FWDI M&A Financial Analysis and Sensitivity
Comprehensive financial modeling for CoinGecko and Stocktwits acquisition opportunities.
Executive Summary
| Metric | CoinGecko | Stocktwits |
|---|
| Entry Price | $400M | $72M |
| Base Case Y3 Revenue | $94M | $39M |
| Base Case Y3 EBITDA | $68.5M | $14M |
| Base Case Exit Value | $752M | $234M |
| Base Case MOIC | 1.9x | 3.25x |
| Base Case IRR | 23% | 48% |
| Expected MOIC (prob-weighted) | 2.2x | 3.6x |
| Breakeven Connection/Growth Rate | 3% | 15% MAU CAGR |
Key Finding: Stocktwits offers higher expected returns (3.6x vs 2.2x MOIC) but with higher execution risk and lower strategic fit. CoinGecko offers more moderate returns with better strategic alignment.
Part 1: CoinGecko Financial Model
1.1 Current State Analysis
Revenue Decomposition
| Stream | Revenue | % Mix | ARPU | Key Driver |
|---|
| Advertising | $13.3M | 33% | $0.33 | 40M MAU × $0.33 |
| API/Data | $13.3M | 33% | N/A | ~500 enterprise clients × $26.6K avg |
| CeFi Referrals | $13.3M | 33% | $0.33 | Affiliate clicks × conversion × bounty |
| Total | $40M | 100% | $1.00 | |
User Economics (Current)
| Metric | Value | Benchmark | Assessment |
|---|
| MAU | 40M | - | Top 3 crypto data site |
| DAU | ~4M (est.) | - | 10% DAU/MAU (estimated) |
| ARPU | $1.00 | Stocktwits: $20 | Very low monetization |
| Session Duration | ~3 min (est.) | - | Quick lookup behavior |
| Pages/Session | ~3 (est.) | - | Price check + 1-2 more |
| Geo Mix | ~30% US, ~70% RoW | - | Explains low ARPU |
Cost Structure (Estimated)
| Category | Amount | % Rev | Basis |
|---|
| Headcount (100 × $80K) | $8M | 20% | Malaysia-based, lower costs |
| Infrastructure | $4M | 10% | Data + hosting |
| Data Acquisition | $3M | 8% | API data sources |
| G&A | $3M | 8% | Corporate overhead |
| Total OpEx | $18M | 45% | |
| EBITDA | $22M | 55% | Strong margin |
1.2 Revenue Model - Existing Business
Ad Revenue Model
Ad Revenue = MAU × Sessions/MAU × Impressions/Session × CPM/1000
| Variable | Bear | Base | Bull | Notes |
|---|
| MAU (M) | 35 | 40 | 50 | Crypto market correlation |
| Sessions/MAU/month | 2 | 2.5 | 3 | Engagement level |
| Impressions/session | 3 | 4 | 5 | Ad density |
| Blended CPM | $0.40 | $0.55 | $0.80 | Geo-adjusted |
Ad Revenue Calculation:
| Scenario | Monthly Impressions | Annual Revenue |
|---|
| Bear | 35M × 2 × 3 = 210M | $1.0M × 12 = $12.0M |
| Base | 40M × 2.5 × 4 = 400M | $2.2M × 12 = $13.2M |
| Bull | 50M × 3 × 5 = 750M | $6.0M × 12 = $18.0M |
API Revenue Model
API Revenue = Enterprise Clients × Avg Contract Value
| Variable | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|
| Enterprise clients | 450 | 520 | 650 |
| ACV | $25K | $28K | $32K |
| Revenue | $11.3M | $14.6M | $20.8M |
Referral Revenue Model
Referral Revenue = Clicks × Conversion Rate × Avg Bounty
| Variable | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|
| Monthly referral clicks | 800K | 1.2M | 2.0M |
| Conversion rate | 3% | 4% | 5% |
| Avg bounty | $25 | $35 | $50 |
| Annual Revenue | $7.2M | $20.2M | $60.0M |
Note: Referral revenue is highly volatile with crypto markets
Total Existing Revenue by Scenario
| Stream | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|
| Advertising | $12.0M | $13.2M | $18.0M |
| API/Data | $11.3M | $14.6M | $20.8M |
| Referrals | $7.2M | $20.2M | $60.0M |
| Total Existing | $30.5M | $48.0M | $98.8M |
1.3 Revenue Model - New Trading Business
Conversion Funnel Model (Detailed)
| Stage | Definition | Bear | Base | Bull | Calculation |
|---|
| MAU | Monthly active users | 35M | 40M | 50M | Market dependent |
| Awareness | See trading feature | 50% | 70% | 85% | UX prominence |
| ↳ Aware Users | | 17.5M | 28.0M | 42.5M | MAU × Awareness |
| Interest | Click to learn more | 10% | 20% | 30% | Value prop |
| ↳ Interested | | 1.75M | 5.6M | 12.75M | × Interest |
| Connection | Connect wallet | 20% | 35% | 50% | Friction |
| ↳ Connected | | 350K | 1.96M | 6.38M | × Connection |
| Funding | Deposit funds | 15% | 25% | 40% | Trust |
| ↳ Funded | | 53K | 490K | 2.55M | × Funding |
| Activation | Complete first trade | 40% | 60% | 75% | UX quality |
| ↳ Activated | | 21K | 294K | 1.91M | × Activation |
| Retention | Monthly active trader | 30% | 50% | 65% | Stickiness |
| ↳ Monthly Traders | | 6.3K | 147K | 1.24M | × Retention |
Funnel Rate Summary
| Path | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|
| MAU → Connected | 1.0% | 4.9% | 12.8% |
| Connected → Funded | 15% | 25% | 40% |
| Funded → Monthly Trader | 12% | 30% | 49% |
| MAU → Monthly Trader | 0.02% | 0.37% | 2.48% |
Trading Economics
| Variable | Bear | Base | Bull | Rationale |
|---|
| Avg trades/month | 3 | 8 | 15 | Activity intensity |
| Avg trade size | $75 | $150 | $300 | Retail ticket |
| Monthly volume/trader | $225 | $1,200 | $4,500 | |
| Take rate (bps) | 30 | 50 | 75 | Spread + fees |
| Monthly rev/trader | $0.68 | $6.00 | $33.75 | |
| Annual rev/trader | $8.10 | $72.00 | $405.00 | |
Trading Revenue Build-Up
| Metric | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|
| Monthly traders | 6,300 | 147,000 | 1,240,000 |
| Monthly volume | $1.4M | $176M | $5.6B |
| Annual volume | $17.0M | $2.1B | $67B |
| Take rate | 30 bps | 50 bps | 75 bps |
| Annual Trading Revenue | $51K | $10.6M | $502M |
Sanity check: Bull case implies 2.5% of MAU becoming monthly traders generating $400/yr each. This is aggressive but not impossible given pump.fun ($1,400 ARPU) and Robinhood ($197 ARPU) comparables.
