Compare your deck to Vettery

Compare Your Deck

Vettery Pitch Deck (2016)

Marketplace

Stage: Series A

Raised: $9M

Year: 2016

Slides: 11

Outcome: Acquired by Adecco

Pitch Deck

1 / 11

Click to expand

Deck Analysis

This deck from Vettery (Series A, 2016) presents a concise, design-forward pitch for a two-sided hiring marketplace focused on matching tech candidates with employers. It combines simple, polished visuals with clear signals of traction (GMV, revenue growth, hiring manager activation), a large definable market, competitive positioning, and strong unit economics. What makes it notable is the balance between aspirational vision and hard metrics — the founders demonstrate both the size of the opportunity and early evidence that the marketplace mechanics and economics are working.

Cover & Brand: A clear, confident opening

The opening slide (cover) establishes a clean, consistent brand identity — a bright, simple layout and a memorable logo set a professional tone. The slide communicates confidence and makes the deck approachable without wasting space on unnecessary text. For investors, well-executed branding signals product polish and attention to detail, which is especially important for marketplaces where trust and UX matter to both sides of the network.

Key Takeaway: Start with a strong, simple cover that reflects your product’s user-facing quality — it sets expectations and builds credibility before a single metric is shown.

Vision: Define the end state succinctly

Slide 2 presents Vettery’s vision in one short sentence: to be the marketplace used for hiring across roles, levels, and geographies. This is effective because it sets a broad, ambitious target while keeping messaging tight — investors immediately know what problem the company is trying to solve and the scope of the opportunity. The minimalist treatment of the slide avoids distracting the reader with premature details and positions the product as universally applicable.

Key Takeaway: Express your long-term vision in one clear sentence so investors can quickly grasp the mission and potential scale.

Product & Marketplace Overview: Show both sides

Slide 3 gives a compact visual of the product (candidate card UI) and a short description explaining that Vettery is a two-sided marketplace allowing companies to discover candidates and request interviews. Presenting a mockup of the candidate profile alongside the business description helps investors visualize the product and how value flows — it’s not just an abstract marketplace, it’s an actionable hiring interface. The text also calls out early scale metrics (1,700 hiring managers and 4,700 candidates in 57 weeks), which pairs product explanation with proof that real users are adopting the platform.

Key Takeaway: When describing a marketplace, show the interface and the user journey for both sides, and pair that with early adoption numbers to make the use case tangible.

Traction & Metrics Dashboard: Let the data tell the story

Slides like the KPI/dashboard page (slide 5) and the revenue/GMV growth page (slide 6) use charts to communicate clear month-over-month growth across interview requests, active hiring managers, average invite salary, and acceptance rates. The visuals emphasize steady, multi-dimensional traction rather than a single vanity metric. Showing both demand-side indicators (requests, active managers) and supply-side or outcome metrics (average invite salary, acceptance rates) demonstrates well-rounded progress and helps investors assess funnel health and marketplace liquidity.

Key Takeaway: Use a concise dashboard to show balanced traction across acquisition, engagement, and monetization metrics — investors want to see healthy flow on both sides of the marketplace.

Market Size: Make the opportunity unambiguous

Slide 7 states the total addressable market (Annual U.S. staffing $120B; $500B globally) and highlights the concentration at the top (14 U.S. staffing firms generate >$1B). This is a classic market-sizing slide: it quantifies the opportunity and suggests room for disruption given incumbent concentration. The emphasis on an established, high-dollar market helps justify enterprise sales efforts and the long-term value of winning even small share.

Key Takeaway: Quantify the market clearly and call out incumbents and concentration — investors need both scale and a reason why the market is ripe for change.

Competitive Positioning: Where you sit on the spectrum

Slide 8 positions Vettery between low-cost job boards (Monster, LinkedIn, Indeed) and high-touch staffing firms (Michael Page, Robert Half), showing the company as a marketplace alternative. This three-column framing makes Vettery’s unique value prop visible — it aims to combine marketplace efficiency with hiring quality and control. By visually mapping competitors along a price/quality axis, the slide communicates differentiation without a long narrative and prepares investors for the business model and pricing rationale that follow.

Key Takeaway: Map competitors along clear dimensions (price, service, quality) so investors can instantly see your differentiation and where you can capture share.

