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

Ssi Pooling, L.P.

Ssi Pooling, L.P. 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

Ssi Pooling, L.P. operates in Other, based in BOSTON.

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

Ssi Pooling, L.P. has raised $1.1B in disclosed capital across 2 recorded rounds, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Growth/Late (a round over $400M).

Largest single filing: $535M on 2010-05-26.

Most recent recorded round closed around 2010-05-26.

Valuation (modeled)modeled

Provath models Ssi Pooling, L.P. at approximately $9.5B (range $4.2B–$17.1B). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.

Read: Fair. Modeled value is 0.92× the median modeled value of Growth/Late Other companies in 2010–2012 (16 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era. Within the normal band (92% of peer median) for its niche.

Financing rhythm & timingmixed

Last raise 16.1 yr ago; this sector typically re-raises about every 11 months.

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

The last round was 1.0× smaller than the prior — a bridge or down round.

Comparablesmixed

Capital scale ranks ahead of 100% of Other peers (25015 compared).

Modeled value ranks above 100% of those peers.

Closest niche peers: Healthcare Technology Holdings, Inc., Conagra Foods Inc /De/, Chinos Holdings, Inc., Griffey Investors, L.P., Visteon Corp.

Peoplefiled

7 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.