Trading Revenue Ramp (Base Case)
| Quarter | Monthly Traders | Qtrly Volume | Qtrly Revenue |
|---|
| Y1 Q1 | 10K | $36M | $180K |
| Y1 Q2 | 30K | $108M | $540K |
| Y1 Q3 | 70K | $252M | $1.26M |
| Y1 Q4 | 120K | $432M | $2.16M |
| Y1 Total | | $828M | $4.1M |
| Y2 Q1 | 150K | $540M | $2.7M |
| Y2 Q2 | 180K | $648M | $3.24M |
| Y2 Q3 | 200K | $720M | $3.6M |
| Y2 Q4 | 220K | $792M | $3.96M |
| Y2 Total | | $2.7B | $13.5M |
| Y3 (annual) | 300K avg | $4.3B | $21.6M |
Additional New Revenue Streams
| Stream | Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Basis |
|---|
| Staking/Yield | $0.5M | $2.0M | $4.0M | Yield aggregation |
| Premium Features | $0.5M | $1.5M | $3.0M | Pro tier |
| NFT Marketplace | $0 | $1.0M | $2.0M | If market recovers |
| Other New | $1.0M | $4.5M | $9.0M | |
1.4 Total Revenue Model - CoinGecko
Base Case Revenue Build
| Stream | Y0 | Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Y4 | Y5 |
|---|
| Advertising | $13.3M | $13.5M | $14.0M | $15.0M | $16.0M | $17.0M |
| API/Data | $13.3M | $14.6M | $16.5M | $18.5M | $20.5M | $22.5M |
| Referrals | $13.3M | $15.0M | $18.0M | $20.0M | $22.0M | $24.0M |
| Existing Total | $40.0M | $43.1M | $48.5M | $53.5M | $58.5M | $63.5M |
| Trading | $0 | $4.1M | $13.5M | $21.6M | $30.0M | $40.0M |
| Other New | $0 | $1.0M | $4.5M | $9.0M | $12.0M | $15.0M |
| New Total | $0 | $5.1M | $18.0M | $30.6M | $42.0M | $55.0M |
| TOTAL REVENUE | $40.0M | $48.2M | $66.5M | $84.1M | $100.5M | $118.5M |
| YoY Growth | - | 21% | 38% | 26% | 20% | 18% |
Scenario Comparison - Revenue
| Scenario | Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Y5 |
|---|
| Bear | $35M | $38M | $42M | $50M |
| Base | $48M | $67M | $84M | $119M |
| Bull | $70M | $120M | $180M | $280M |
1.5 Cost Model - CoinGecko
Investment Plan
| Category | Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Y4 | Y5 | Notes |
|---|
| Existing OpEx | $19M | $20M | $21M | $22M | $23M | 5% annual growth |
| Product/Eng Hires | $3M | $2M | $1.5M | $1M | $1M | Trading team build |
| Infrastructure | $2M | $2M | $1.5M | $1M | $1M | Trading scale |
| Marketing | $1M | $2M | $2.5M | $3M | $3M | Feature awareness |
| Compliance | $1M | $1M | $0.5M | $0.5M | $0.5M | Regulatory |
| Incremental Total | $7M | $7M | $6M | $5.5M | $5.5M | |
| TOTAL OPEX | $26M | $27M | $27M | $27.5M | $28.5M | |
| Line Item | Y0 | Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Y4 | Y5 |
|---|
| Revenue | $40.0M | $48.2M | $66.5M | $84.1M | $100.5M | $118.5M |
| Gross Margin | 85% | 83% | 80% | 78% | 77% | 76% |
| Gross Profit | $34.0M | $40.0M | $53.2M | $65.6M | $77.4M | $90.1M |
| OpEx | $18.0M | $26.0M | $27.0M | $27.0M | $27.5M | $28.5M |
| EBITDA | $16.0M | $14.0M | $26.2M | $38.6M | $49.9M | $61.6M |
| EBITDA Margin | 40% | 29% | 39% | 46% | 50% | 52% |
| D&A | $2M | $2.5M | $3M | $3.5M | $4M | $4.5M |
| EBIT | $14.0M | $11.5M | $23.2M | $35.1M | $45.9M | $57.1M |
| Tax (25%) | $3.5M | $2.9M | $5.8M | $8.8M | $11.5M | $14.3M |
| Net Income | $10.5M | $8.6M | $17.4M | $26.3M | $34.4M | $42.8M |
P&L by Scenario - Year 3
| Line | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|
| Revenue | $42M | $84M | $180M |
| Gross Profit | $34M | $66M | $135M |
| OpEx | $25M | $27M | $35M |
| EBITDA | $9M | $39M | $100M |
| EBITDA Margin | 21% | 46% | 56% |
| Net Income | $5M | $26M | $70M |
1.6 Valuation Model - CoinGecko
Comparable Transactions
| Company | Year | Revenue | EV | Multiple | Notes |
|---|
| CoinMarketCap | 2020 | ~$30M | $400M | 13x | Binance acquisition |
| TradingView | 2021 | ~$200M | $3B | 15x | Growth equity |
| eToro | 2021 | $600M | $10B | 17x | SPAC (later failed) |
| Robinhood | 2021 | $1.8B | $32B | 18x | IPO peak |
| Robinhood | 2024 | $2.0B | $8B | 4x | Current |
Multiple Framework:
| Revenue Scale | Bear Multiple | Base Multiple | Bull Multiple |
|---|
| <$50M | 5x | 7x | 10x |
| $50-100M | 6x | 8x | 12x |
| $100-200M | 7x | 10x | 15x |
| >$200M | 8x | 12x | 18x |
Exit Valuation - Year 3
| Scenario | Y3 Revenue | Multiple | Enterprise Value |
|---|
| Bear | $42M | 6x | $252M |
| Base | $84M | 8x | $672M |
| Bull | $180M | 12x | $2,160M |
Exit Valuation - Year 5
