For Funders Only

Two resources built specifically for institutional funders.

Below: a live, anonymized read on what's actually coming through the Institute right now, and a way to register your current investment criteria so we can flag matters that fit before they're shopped broadly elsewhere.

Live · Updated Continuously

The State of Demand

Aggregated and anonymized from real AI Concierge conversations, no names, no contact details, no identifiable case facts. Categorical tags only, consistent with our Privacy Policy.

Loading current data…
Published · Independently Compiled

What Funders Say They Want

Ahead of having a large enough sample of live inquiries to report, here is what we found by reading the publicly stated investment criteria of all 39 funders in our directory directly from their own websites and public materials. Each individual funder's criteria are cited on its own profile page.

Size Segments Are Real

Thresholds vary by how each funder measures size (claim value, investment amount, or damages), but the tiers are consistent: ultra-large generalists want minimum claims of $10M-$100M+ (Innsworth, Woodsford, Harbour, Vannin); most institutional funders cluster around a $1M-$25M investment range (Burford, Omni Bridgeway, GLS Capital, Longford, Arcadia); and a distinct middle-market tier exists specifically for the $250K-$4M gap the majors won't touch (Statera Capital, Validity Finance, Orchard Global). Below that, only algorithmic or marketplace models (Legalist, LexShares) will look at matters under $250K.

Specialization Runs Deeper Than It Looks

Several funders are genuinely narrow despite broad-sounding names: Soryn IP Group and much of 1624's book are patent/IP-only; Deminor has particular depth in securities and shareholder claims; Delta Capital Partners is built around judgment enforcement and asset recovery specifically, not new litigation; Augusta Ventures stands out in construction, energy, and infrastructure disputes.

Personal Injury Is a Hard Line

Most commercial funders explicitly exclude personal injury, mass tort, and individual consumer claims (Omni Bridgeway, Validity Finance, Curiam Capital, Harbour, and Balance Legal Capital all say so directly). Pravati Capital and Lawstreet Capital are among the few institutional funders built specifically around that category instead, a real structural line, not a gap in the data.

Underwriting Logic Converges

Regardless of niche, nearly every funder's public materials converge on the same four questions: are the legal merits strong, can the defendant actually pay, does the expected recovery justify the investment (commonly cited around a 5-10x multiple), and is the litigation team experienced. Worth knowing if you're benchmarking your own criteria against the field.
Compiled from each funder's own website and public statements as of mid-2026; criteria shift, and figures should be independently verified before relying on them. Not an endorsement of any firm.
Register Your Criteria

Deal Alerts

Tell us what you're looking for. When a claimant matter is tagged with characteristics matching your stated criteria, you'll get a short, anonymized email, before deciding whether to pursue an introduction through the Exchange. No cost, no obligation, unsubscribe anytime.

Commercial dispute
IP / patent
Mass tort
Construction
Securities
Antitrust
International arbitration
Portfolio financing
Leave all unselected to receive alerts for any category.
<$250k
$250k-$2M
$2M-$10M
$10M+
Leave unselected to receive alerts for any claim size.

Prefer to talk it through instead? The AI Concierge can capture your investment criteria conversationally and summarize it back to you as a Living Investment Profile, just tell it you represent a litigation finance firm.