Diligence memo · auto-generated · as of July 3, 2026

Days of Wonder, Inc.

Days of Wonder, Inc. looks over-valued against its niche peers and is dormant on financing cadence.

DeprioritizeFinancing has gone silent well past the sector's normal cadence — treat as inactive until outside confirmation of a live operation.

Businessfiled

Days of Wonder, Inc. operates in Other, based in LOS ALTOS.

Sector still resolves to a broad 'Other' bucket, so operating comparables below are weaker than for a tightly-classified peer.

No verified homepage on file yet — operating evidence is limited to the public record.

Capital & rounds (filed)filed

Days of Wonder, Inc. has raised $899K in disclosed capital across 1 recorded round, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Pre-Seed (a round under $1.0M).

Largest single filing: $899K on 2006-04-28.

Most recent recorded round closed around 2006-04-28.

Valuation (modeled)modeled

Provath models Days of Wonder, Inc. at approximately $21M (range $599K–$235M). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.

Read: Over-valued. Modeled value is 1.80× the median modeled value of Pre-Seed Other companies in 2004–2006 (7 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era.

Financing rhythm & timingmixed

Last raise 20.2 yr ago; this sector typically re-raises about every 11 months.

Only one round on record and long silent — often defunct, acquired, or gone quiet.

Comparablesmixed

Capital scale ranks ahead of 34% of Other peers (25015 compared).

Modeled value ranks above 54% of those peers.

Closest niche peers: Bright Ideas Entertainment, LLC, Kwk Opportunity Fund Lp, Rainbow Reward Holdings Ltd, Blatant Entertainment, Inc., Tech Gold Plus, LLC.

Peoplefiled

4 named people on file across officers, directors and signatories.

Risks & flagsmixed

Financing has been silent well beyond sector cadence — possibly defunct, acquired, or paused.

Modeled above niche peers — valuation risk on entry.

Broad sector classification weakens peer comparison.

No clearly named CEO/founder/principal in the surfaced records — key-person evidence is thin.