| Scenario | Y5 Revenue | Multiple | Enterprise Value |
|---|
| Bear | $50M | 5x | $250M |
| Base | $119M | 9x | $1,071M |
| Bull | $280M | 14x | $3,920M |
1.7 Returns Analysis - CoinGecko
Entry Price Scenarios
| Entry Price | Basis |
|---|
| $300M | 7.5x current, aggressive negotiation |
| $350M | 8.75x current, earnout structure |
| $400M | 10x current, current ask |
| $450M | 11.25x current, competitive process |
| $500M | 12.5x current, bidding war |
MOIC by Entry Price and Scenario (3-Year Exit)
| Entry \ Scenario | Bear ($252M) | Base ($672M) | Bull ($2,160M) |
|---|
| $300M | 0.84x | 2.24x | 7.20x |
| $350M | 0.72x | 1.92x | 6.17x |
| $400M | 0.63x | 1.68x | 5.40x |
| $450M | 0.56x | 1.49x | 4.80x |
| $500M | 0.50x | 1.34x | 4.32x |
MOIC by Entry Price and Scenario (5-Year Exit)
| Entry \ Scenario | Bear ($250M) | Base ($1,071M) | Bull ($3,920M) |
|---|
| $300M | 0.83x | 3.57x | 13.07x |
| $350M | 0.71x | 3.06x | 11.20x |
| $400M | 0.63x | 2.68x | 9.80x |
| $450M | 0.56x | 2.38x | 8.71x |
| $500M | 0.50x | 2.14x | 7.84x |
IRR Analysis (3-Year Hold)
| Entry \ Scenario | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|
| $300M | -6% | 30% | 93% |
| $350M | -10% | 24% | 84% |
| $400M | -14% | 19% | 76% |
| $450M | -18% | 15% | 69% |
| $500M | -21% | 11% | 63% |
IRR Analysis (5-Year Hold)
| Entry \ Scenario | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|
| $300M | -4% | 29% | 68% |
| $350M | -7% | 25% | 62% |
| $400M | -9% | 22% | 58% |
| $450M | -11% | 19% | 54% |
| $500M | -13% | 16% | 51% |
Part 2: Stocktwits Financial Model
2.1 Current State Analysis
Revenue Decomposition
| Stream | Revenue | % Mix | Driver |
|---|
| Programmatic Ads | $6.75M | 45% | MAU × impressions × CPM |
| Direct Ads | $6.75M | 45% | Sales team capacity |
| Subscriptions | $0.75M | 5% | Premium users |
| Other | $0.75M | 5% | Events, data |
| Total | $15M | 100% | |
User Economics (Current)
| Metric | Value | Notes |
|---|
| MAU | 750K | Flat for years |
| DAU | 350K | Exceptional engagement |
| DAU/MAU | 47% | 4-5x typical social |
| ARPU | $20 | 20x CoinGecko |
| High-twitch traders | ~50K DAU | Core monetization target |
| Posts/DAU | ~0.3 (est.) | Active content creation |
| Geo | ~85% US | Explains high ARPU |
Cost Structure (Current)
| Category | Amount | % Rev |
|---|
| Headcount (~75) | $10M | 67% |
| Infrastructure | $1.5M | 10% |
| G&A | $1.5M | 10% |
| Total OpEx | $13M | 87% |
| EBITDA | $2M | 13% |
2.2 Growth Model - Stocktwits
User Growth Framework
New MAU = Prior MAU × (1 - Churn) + Organic Adds + Paid Adds
| Variable | Bear | Base | Bull | Notes |
|---|
| Annual churn | 25% | 20% | 15% | Platform stickiness |
| Organic adds/month | 2K | 5K | 10K | Product + word of mouth |
| Marketing budget/year | $0 | $3M | $8M | Growth investment |
| CAC | N/A | $20 | $15 | Paid efficiency |
| Paid adds/year | 0 | 150K | 533K | Marketing ÷ CAC |
MAU Projection
| Year | Bear | Base | Bull | Base YoY |
|---|
| Y0 | 750K | 750K | 750K | - |
| Y1 | 688K | 910K | 1,158K | +21% |
| Y2 | 640K | 1,138K | 1,694K | +25% |
| Y3 | 608K | 1,422K | 2,395K | +25% |
| Y4 | 578K | 1,778K | 3,353K | +25% |
| Y5 | 549K | 2,222K | 4,694K | +25% |
DAU Projection (Engagement Preservation)
| Year | MAU | DAU/MAU | DAU | DAU Growth |
|---|
| Y0 | 750K | 47% | 353K | - |
| Y1 | 910K | 44% | 400K | +14% |
| Y2 | 1,138K | 42% | 478K | +20% |
| Y3 | 1,422K | 40% | 569K | +19% |
| Y4 | 1,778K | 38% | 676K | +19% |
| Y5 | 2,222K | 37% | 822K | +22% |
Note: DAU/MAU erosion is modeled as new users are typically less engaged than legacy users
Engagement Risk Sensitivity
| DAU/MAU at Y3 | Implied DAU | Revenue Impact |
|---|
| 47% (maintained) | 668K | +$3M vs base |
| 42% (base) | 597K | Base case |
| 37% (eroded) | 526K | -$2.5M vs base |
| 30% (degraded) | 427K | -$6M vs base |
2.3 Revenue Model - Existing Business
Ad Revenue Model
Ad Revenue = DAU × Sessions/DAU × Ad loads/Session × CPM/1000
| Variable | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|
| DAU at Y3 | 213K | 569K | 1,078K |
| Sessions/DAU/day | 2.5 | 3.0 | 3.5 |
| Ad loads/session | 8 | 10 | 12 |
| Days/year | 365 | 365 | 365 |
| CPM | $3.50 | $4.50 | $6.00 |