Unit Economics & Business Model: Demonstrate profitability potential

The slide labeled 'Strong Business Model' (slide 9) is particularly persuasive: it calls out a 90.3% gross margin in April and projects profitability and positive cash flow the following month. It also lists candidate acquisition cost ($77) and average revenue per placement ($15,960). These numbers are critical because they transform the marketplace story into a financially credible business. Very strong unit economics reduce investor risk — they show that growth can scale without proportional cost increases.

Key Takeaway: Lead with unit economics: show CAC, average revenue per transaction, and margin milestones to prove your model scales profitably.

Technology & Scaling Roadmap: How you'll defend and grow

Slide 10 outlines a concrete technology roadmap focused on data, scaling, and HR ecosystem integrations: better matching, data-driven curation, employer onboarding, candidate activation, and ATS/workflow integrations. This is effective because it links product development to defensibility — data and integrations create switching costs and improve matching quality over time. It also signals a clear product plan to investors: not only have they built a working marketplace, they know which technical capabilities will drive expansion and retention.

Key Takeaway: Tie your roadmap to defensibility: prioritize data, automation, and platform integrations that increase switching costs and improve core matching metrics.

Conclusion: Key Lessons

Vettery’s Series A deck is a strong example of balancing product clarity, market sizing, competitive positioning, and hard metrics. Strengths include a tight vision, a visual product demo, multi-dimensional traction charts, explicit unit economics, and a defensible tech roadmap. For founders drafting their own decks: prioritize clarity (one-sentence vision), show the product and user flows, present balanced KPIs across both sides of a marketplace, quantify market size and incumbents, and — crucially — lead with unit economics that prove the business can scale profitably. Finally, map your competitive differentiation and spell out the technical investments that will sustain growth and create barriers to entry.

Compare Your Deck To Vettery

Full Deck Analysis

11 sections

Overview Executive Summary Problem Statement Solution Market Opportunity Business Model Traction & Metrics Competitive Positioning Team Go-to-Market Strategy The Ask

Overview

Company: Vettery
Round: Series A ($9M)
Year: 2016
Outcome: Acquired by Adecco (2018)
Deck Length: 11 slides

Executive Summary

Vettery’s Series A pitch presents a compelling two-sided marketplace for hiring that demonstrates exceptional early traction and unit economics. The deck showcases a path to profitability with 90.3% gross margins, a $77 candidate acquisition cost, and $15,960 average revenue per placement—metrics that justified $9M Series A funding in May 2016. However, the pitch lacks clear competitive differentiation against entrenched players and leaves critical questions about team credentials and sustainable scaling unanswered, which may explain why the company ultimately sold to Adecco rather than scaling independently.

Problem Statement

How the deck articulates the problem:

The deck does not explicitly state a problem statement. Instead, it assumes the problem is self-evident: the hiring process is inefficient, expensive, and lacks transparency.

Implicit problems addressed:

For Hiring Managers (Slide 4): Lack of access to qualified candidates, limited transparency into candidate intent/availability, high costs, and complexity in the hiring process
For Candidates (Slide 4): Limited access to opportunities, lack of price discovery (salary transparency), and difficulty controlling their job search narrative

Market context (Slide 7): The $120B U.S. staffing industry is dominated by 14 large firms generating >$1B each, suggesting the market is ripe for disruption but heavily entrenched.

Notable gap: The deck never articulates why existing solutions (LinkedIn, Indeed, traditional recruiters) fail to solve these problems, which is a critical omission for competitive positioning.

Solution

How the deck positions the solution (Slides 2-4):

Vettery is positioned as a two-sided marketplace that connects hiring managers directly with qualified candidates, eliminating intermediaries and creating transparency.

Core value propositions:

For Hiring Managers:

Intent: See which candidates are actively looking
Access & Transparency: Direct access to candidate profiles with skills, experience, salary expectations, visa status, and education
Control: Ability to request interviews directly without recruiter intermediation
Ease of Use: Simple, intuitive interface
Cost Effective: Lower costs than traditional staffing agencies

For Candidates:

Ease of Use: Simple profile creation and job search
Access: Direct access to opportunities from hiring managers
Price Discovery: Transparent salary information and negotiation
Control: Agency over their job search and visibility

Product Features (Slide 3):

Rich candidate profiles with skills tags (Node.js, Angular, JavaScript), experience level, location/visa status, salary expectations, and education
One-click interview request functionality
Resume viewing capability

Key differentiator claimed: “Marketplace provides transparency, price discovery, intent, and ease” (Slide 3)—but this is not substantiated against competitors.

