Diligence memo · auto-generated · as of July 2, 2026

Greybrook Hamilton III Trust

Greybrook Hamilton III Trust looks fair against its niche peers and is at-risk on financing cadence.

WatchOverdue for a raise versus sector cadence — could be a bridge, a down round, or distress. Watch for the next filing.

Businessfiled

Greybrook Hamilton III Trust operates in Other, based in TORONTO.

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

Greybrook Hamilton III Trust has raised $517K in disclosed capital across 2 recorded rounds, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Pre-Seed (a round under $1.0M).

Largest single filing: $285K on 2023-06-30.

Most recent recorded round closed around 2023-06-30.

Valuation (modeled)modeled

Provath models Greybrook Hamilton III Trust at approximately $1.8M (range $190K–$8.1M). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.

Read: Fair. Modeled value is 0.88× the median modeled value of Pre-Seed Other companies in 2022–2024 (1723 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era. Within the normal band (88% of peer median) for its niche.

Financing rhythm & timingmixed

Last raise 3.0 yr ago; this sector typically re-raises about every 11 months.

Past due for a raise versus sector cadence — watch for distress or a bridge.

The last round was 1.2× smaller than the prior — a bridge or down round.

Comparablesmixed

Capital scale ranks ahead of 25% of Other peers (25015 compared).

Modeled value ranks above 10% of those peers.

Closest niche peers: El American Inc., AEA Hope, LLC, Joy Milk Tea Inc., Manage Mindfully, Inc., ValiDateMe LLC.

Peoplefiled

1 named person on file across officers, directors and signatories.

Risks & flagsmixed

Overdue for a raise versus sector norm — distress or bridge risk.

Broad sector classification weakens peer comparison.

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