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

Miami DD Club, LLC

Miami DD Club, LLC looks under-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

Miami DD Club, LLC operates in Other, based in DALLAS.

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

Miami DD Club, LLC has raised $26M in disclosed capital across 2 recorded rounds, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Series B (a $15M–$40M round).

Largest single filing: $20M on 2021-12-31.

Most recent recorded round closed around 2023-04-30.

Valuation (modeled)modeled

Provath models Miami DD Club, LLC at approximately $49M (range $15M–$111M). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.

Read: Under-valued. Modeled value is 0.31× the median modeled value of Series B Other companies in 2022–2024 (465 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era.

Financing rhythm & timingmixed

Historic cadence: a new round about every 16 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 3.4× smaller than the prior — a bridge or down round.

Comparablesmixed

Capital scale ranks ahead of 88% of Other peers (25015 compared).

Modeled value ranks above 71% of those peers.

Closest niche peers: Ever/Body, Inc., Financeware Holdings LLC, American Cricket Enterprises Inc., Xlerate Ultimate Holdings, Lp, MDME Ultimate Holdings, LP.

Peoplefiled

3 named people 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.