Ad Revenue by Scenario (Y3)
| Scenario | Annual Impressions | CPM | Revenue |
|---|
| Bear | 1.56B | $3.50 | $5.5M |
| Base | 6.23B | $4.50 | $28.0M |
| Bull | 16.3B | $6.00 | $97.9M |
Existing Revenue Projection (Base Case)
| Stream | Y0 | Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Y4 | Y5 |
|---|
| Programmatic | $6.75M | $7.5M | $9.5M | $12.0M | $15.0M | $19.0M |
| Direct | $6.75M | $7.5M | $10.0M | $14.0M | $18.0M | $23.0M |
| Subscriptions | $0.75M | $1.0M | $1.5M | $2.0M | $2.5M | $3.0M |
| Other | $0.75M | $1.0M | $1.0M | $1.0M | $1.0M | $1.0M |
| Total Existing | $15.0M | $17.0M | $22.0M | $29.0M | $36.5M | $46.0M |
2.4 Revenue Model - Crypto Products
Crypto Adoption Funnel
| Stage | Definition | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|
| MAU (Y3) | Total users | 608K | 1,422K | 2,395K |
| Awareness | See crypto features | 40% | 60% | 80% |
| ↳ Aware | | 243K | 853K | 1,916K |
| Interest | Explore features | 15% | 30% | 45% |
| ↳ Interested | | 36K | 256K | 862K |
| Connection | Link wallet | 20% | 35% | 50% |
| ↳ Connected | | 7.3K | 90K | 431K |
| Funding | Deposit funds | 20% | 35% | 50% |
| ↳ Funded | | 1.5K | 31K | 216K |
| Activation | First crypto action | 50% | 70% | 85% |
| ↳ Active crypto | | 730 | 22K | 183K |
| Retention | Monthly active | 40% | 55% | 70% |
| ↳ Monthly Crypto Users | | 290 | 12K | 128K |
Crypto Product Mix
| Product | Y1 Share | Y2 Share | Y3 Share | Revenue/User |
|---|
| Basic trading | 100% | 60% | 40% | $50/yr |
| Perps | 0% | 25% | 35% | $300/yr |
| Prediction markets | 0% | 10% | 15% | $150/yr |
| Prop bets / PvP | 0% | 5% | 10% | $200/yr |
Blended Crypto ARPU
| Year | Product Mix | Blended ARPU |
|---|
| Y1 | 100% basic | $50 |
| Y2 | 60/25/10/5 | $130 |
| Y3 | 40/35/15/10 | $178 |
Crypto Revenue Projection
| Metric | Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Y4 | Y5 |
|---|
| Monthly crypto users | 1K | 5K | 12K | 25K | 45K |
| Blended ARPU | $50 | $130 | $178 | $200 | $220 |
| Crypto Revenue | $0.05M | $0.65M | $2.1M | $5.0M | $9.9M |
2.5 Total Revenue Model - Stocktwits
Base Case Revenue Build
| Stream | Y0 | Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Y4 | Y5 |
|---|
| Ad Revenue | $13.5M | $15.0M | $19.5M | $26.0M | $33.0M | $42.0M |
| Subscriptions | $0.75M | $1.0M | $1.5M | $2.0M | $2.5M | $3.0M |
| Other | $0.75M | $1.0M | $1.0M | $1.0M | $1.0M | $1.0M |
| Existing Total | $15.0M | $17.0M | $22.0M | $29.0M | $36.5M | $46.0M |
| Crypto Products | $0 | $0.05M | $0.65M | $2.1M | $5.0M | $9.9M |
| TOTAL REVENUE | $15.0M | $17.1M | $22.7M | $31.1M | $41.5M | $55.9M |
| YoY Growth | - | 14% | 33% | 37% | 33% | 35% |
Scenario Comparison - Revenue
| Scenario | Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Y5 |
|---|
| Bear | $13M | $12M | $11M | $10M |
| Base | $17M | $23M | $31M | $56M |
| Bull | $22M | $38M | $65M | $140M |
2.6 Cost Model - Stocktwits
| Category | Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Y4 | Y5 | Notes |
|---|
| Restructured Base OpEx | $8M | $9M | $10M | $11M | $12M | Post-turnover |
| New Leadership | $2M | $2M | $2M | $2M | $2M | CEO + CTO |
| Product Team | $4M | $4M | $3M | $3M | $3M | Eng + design |
| Marketing | $3M | $4M | $5M | $6M | $7M | Growth spend |
| Compliance | $1M | $1M | $1M | $1M | $1M | Crypto products |
| Transition Costs | $2M | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Severance |
| New Investment Total | $12M | $11M | $11M | $12M | $13M | |
| TOTAL OPEX | $20M | $20M | $21M | $23M | $25M | |
| Line Item | Y0 | Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Y4 | Y5 |
|---|
| Revenue | $15.0M | $17.1M | $22.7M | $31.1M | $41.5M | $55.9M |
| Gross Margin | 75% | 70% | 72% | 74% | 75% | 76% |
| Gross Profit | $11.3M | $12.0M | $16.3M | $23.0M | $31.1M | $42.5M |
| OpEx | $13.0M | $20.0M | $20.0M | $21.0M | $23.0M | $25.0M |
| EBITDA | $-1.7M | $-8.0M | $-3.7M | $2.0M | $8.1M | $17.5M |
| EBITDA Margin | -11% | -47% | -16% | 6% | 20% | 31% |
| D&A | $1M | $1.5M | $2M | $2M | $2M | $2M |
| EBIT | $-2.7M | $-9.5M | $-5.7M | $0 | $6.1M | $15.5M |
Note: Negative EBITDA in Y1-Y2 reflects transformation investment. This is expected.