Market Opportunity

TAM Analysis (Slide 7):

Market Segment	Size	Notes
U.S. Staffing Industry	$120 billion	Annual market size
Global Staffing Industry	$500 billion	International opportunity
Top 14 U.S. Staffing Firms	>$1 billion each	Market concentration (~$14B+ combined)

Market Penetration Context:

Top 14 firms represent ~11-12% of U.S. market, indicating significant fragmentation
Global opportunity is 4.2x larger than U.S. market
Vettery’s vision (Slide 2) is to be “the marketplace used for hiring across all roles, levels, and geographies”—positioning for global scale

Notable gaps:

No SAM (Serviceable Addressable Market) or SOM (Serviceable Obtainable Market) defined
No breakdown by segment (tech vs. non-tech, direct hire vs. contract, etc.)
No market growth rate provided
No explanation of why Vettery can capture share from $14B+ incumbent firms

Business Model

Revenue Model (Implied from Slides 3, 6, 9):

Vettery operates as a placement-based marketplace, taking a percentage of the placement value or a fixed fee per successful hire.

Pricing Structure:

Average Revenue per Placement: $15,960 (Slide 9)
Implied Take Rate: ~13% of average salary (~$122K from Slide 5)
Example: If average salary is $122K, Vettery takes ~$15,960 per placement

Unit Economics (Slide 9):

Metric	Value	Implication
Candidate Acquisition Cost (CAC)	$77	Exceptionally low
Average Revenue per Placement	$15,960	Strong revenue per transaction
LTV:CAC Ratio	~207:1	Phenomenal (3:1 is healthy)
Gross Margin (April 2016)	90.3%	SaaS-like margins

Profitability Claims:

“In May, we estimate we will be profitable and cash flow positive” (Slide 9)
“Long term, we believe this to be a very high margin business” (Slide 9)

Critical gaps:

No breakdown of operating expenses (R&D, sales, G&A)
No net margin calculation
No explanation of how CAC is calculated or what’s included
No discussion of repeat rate or LTV calculation methodology
Profitability claims are estimates, not proven results

Traction & Metrics

Timeline: July 2015 - May 2016 (11 months of data shown)

User Acquisition (Slide 3):

Hiring Managers: 1,700 signed up in 57 weeks (~4 months of data shown)
Candidates: 4,700 connected in same period
Ratio: 2.76 candidates per hiring manager (healthy two-sided ratio)

Engagement Metrics (Slide 5 - KPI Dashboard):

Metric	Start (7/2015)	Peak (4/2016)	Growth
Monthly Interview Requests	~50	~350+	7x
Monthly Active Hiring Managers	~200	~500+	2.5x
Average Invite Salary	~$100K	~$120K+	20% increase
Candidate Acceptance Rate	20-80% weekly	20-80% weekly	Volatile (40-60% avg)

Revenue Metrics (Slide 6 - Revenue Growth):

Metric	Start (4/2015)	Peak (5/2016)	Growth
Monthly GMV	~$0	~$500K+	Exponential
Monthly Net Revenue	~$0	~$400K+	Exponential
Annualized Run Rate (May 2016)	N/A	~$4.8M	Strong trajectory

Growth Pattern:

Q2-Q3 2015: Volatile, flat growth (4/15-9/15)
Q4 2015 - Q1 2016: Strong acceleration in all metrics
May 2016: Peak performance across all metrics

Notable observations:

Candidate acceptance rate volatility (20-80% weekly) suggests market demand fluctuations or quality issues
Revenue acceleration coincides with hiring manager growth (network effects)
No churn or retention metrics provided

Competitive Positioning

Competitive Landscape (Slide 8):

Vettery positions itself in the Marketplaces category, distinct from Job Boards and Full Service Incumbents.

