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

Hahparking, Inc.

Hahparking, Inc. looks over-valued 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

Hahparking, Inc. operates in Other, based in CHARLESTON.

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

Hahparking, Inc. has raised $2.4M in disclosed capital across 5 recorded rounds, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Pre-Seed (a round under $1.0M).

Largest single filing: $750K on 2021-04-30.

Most recent recorded round closed around 2023-04-05.

Valuation (modeled)modeled

Provath models Hahparking, Inc. at approximately $5.1M (range $495K–$25M). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.

Read: Over-valued. Modeled value is 2.53× the median modeled value of Pre-Seed Other companies in 2022–2024 (1723 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era.

Financing rhythm & timingmixed

Historic cadence: a new round about every 13 months.

Last raise 3.2 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 1.0× smaller than the prior — a bridge or down round.

Comparablesmixed

Capital scale ranks ahead of 52% of Other peers (25015 compared).

Modeled value ranks above 26% of those peers.

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

Peoplefiled

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

Risks & flagsmixed

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

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.