M&A AI Due Diligence
Target-scale diligence: CYBAIR on every material AI workload, GENOMIA on the organization and key-person graph, WINS on the deal thesis. Not a $75k flat.
Why this engagement exists
AI diligence is still a questionnaire and a management meeting. Material workloads, key-person risk, and deal-thesis fragility stay hidden until after close — which is exactly when they become write-downs, integration failures, and missed earnouts.
What it looks like in your organization
- AI diligence is a checklist of vendor claims and management presentations.
- The target’s material AI workloads are never scored for posture or compliance.
- Key-person and organizational dependency risk surfaces only post-close.
- The deal thesis is never stress-tested against adverse scenarios before signing.
What we do and how it works
CYBAIR scores every material target AI workload — posture, compliance, evidence. GENOMIA maps the organization and key-person graph the deal has to integrate. WINS stress-tests the deal thesis. Price moves with target scale: a 6-workload tuck-in and a 40-workload platform company are not the same engagement, and are not priced as one.
The engagement includes
- Target sizing: workloads, org band, and thesis complexity
- CYBAIR posture on every material AI workload
- GENOMIA organizational and key-person dependency mapping
- WINS stress test of the deal thesis
- Integration risk playbook
What you take away
Every deliverable is named, formatted, and tied to the outcome it enables. Nothing ships as a deck with no use.
Target AI posture and risk assessment
Assessment reportCYBAIR posture, compliance position, and evidence state for every material AI workload in the target.
You know what you are buying — including the AI liabilities nobody disclosed.
Key-person and org dependency map
Dependency mapThe people, structures, and dependencies the deal actually acquires, with key-person risk flagged.
Integration planning starts from the real org, not the org chart in the data room.
Deal thesis stress-test results
Stress-test reportThe investment thesis tested under adverse scenarios with break points identified.
You sign against a tested thesis — or renegotiate, or walk, with evidence.
Integration risk playbook
PlaybookThe integration risks the diligence surfaced, with sequenced responses for the first 100 days.
Post-close integration starts with a rehearsed plan instead of discovery.
How this engagement runs
Size the target
Week 1Workloads, org band, and thesis complexity are confirmed. Those three numbers are the price — set before diligence starts.
A priced scope that matches the actual target, not a flat guess.
Score the AI estate
Weeks 1–3CYBAIR scores material workloads — posture, compliance, evidence. Restricted data rooms are expected and handled.
The AI estate has measured posture, not management assurances.
Map the people and structure
Weeks 2–4GENOMIA maps the organization the deal has to integrate: structure, dependencies, and key-person concentration.
Integration risk is visible before close, not discovered after.
Stress the thesis
Weeks 3–5WINS stress-tests the deal thesis. Compute is estimated, then billed on actuals. The diligence closes with a readout to the deal team.
The IC holds a tested thesis and a 100-day integration plan.
How the fee is built
The engagement fee moves on three multipliers — sensitivity, involvement, and organization type — and the platform units the work consumes are their own lines. Nothing is hidden inside a flat number.
Sensitivity
×0.90 – ×1.30 on the engagement feeSensitivity sets the handling envelope around the whole engagement: how data moves, where evidence lives, who can touch it, and what containment we must maintain. Higher sensitivity means cleared handling, segregated evidence, and slower, more deliberate operations — real cost that a flat fee would hide.
Open information. Standard handling, no containment overhead.
Proprietary business information. NDA-grade handling and controlled evidence storage.
Compliance-bound data. Framework controls and audit-ready evidence handling shape the work.
Defense-grade pathways. Cleared handling, boundary containment, and evidence segregation inside your perimeter.
Involvement
×0.85 – ×1.35 on the engagement feeInvolvement is how much Multipolar operator time is on the hook. Counsel at checkpoints is a different commitment than embedded delivery inside your team, your systems, and your cadence. The multiplier tracks senior hours actually committed — not a markup.
We advise and interpret; your team executes. Senior counsel at defined checkpoints.
We run the engagement end to end, with your stakeholders at the decision points.
Embedded delivery. Our operators work inside your team until the outcome is actually in place.
Organization type
×0.85 – ×1.25 on the engagement feeThe same technical work lands differently depending on who is buying it. Federal and defense engagements carry procurement, compliance, security review, and stakeholder alignment that a mid-market engagement does not. The multiplier prices the coordination and accountability surface, not the analysis.
Fewer stakeholders, faster decisions, lighter coordination overhead.
The baseline: standard commercial engagement surface.
Public-sector procurement and multi-agency stakeholder surface.
Investment-platform cadence: deal-driven timelines and IC audiences.
Joint-delivery and enablement motions with partner delivery teams.
Assurance functions: evidence standards and underwriting audiences.
Federal procurement, compliance crosswalks, and multi-office alignment.
Mission-critical review, security handling, and acquisition-process alignment.
Scope & scale of platform units
The largest component of most totalsEvery engagement consumes platform units — CYBAIR workloads, AIR organization bands, GENOMIA twins, WINS scenarios, SiliconAIR systems. Units track your estate, not our appetite for flat pricing: an 8-workload assessment and a 50-workload assessment are different engagements and are priced as such. You set the scope in the configurator; the total moves with it, and nothing is quietly under-scoped to fit a number.
Simulation compute
Estimated until configured · billed on actualsWINS simulations carry real compute costs that scale with scenario count, branching depth, and campaign length. A focused single-scenario game and a sustained multi-agent campaign are orders of magnitude apart. Facilitation and after-action are in the fee; compute is estimated once the game is configured, then billed on actuals — you pay for what actually runs, never a padded average.
Platform units in this engagement
Units track your estate, not our appetite for flat pricing. You set the scope; the total moves with it. Each unit below is consumed by this engagement and billed as its own line.
Each model, RAG pipeline, or agentic workflow you nominate for posture, compliance, evidence, and attestation.
The number of AI workloads you put in scope. Minimum one. You choose the estate to assess — the count is yours to set, and we do not flatten ten workloads and fifty into the same fee.
The organizational twin: people, skills, systems, dependencies, and projects modeled as a living graph.
Headcount or agency count sets the size band; structural complexity multiplies it. Multi-system, contested, or mission-critical environments cost more to model because they are more to model.
The simulation campaign: scenario families, adjudication, facilitation, and after-action.
How many scenario families the decision needs and whether the game is a focused exercise or a sustained campaign. Compute is estimated after configuration and billed on actuals.
What the engagement fee covers
- Scoping, workshops, and interpretation
- Every deliverable listed on this page
- Cross-framework mapping where the package includes compliance
- Executive translation — board, program-office, or IC language
- Handoff and a defensible next-step recommendation
What it does not cover
- Platform units consumed by the work (shown as their own lines)
- WINS simulation compute (estimated, then billed on actuals)
Frequently asked questions
A 6-workload tuck-in and a 40-workload platform company are not the same engagement. CYBAIR, GENOMIA, and WINS each scale with the target, so the price scales with them.
Ready to brief us on the M&A AI Due Diligence?
We choose who we work with and confirm scope, capacity, and final pricing in the briefing.