Competitive Categories:

Category	Competitors	Characteristics
Job Boards	Monster, LinkedIn, CareerBuilder, Indeed, Dice	Low cost, high volume, self-service
Marketplaces	Vettery, Hired, Indeed Prime	Mid-market, curated, two-sided
Full Service Incumbents	Betts Recruiting, Deversa Partners, Glocap, Michael Page, Riviera Partners, Robert Half	High touch, high cost, relationship-driven

Positioning Strategy:

Vettery is positioned between job boards (cheap but impersonal) and full-service firms (expensive but high-touch)
Implied price positioning: More expensive than Indeed, cheaper than Robert Half
Target market: Mid-market hiring managers seeking quality candidates without recruiter overhead

Critical gaps in competitive analysis:

No differentiation explanation: Why would candidates choose Vettery over LinkedIn (which has 500M+ users)?
No competitive advantages articulated: Speed? Quality? Network effects? Data?
No win rates or market share data: How often does Vettery win vs. Hired or Indeed Prime?
No discussion of switching costs: What prevents customers from reverting to LinkedIn or Indeed?
Incumbent threat underestimated: Robert Half, Michael Page, and Adecco have massive resources, relationships, and brand trust
LinkedIn threat not addressed: LinkedIn’s dominance in candidate discovery is not acknowledged

Team

Team Information Provided: None

Critical omission:

No founder names, titles, or credentials
No team size or composition
No relevant experience highlighted
No board members or advisors mentioned
Closing slide (Slide 11) has no contact information or team details

Why this matters:

Investors fund teams as much as ideas
No credibility signals for execution capability
No explanation of why this team can compete against entrenched incumbents
Raises questions about founder background (first-time founders? Serial entrepreneurs? Industry veterans?)

Inference from metrics:

The low CAC ($77) and high gross margins (90.3%) suggest either:
- Exceptional product-market fit and viral growth (team execution)
- Unsustainable unit economics (team inexperience with scaling)
No way to assess which without team information

Go-to-Market Strategy

GTM approach (Inferred from metrics and Slide 10):

Candidate Acquisition (Implied):

CAC: $77 suggests primarily organic/viral growth, not paid advertising
Possible channels: Referrals, word-of-mouth, content marketing, or partnerships
No explicit GTM strategy shown in the deck

Hiring Manager Acquisition (Implied):

Growth from 200 to 500+ MAHMs in 9 months suggests direct sales or partnerships
No explicit GTM strategy shown in the deck

Scaling Strategy (Slide 10 - Technology Roadmap):

Initiative	Purpose
Employer On-Boarding	Reduce friction for hiring managers joining platform
Candidate Registration and Activation	Streamline candidate signup and profile completion
Streamlining the Interview Funnel	Reduce time-to-hire and improve conversion
ATS Integrations	Embed Vettery into hiring manager workflows
Workflow Management Tools	Increase stickiness and reduce switching

Notable gaps:

No paid acquisition strategy discussed
No partnership strategy (e.g., with HR software vendors)
No geographic expansion plan (despite global TAM)
No vertical specialization strategy (tech vs. finance vs. healthcare)
No content/brand strategy articulated

The Ask

Funding Amount: $9M Series A

Use of Funds: Not explicitly stated in the deck

Inferred use of funds (based on roadmap and growth):

Product Development: Data-driven matching, ATS integrations, hiring intelligence
Sales & Marketing: Hiring manager acquisition (to sustain 2.5x growth)
Operations: Customer support, compliance, payment processing
Team Expansion: Engineering, product, sales, operations

Burn rate context:

Claiming profitability by May 2016 suggests low burn or positive unit economics
$9M raise suggests 12-24 month runway to profitability or next funding round
No explicit burn rate or cash runway provided

Investor Deep Dive

Executive summary, strengths & red flags

Executive Summary

Vettery's Series A pitch presents a compelling two-sided marketplace for hiring that demonstrates exceptional early traction and unit economics. The deck showcases a path to profitability with 90.3% gross margins, a $77 candidate acquisition cost, and $15,960 average revenue per placement—metrics that justified $9M Series A funding in May 2016. However, the pitch lacks clear competitive differentiation against entrenched players and leaves critical questions about team credentials and sustainable scaling unanswered, which may explain why the company ultimately sold to Adecco rather than scaling independently.