Cumulative Cash Burn (Base Case)
| Year | EBITDA | Cumulative |
|---|
| Y1 | -$8.0M | -$8.0M |
| Y2 | -$3.7M | -$11.7M |
| Y3 | +$2.0M | -$9.7M |
| Y4 | +$8.1M | -$1.6M |
| Y5 | +$17.5M | +$15.9M |
Total cash requirement: ~$12M beyond initial investment
2.7 Valuation Model - Stocktwits
Comparable Transactions
| Company | Year | Revenue | Multiple | Context |
|---|
| StockTwits (prior round) | 2021 | ~$10M | 5x | Secondary |
| eToro | 2024 | ~$600M | 3x | Down round |
| Twitter | 2022 | $5B | 6x | Musk acquisition |
| Discord | 2021 | ~$200M | 75x | Extreme outlier |
Multiple Framework:
| Revenue Scale | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|
| <$20M | 3x | 4x | 6x |
| $20-50M | 4x | 6x | 8x |
| $50-100M | 5x | 7x | 10x |
| >$100M | 6x | 8x | 12x |
Exit Valuation - Year 3
| Scenario | Y3 Revenue | Multiple | Enterprise Value |
|---|
| Bear | $11M | 3x | $33M |
| Base | $31M | 6x | $187M |
| Bull | $65M | 8x | $520M |
Exit Valuation - Year 5
| Scenario | Y5 Revenue | Multiple | Enterprise Value |
|---|
| Bear | $10M | 2x | $20M |
| Base | $56M | 7x | $392M |
| Bull | $140M | 10x | $1,400M |
2.8 Returns Analysis - Stocktwits
MOIC by Entry Price and Scenario (3-Year Exit)
| Entry \ Scenario | Bear ($33M) | Base ($187M) | Bull ($520M) |
|---|
| $50M | 0.66x | 3.74x | 10.40x |
| $60M | 0.55x | 3.12x | 8.67x |
| $72M | 0.46x | 2.60x | 7.22x |
| $80M | 0.41x | 2.34x | 6.50x |
| $90M | 0.37x | 2.08x | 5.78x |
MOIC by Entry Price and Scenario (5-Year Exit)
| Entry \ Scenario | Bear ($20M) | Base ($392M) | Bull ($1,400M) |
|---|
| $50M | 0.40x | 7.84x | 28.00x |
| $60M | 0.33x | 6.53x | 23.33x |
| $72M | 0.28x | 5.44x | 19.44x |
| $80M | 0.25x | 4.90x | 17.50x |
| $90M | 0.22x | 4.36x | 15.56x |
IRR Analysis (3-Year Hold)
| Entry \ Scenario | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|
| $50M | -13% | 55% | 118% |
| $60M | -18% | 46% | 105% |
| $72M | -23% | 38% | 93% |
| $80M | -26% | 33% | 86% |
| $90M | -28% | 28% | 79% |
IRR Analysis (5-Year Hold)
| Entry \ Scenario | Bear | Base | Bull |
|---|
| $50M | -17% | 51% | 95% |
| $60M | -20% | 45% | 88% |
| $72M | -22% | 40% | 81% |
| $80M | -24% | 37% | 77% |
| $90M | -26% | 34% | 73% |
Part 3: Sensitivity Analysis
3.1 CoinGecko Tornado Analysis
Variables Ranked by Impact on Y3 Valuation
| Rank | Variable | Low Value | Base | High Value | Low EV | High EV | Swing |
|---|
| 1 | Wallet Connection Rate | 1% | 5% | 10% | $380M | $1,050M | $670M |
| 2 | Take Rate (bps) | 30 | 50 | 75 | $540M | $850M | $310M |
| 3 | Exit Multiple | 6x | 8x | 10x | $504M | $840M | $336M |
| 4 | MAU Retention | -20% | 0% | +20% | $520M | $830M | $310M |
| 5 | Funded Wallet Conversion | 15% | 25% | 40% | $550M | $810M | $260M |
| 6 | Trades per Trader | 3 | 8 | 15 | $580M | $780M | $200M |
| 7 | Avg Trade Size | $75 | $150 | $300 | $590M | $770M | $180M |
| 8 | Existing Revenue Growth | -10% | +5% | +15% | $620M | $720M | $100M |
Visual Tornado (ASCII)
$400M $672M $1,000M
| | |
Wallet Connection [===========|===========================] $670M swing
Take Rate [======|=======================] $310M swing
Exit Multiple [=======|===================] $336M swing
MAU Retention [======|====================] $310M swing
Funded Conversion [=====|==================] $260M swing
Trades/Trader [=====|===============] $200M swing
Avg Trade Size [=====|==============] $180M swing
Existing Growth [===|===========] $100M swing
| | |
Bear Base Bull
Key Insight
Wallet connection rate dominates. The difference between 1% and 10% connection is $670M in enterprise value. This single variable is 2x more important than any other.
