Upload a sample. Get it graded on the seven things a lab checks before it pays — and listed where their researchers search.
Twenty rows of the real thing is enough. Nothing is listed until you say so.
No account, no email. We read the first 6,000 characters.
Rights, coverage and refresh decide 42% of the score and none of them are visible in the data.
The full report takes about a minute. We'll email it.
The web kept the finished output and threw away the process. The process is what's scarce.
Seeded from public licensing activity through mid-2026. Buyer briefs replace these numbers as they land.
Published on purpose. Read it, fix your data, then submit.
No. The sample produces your assay, and nothing is listed until you press the button. A listing carries the description and the scores, never the data. Buyers contact you and you negotiate directly.
Anchor on what it replaces. If a lab would otherwise pay experts to produce the equivalent, price against that — $30 an hour for reviewers up to $200 for specialist clinicians. Exclusivity roughly doubles the conversation.
Small and unique beats large and ordinary. A few thousand genuinely non-public records capturing expert judgement will get a meeting; ten million scraped listings won't.
Every listing has been through the same assay, so scores compare across sellers.
The index is closed. Sellers list what they hold and what it's worth — reading that takes an account we can attribute to a buyer.