Diligence memo · auto-generated · as of July 2, 2026
Short Amount of Time Development Ltd Liability Co
Short Amount of Time Development Ltd Liability Co looks over-valued against its niche peers and is dormant on financing cadence.
Businessfiled
Short Amount of Time Development Ltd Liability Co operates in Other, based in NEW YORK.
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
Short Amount of Time Development Ltd Liability Co has raised $600K in disclosed capital across 1 recorded round, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Pre-Seed (a round under $1.0M).
Largest single filing: $600K on 2019-07-01.
Most recent recorded round closed around 2019-07-01.
Valuation (modeled)modeled
Provath models Short Amount of Time Development Ltd Liability Co at approximately $14M (range $400K–$157M). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.
Read: Over-valued. Modeled value is 2.23× the median modeled value of Pre-Seed Other companies in 2019–2021 (1372 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era. Issuer reports no revenue, yet is modeled well above niche peers.
Financing rhythm & timingmixed
Last raise 7.0 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 28% of Other peers (25015 compared).
Modeled value ranks above 45% of those peers.
Closest niche peers: Valued, Inc., CiiTA, LLC, Wnder, LTD, Supernova Discotheque, LLC, TommyKnockers LLC.
Peoplefiled
1 named person on file across officers, directors and signatories.
Risks & flagsmixed
Financing has been silent well beyond sector cadence — possibly defunct, acquired, or paused.
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.