3.2 CoinGecko Two-Variable Sensitivity Tables
Table 1: Entry Price vs. Wallet Connection Rate (MOIC at Y3)
| Entry \ Connection | 1% | 2% | 3% | 5% | 7% | 10% |
|---|
| $300M | 0.9x | 1.3x | 1.6x | 2.2x | 2.8x | 3.5x |
| $350M | 0.8x | 1.1x | 1.4x | 1.9x | 2.4x | 3.0x |
| $400M | 0.7x | 1.0x | 1.2x | 1.7x | 2.1x | 2.6x |
| $450M | 0.6x | 0.9x | 1.1x | 1.5x | 1.9x | 2.3x |
| $500M | 0.5x | 0.8x | 1.0x | 1.3x | 1.7x | 2.1x |
Interpretation: At $400M entry, need 3%+ connection rate to break even, 5%+ for 1.5x return.
Table 2: Wallet Connection Rate vs. Take Rate (Y3 Trading Revenue)
| Connection \ Take | 30 bps | 40 bps | 50 bps | 60 bps | 75 bps |
|---|
| 1% | $2.5M | $3.4M | $4.2M | $5.1M | $6.4M |
| 2% | $5.1M | $6.8M | $8.5M | $10.2M | $12.7M |
| 3% | $7.6M | $10.2M | $12.7M | $15.3M | $19.1M |
| 5% | $12.7M | $17.0M | $21.2M | $25.5M | $31.9M |
| 7% | $17.8M | $23.8M | $29.7M | $35.7M | $44.6M |
| 10% | $25.5M | $34.0M | $42.5M | $51.0M | $63.7M |
Table 3: Entry Price vs. Exit Multiple (MOIC at Y3, Base Case)
| Entry \ Multiple | 5x | 6x | 7x | 8x | 10x | 12x |
|---|
| $300M | 1.4x | 1.7x | 2.0x | 2.2x | 2.8x | 3.4x |
| $350M | 1.2x | 1.4x | 1.7x | 1.9x | 2.4x | 2.9x |
| $400M | 1.1x | 1.3x | 1.5x | 1.7x | 2.1x | 2.5x |
| $450M | 0.9x | 1.1x | 1.3x | 1.5x | 1.9x | 2.2x |
| $500M | 0.8x | 1.0x | 1.2x | 1.3x | 1.7x | 2.0x |
3.3 Stocktwits Tornado Analysis
Variables Ranked by Impact on Y3 Valuation
| Rank | Variable | Low | Base | High | Low EV | High EV | Swing |
|---|
| 1 | MAU Growth Rate | 0% | 25% | 50% | $66M | $360M | $294M |
| 2 | Exit Multiple | 4x | 6x | 8x | $124M | $248M | $124M |
| 3 | DAU/MAU Preservation | 30% | 40% | 47% | $140M | $230M | $90M |
| 4 | Crypto Adoption Rate | 2% | 8% | 15% | $165M | $230M | $65M |
| 5 | Ad ARPU Growth | -10% | 0% | +15% | $170M | $210M | $40M |
| 6 | Marketing Efficiency | $30 CAC | $20 | $12 | $175M | $205M | $30M |
Visual Tornado (ASCII)
$50M $187M $350M
| | |
MAU Growth Rate [==========|=============================] $294M swing
Exit Multiple [========|================] $124M swing
DAU/MAU [======|==============] $90M swing
Crypto Adoption [=====|============] $65M swing
Ad ARPU Growth [====|==========] $40M swing
Marketing CAC [===|=========] $30M swing
| | |
Bear Base Bull
Key Insight
MAU growth rate is by far the most important driver (~$294M swing). If Stocktwits can't solve growth, the deal doesn't work. All other variables are secondary.
3.4 Stocktwits Two-Variable Sensitivity Tables
Table 1: MAU Growth CAGR vs. DAU/MAU (MOIC at Y3)
| Growth \ DAU/MAU | 30% | 35% | 40% | 45% | 47% |
|---|
| -10% (shrink) | 0.3x | 0.4x | 0.4x | 0.5x | 0.5x |
| 0% (flat) | 0.6x | 0.7x | 0.9x | 1.0x | 1.1x |
| 15% | 1.3x | 1.5x | 1.8x | 2.1x | 2.2x |
| 25% | 1.8x | 2.1x | 2.6x | 3.0x | 3.2x |
| 35% | 2.4x | 2.9x | 3.5x | 4.1x | 4.4x |
| 50% | 3.2x | 3.9x | 4.7x | 5.5x | 5.9x |
Interpretation: At flat growth (historical), returns are marginal. Need 15%+ CAGR for acceptable returns.
Table 2: Entry Price vs. MAU Growth (MOIC at Y3)
| Entry \ MAU CAGR | 0% | 10% | 20% | 25% | 35% |
|---|
| $50M | 1.0x | 1.7x | 2.6x | 3.2x | 4.5x |
| $60M | 0.8x | 1.4x | 2.2x | 2.7x | 3.7x |
| $72M | 0.7x | 1.2x | 1.8x | 2.2x | 3.1x |
| $80M | 0.6x | 1.1x | 1.6x | 2.0x | 2.8x |
| $100M | 0.5x | 0.9x | 1.3x | 1.6x | 2.2x |
Table 3: MAU Growth vs. Crypto Adoption (Y3 Revenue)
| Growth \ Crypto Adopt | 2% | 5% | 8% | 12% | 15% |
|---|
| 0% | $15M | $16M | $17M | $18M | $19M |
| 15% | $23M | $25M | $27M | $30M | $32M |
| 25% | $28M | $31M | $34M | $38M | $41M |
| 35% | $35M | $38M | $43M | $49M | $54M |
| 50% | $45M | $50M | $57M | $66M | $74M |
3.5 Breakeven Analysis
CoinGecko: What Rate Gets Us to 1.5x MOIC at $400M Entry?
| Variable | Required Value | Base Case | Gap |
|---|
| Wallet Connection | 4.5% | 5% | OK |
| Take Rate | 45 bps | 50 bps | OK |
| Exit Multiple | 7.5x | 8x | OK |
| Combined Threshold | All three at floor | | Achievable |
Conclusion: Base case assumptions leave reasonable margin for error.
