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

InStadium, Inc.

InStadium, Inc. looks under-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

InStadium, Inc. operates in Other, based in CHICAGO.

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

InStadium, Inc. has raised $14M in disclosed capital across 4 recorded rounds, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Series A (a $4.0M–$15M round).

Largest single filing: $7.5M on 2009-05-22.

Most recent recorded round closed around 2014-03-14.

Valuation (modeled)modeled

Provath models InStadium, Inc. at approximately $45M (range $4.1M–$247M). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.

Read: Under-valued. Modeled value is 0.51× the median modeled value of Series A Other companies in 2013–2015 (623 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era.

Financing rhythm & timingmixed

Historic cadence: a new round about every 19 months.

Last raise 12.3 yr ago; this sector typically re-raises about every 11 months.

Silent for over 3× the sector's normal cadence.

The last round stepped up 2.9× from the prior — scaling.

Comparablesmixed

Capital scale ranks ahead of 81% of Other peers (25015 compared).

Modeled value ranks above 70% of those peers.

Closest niche peers: Biloxi Baseball, LLC, United Sample Inc, Revolution Lighting Technologies, Inc., County Waste of Virginia, LLC, Marathon Patent Group, Inc..

Peoplefiled

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

Risks & flagsmixed

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

Broad sector classification weakens peer comparison.

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