is US-primary.

Opagio owns the intangible asset management job. From Series B onward, the founder's value question shifts from "what is the company worth" to "what intangible assets are we building and how are they growing". For exit preparation, PE diligence, IP-backed lending readiness, audit-aligned PPA, and continuous CFO measurement of the intangible base, Opagio's twelve-driver decomposition and method-specific Asset Valuator are the platform-shaped fit. Opagio's positioning is UK-primary with multi-jurisdiction roadmap.

Note (jurisdiction): Eqvista is US-primary with 409A as a core feature — a US-specific compliance valuation. Equidam is Amsterdam-headquartered with global positioning. Opagio is UK-primary with explicit IFRS 3 / IAS 38 (UK and global) and ASC 805 (US) alignment. For UK-domiciled founders, Opagio's jurisdictional fit is most explicit; for US-domiciled founders needing 409A specifically, Eqvista is the integrated fit; for European founders needing benchmarked round pricing, Equidam is the dataset fit.

Can They Coexist?

Yes — and many founders use more than one platform at different stages.

A pre-seed founder might use Equidam for the round-pricing moment, build the Opagio register in parallel so that by Series B the intangible decomposition is mature, and (if US-domiciled) bring on Eqvista for cap table + 409A as the equity register grows.

A US-domiciled SaaS business at Series A might run Eqvista for the cap table + 409A + share-price view, Equidam for the round-pricing top-line, and start Opagio discovery to prepare for the Series B intangibles narrative.

A UK-domiciled business approaching exit might use Opagio for the asset-level decomposition the acquirer's diligence will demand, the Asset Valuator output for the acquirer's accountants to use as the basis of a post-close PPA, and a separate cap table system (whether Eqvista, Carta, or a UK-domiciled alternative) for the equity register.

The three platforms are complementary at different stages, not strict substitutes. The substitution question only sharpens when the founder is choosing the single platform for one specific job at one specific moment.

FAQ

How do these three platforms differ at the simplest level?

Answer

Equidam is a company-level startup valuation platform — its primary product is a benchmark-grounded valuation number. Eqvista is a cap table + 409A + real-time valuation platform — its primary product is integrated equity management. Opagio is an intangible asset platform — its primary product is the asset-level decomposition that drives enterprise value. Different jobs, different platforms.

Which is best for a Series B fundraising round?

Answer

By Series B the investor's diligence team is probing intangibles asset-by-asset — customer cohorts, organisational capital, brand, IP, key-person exposure. Opagio's twelve-driver decomposition and method-specific Asset Valuator output are built for this conversation. Equidam's company-level methods produce a top-line number useful as a headline but do not produce the asset-level decomposition. Eqvista is not a Series B fundraising tool per se — its primary use case is cap table and 409A.

Which is best for a US-domiciled startup needing 409A?

Answer

Eqvista, per its public materials, is the #1-rated 409A and equity management product on G2 and Clutch. For a US-domiciled startup needing 409A bundled with cap table and a real-time valuation view, Eqvista's integrated product is the natural fit. Equidam and Opagio are not 409A-focused platforms.

Which is best for an exit or PE diligence?

Answer

Opagio. The exit-stage and PE-diligence conversation is about which intangible assets sit underneath the deal price, the appropriate method per asset, and the audit-aligned PPA cross-check (IFRS 3 / IAS 38 in the UK and globally, ASC 805 in the US). Opagio's Asset Valuator is built for this work. Equidam's company-level valuation supports the round-pricing precursor but not the asset-level diligence detail; Eqvista's cap table and 409A serve the post-close equity admin but not the intangible asset decomposition.

Can a founder use all three platforms?

Answer

Yes — the three platforms are complementary at different stages. A founder might use Equidam at pre-seed for round pricing, layer in Eqvista as the equity register expands (particularly if US-domiciled), and bring on Opagio as the intangible register matures toward Series B and exit preparation. Different platforms for different jobs.

How do pricing models compare across the three?

Answer

Per the platforms' respective public materials, Equidam uses a one-off engagement model with 12-month access; Eqvista uses tiered subscription pricing for equity admin plus a 409A add-on; Opagio uses tiered SaaS subscription with a free Growth Forecaster, paid Forecaster Pro, and paid Opagio Intangibles platform. For accurate current pricing, check each platform's pricing page or quote directly. Subscription models tend to be more cost-effective over a 2-3 year horizon when the valuation work is continuous; per-engagement models tend to be more cost-effective for one-off transactional needs.

Which is the strongest for UK-domiciled startups?

Answer

Opagio is UK-primary with explicit UK-IFRS, global IFRS, and ASC 805 alignment, plus integration with the UK IP-backed lending market via the Lending Readiness Report. Equidam is Amsterdam-headquartered with global positioning — useable from the UK but not UK-specific. Eqvista is US-primary with 409A as a core US-specific feature — useable from the UK but the 409A feature is less relevant. For UK-domiciled founders, Opagio is the jurisdictional fit.

Does Opagio plan to add cap table functionality?

Answer

Opagio's primary product is intangible asset management — the asset-level decomposition that drives enterprise value. Cap table functionality is on the integration roadmap rather than a primary build, recognising that founders typically already have a cap table system in place (Carta, Eqvista, Pulley, SeedLegals for UK EMI work) and the valuable integration is between the intangible register and the cap table, not duplication of cap-table functionality inside Opagio.

Where can I see Opagio in action?

Answer

Book a demo and a member of the Opagio team will walk through the Opagio 12™ taxonomy, the Asset Valuator, and the Value Drivers Register™ with a worked example relevant to your context — typically a Series B preparation, exit window, PE portfolio, or PPA case. The demo is run by an Opagio team member and is typically 30-40 minutes.

Closing

Equidam, Eqvista, and Opagio are three credible platforms each strong in their own domain. Equidam owns the early-stage round-pricing job at scale. Eqvista owns the US cap table + 409A + real-time valuation job. Opagio owns the intangible asset management job from Series B onward through exit, PE diligence, IP-backed lending, and audit-aligned PPA work.

The right choice depends on which question is the dominant one for the buyer right now. For most founders the question evolves over time — a single platform rarely owns the entire 5-year corporate journey. The platforms can coexist at different stages, with each owning the specific layer of the value question it is built for.

The best way to know whether Opagio is right for your business is to see it in action against a real scenario. Book a demo — we will bring a worked example relevant to your context and walk through how the platform handles it.

Two-way comparisons: Opagio vs Equidam | Opagio vs Eqvista Companion pieces: Equidam alternative — how to evaluate Opagio | Eqvista alternative — how to evaluate Opagio

Related reading

• Opagio vs Equidam — Startup Valuation Platforms Compared
• Opagio vs Eqvista — Startup Valuation Platforms Compared
• Carta vs Eqvista vs Opagio — Three-way Comparison
• RFR vs MPEEM vs With and Without — Asset Valuation Methods Compared
• Purchase Price Allocation — Complete PPA Guide
• Intangible asset glossary — Customer Relationships
• Intangible asset glossary — Relief from Royalty
• Intangible asset glossary — Multi-Period Excess Earnings

Related Glossary Terms

Learn More

• View lesson →