Stocktwits: What Growth Gets Us to 1.5x MOIC at $72M Entry?
| Variable | Required Value | Base Case | Historical |
|---|
| MAU CAGR | 15% | 25% | 0% |
| DAU/MAU | 38% | 40% | 47% |
Conclusion: Requires cracking a growth problem that hasn't been solved in years.
Part 4: Scenario Analysis
4.1 CoinGecko Scenario Matrix
| Scenario | Prob | Description | Y3 Rev | Multiple | Y3 EV | MOIC |
|---|
| Disaster | 10% | Crypto winter + execution fail | $30M | 4x | $120M | 0.30x |
| Bear | 20% | Crypto flat + slow adoption | $50M | 6x | $300M | 0.75x |
| Base | 40% | Crypto recovery + trading works | $84M | 8x | $672M | 1.68x |
| Bull | 20% | Strong crypto + high conversion | $140M | 10x | $1,400M | 3.50x |
| Exceptional | 10% | Everything works | $220M | 14x | $3,080M | 7.70x |
Probability-Weighted Expected Value
EV = (0.10 × $120M) + (0.20 × $300M) + (0.40 × $672M) + (0.20 × $1,400M) + (0.10 × $3,080M)
EV = $12M + $60M + $269M + $280M + $308M
EV = $929M
Expected MOIC at $400M entry: 2.32x
Expected IRR (3-year): ~32%
Scenario Probability Distribution
Disaster [10%] ████████████████████ $120M
Bear [20%] ████████████████████████████████████████ $300M
Base [40%] ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████ $672M
Bull [20%] ████████████████████████████████████████ $1,400M
Excep. [10%] ████████████████████ $3,080M
Loss Probability
- P(MOIC < 1.0x) = P(Disaster) + P(Bear) = 30%
- P(MOIC < 1.5x) = P(Disaster) + P(Bear) + ~½ P(Base) = 50%
4.2 Stocktwits Scenario Matrix
| Scenario | Prob | Description | Y3 Rev | Multiple | Y3 EV | MOIC |
|---|
| Disaster | 15% | Execution fail, user loss | $8M | 2x | $16M | 0.22x |
| Bear | 25% | No growth, modest crypto | $15M | 3x | $45M | 0.63x |
| Base | 35% | Moderate growth, crypto works | $31M | 6x | $186M | 2.58x |
| Bull | 20% | Strong growth + crypto | $60M | 8x | $480M | 6.67x |
| Exceptional | 5% | Breakout growth | $120M | 12x | $1,440M | 20.00x |
Probability-Weighted Expected Value
EV = (0.15 × $16M) + (0.25 × $45M) + (0.35 × $186M) + (0.20 × $480M) + (0.05 × $1,440M)
EV = $2.4M + $11.3M + $65.1M + $96M + $72M
EV = $247M
Expected MOIC at $72M entry: 3.43x
Expected IRR (3-year): ~51%
Scenario Probability Distribution
Disaster [15%] ██████████████████████████████ $16M
Bear [25%] ██████████████████████████████████████████████████ $45M
Base [35%] ██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████ $186M
Bull [20%] ████████████████████████████████████████ $480M
Excep. [5%] ██████████ $1,440M
Loss Probability
- P(MOIC < 1.0x) = P(Disaster) + P(Bear) = 40%
- P(MOIC < 1.5x) = P(Disaster) + P(Bear) = 40%
4.3 Comparative Scenario Analysis
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CoinGecko | Stocktwits | Difference |
|---|
| Entry Price | $400M | $72M | 5.6x more expensive |
| Expected Value | $929M | $247M | 3.8x higher |
| Expected MOIC | 2.32x | 3.43x | ST 48% better |
| Expected IRR | 32% | 51% | ST 19pp better |
| Loss Probability | 30% | 40% | CG safer |
| Breakeven Probability | 50% | 40% | ST higher floor |
| Capital at Risk | $400M | $72M | ST much lower |
| Max Loss (×prob) | $280M × 10% | $56M × 15% | $28M vs $8.4M |
Risk-Adjusted Returns
| Metric | CoinGecko | Stocktwits |
|---|
| Expected MOIC | 2.32x | 3.43x |
| Std Dev of MOIC | ~2.3x | ~5.5x |
| Sharpe-like ratio | 0.57 | 0.44 |
| Sortino-like ratio | 0.85 | 0.65 |
Interpretation: CoinGecko has better risk-adjusted returns (more consistent outcomes). Stocktwits has higher expected returns but with much wider variance.
