Built from inside the workflow
We have worked in private equity and investment banking. Arbitrex exists because we spent that time doing the process work by hand, and knew what could be taken off the desk.
Deal teams are not short of data. They are short of process: the connective work between having information and being able to act on it. That work is where the week goes, and it is almost never the part that creates the value.
Because we have sat on both sides (the bank running the process and the fund on the other end of it), we know where the friction actually is. It is rarely the analysis. It is the assembly around it: rebuilding the same longlist, reconciling the same figures, chasing the same filings.
So we build the systems we wanted then: for other firms as bespoke software, automation and AI implementation, and for ourselves as the tools you can see on this site. Each one is aimed at a specific question rather than at a category. Opinionated about the workflow, and honest about where every number came from.
Sourcing done by hand
Longlists rebuilt from scratch each mandate, in a spreadsheet that is stale the week after it is circulated.
Data spread across tools
A screen in one system, filings in another, notes in a third, and no single view that holds them together.
Process rebuilt every time
The same diligence steps repeated per deal, with the structure living in someone's head rather than the tooling.
Junior time spent on assembly
Analyst hours going into collecting and formatting rather than the judgement the work is actually paid for.
Tell us where your process hurts
If any of the above sounds like your week, we would be glad to hear which part costs you most. That is how the product gets built.