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

Scentbird, Inc.

Scentbird, Inc. looks fair 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

Scentbird, Inc. operates in Other, based in NEW YORK, NY, USA; Remote. Scentbird is a luxury fragrance subscription service.

Sub-sector tags: Consumer, Apparel and Cosmetics.

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

Capital & rounds (filed)filed

Scentbird, Inc. has raised $25M in disclosed capital across 1 recorded round, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Series B (a $15M–$40M round).

Largest single filing: $25M on 2018-05-02.

Most recent recorded round closed around 2018-05-02.

Valuation (modeled)modeled

Provath models Scentbird, Inc. at approximately $408M (range $61M–$1.6B). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.

Read: Fair. Modeled value is 1.23× the median modeled value of Series B Other companies in 2016–2018 (298 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era. Within the normal band (123% of peer median) for its niche.

Financing rhythm & timingmixed

Last raise 8.2 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 88% of Other peers (25015 compared).

Modeled value ranks above 93% of those peers.

Closest niche peers: EIP Investment Holdings, LLC, HD MSouth Holdings, LLC, Aston Holding Corp., AirClean Holdings, Inc., Westminster Virginia LP.

Peoplefiled

5 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.