Portfolio View
| Strategy | Capital | Expected Value | Expected Profit | MOIC |
|---|
| CoinGecko only | $400M | $929M | $529M | 2.32x |
| Stocktwits only | $72M | $247M | $175M | 3.43x |
| Both | $472M | $1,176M | $704M | 2.49x |
| CG + 2× ST | $544M | $1,423M | $879M | 2.62x |
Part 5: Decision Framework
5.1 🚦 Go/No-Go Criteria
CoinGecko: Proceed if ALL TRUE
| # | Criterion | Threshold | Current Status |
|---|
| 1 | Wallet connection rate achievable | User research shows >5% intent | 🔴 Not validated |
| 2 | Traffic source diversified | Google <50% of traffic | 🔴 Not validated |
| 3 | Team quality validated | Site visit passes | 🟡 Pending Jan 26-27 |
| 4 | Entry price reasonable | <$450M or earnout structure | 🟡 TBD |
| 5 | Legal path clear | Key products legal in US | 🔴 Not validated |
| 6 | FWDI can fund | Capital structure works | 🔴 Not validated |
Gate Passed: 0/6 ⛔
Stocktwits: Proceed if ALL TRUE
| # | Criterion | Threshold | Current Status |
|---|
| 1 | CEO/CTO identified and committed | Named candidates before LOI | 🔴 Not validated |
| 2 | User crypto interest | Survey shows >15% interest | 🔴 Not validated |
| 3 | Regulatory path clear | Perps/prediction markets viable | 🔴 Not validated |
| 4 | Howard Lindzon aligned | Supports full transformation | 🔴 Not validated |
| 5 | Milestone structure agreed | Capital deployment tied to results | 🔴 Not validated |
Gate Passed: 0/5 ⛔
5.2 ⛔ Walk-Away Triggers
CoinGecko
| Trigger | Explanation |
|---|
| ⛔ User research shows <3% wallet intent | Core thesis fails |
| ⛔ Google traffic >60% | Platform risk too high |
| ⛔ Team unable to build trading product | Need to hire externally |
| ⛔ Entry price >$500M | Returns unacceptable |
| ⛔ No legal path in US | Key market excluded |
| ⛔ Competitive bid >$600M | Let bidder win |
Stocktwits
| Trigger | Explanation |
|---|
| ⛔ Cannot find CEO/CTO | Execution impossible |
| ⛔ User research shows <10% crypto interest | Core thesis fails |
| ⛔ Perps/prediction markets illegal for US | Key products blocked |
| ⛔ Howard Lindzon demands control | Governance conflict |
| ⛔ Historical user data shows declining engagement | Asset degrading |
5.3 Negotiation Strategy
CoinGecko Target Structure
| Component | Target | Rationale |
|---|
| Base consideration | $300M | 7.5x revenue |
| Earnout pool | $100M | 25% of deal |
| Earnout trigger | Trading revenue milestones | De-risk thesis |
| Y1 milestone | $5M trading revenue = $30M | |
| Y2 milestone | $15M trading revenue = $40M | |
| Y3 milestone | $30M trading revenue = $30M | |
| Total if all hit | $400M | Same as ask |
| Total if miss | $300M | Protected entry |
Stocktwits Target Structure
| Component | Target | Rationale |
|---|
| Initial acquisition | $40M for 80% | Lower base |
| Primary investment | $5M (Tranche 1) | Initial runway |
| Product milestone | $5M (Tranche 2) | On product launch |
| Revenue milestone | $10M (Tranche 3) | On $25M revenue |
| Total if all hit | $60M | vs. $72M ask |
| Total if stall | $45M | Capital preserved |
5.4 ✅ Recommendation Summary
Primary Recommendation: CoinGecko with Validation
Action: Proceed to validation phase, but ⛔ DO NOT sign LOI until:
- ☑️ User survey validates conversion thesis
- ☑️ Traffic data confirms diversification
- ☑️ Team visit confirms execution capability
- ☑️ Legal analysis confirms product viability
If validation passes: Negotiate $300-350M base + $100M earnout
Expected outcome:
- 🟢 70% probability of proceeding post-validation
- 🟢 2.3x expected MOIC on risk-adjusted basis
Secondary Recommendation: Stocktwits with Conditions
Action: Parallel-path CEO/CTO search and user research, but ⛔ DO NOT sign LOI until:
- ☑️ CEO/CTO candidates locked
- ☑️ User interest validated
- ☑️ Legal path confirmed
- ☑️ Milestone structure agreed
If conditions met: Proceed at $40-50M base + milestone tranches
Expected outcome:
- 🟡 40% probability of proceeding post-validation
- 🟢 3.4x expected MOIC but higher variance
Portfolio Strategy
| Capital Available | Recommendation |
|---|
| <$400M | Stocktwits only (if conditions met) |
| $400-500M | CoinGecko priority, Stocktwits secondary |
| >$500M | Both, sequenced (CoinGecko first) |
Appendix A: Model Assumptions Log
CoinGecko Key Assumptions
| Assumption | Value | Source | Confidence |
|---|
| Current MAU | 40M | Memo | High |
| Current revenue | $40M | Memo | High |
| Revenue mix | 33/33/33 | Memo | Medium |
| Wallet connection rate | 5% | Estimate | Low |
| Funded wallet rate | 25% | pump.fun pattern | Low |
| Take rate | 50 bps | Industry | Medium |
| Team cost | $80K avg | Malaysia benchmark | Medium |
| Exit multiple | 8x | Comparable transactions | Medium |
Stocktwits Key Assumptions
| Assumption | Value | Source | Confidence |
|---|
| Current MAU | 750K | Memo | High |
| Current DAU | 350K | Memo | High |
| Current revenue | $15M | Memo | High |
| MAU growth rate | 25% CAGR | Estimate | Low |
| DAU/MAU preservation | 40% | Estimate | Low |
| Crypto adoption | 8% of MAU | Estimate | Low |
| CAC | $20 | Industry | Medium |
| Exit multiple | 6x | Comparable transactions | Medium |
Appendix B: Validation Plan
User Research Design
CoinGecko Survey (n=1000 MAU):
- Do you currently have a funded crypto wallet?
- Do you currently have a brokerage account?
- Would you trade directly on CoinGecko if available?
- What would make you more/less likely to trade on CoinGecko?
- How often do you currently trade crypto?
Stocktwits Survey (n=500 MAU):
- Are you interested in crypto trading?
- Would you use perps/leverage if available?
- Would you use prediction markets?
- Would you use prop bets/contests?
- What features would make you more engaged?
Data Requests
CoinGecko:
- Traffic source breakdown (last 12 months)
- MAU by geography
- Session duration and pages/session
- API customer list and contract values
- Historical MAU vs. crypto prices
Stocktwits:
- MAU trend by month (24 months)
- Cohort retention analysis
- Posts per user by cohort
- Revenue per user by engagement level
- Prior acquisition/marketing history
Document generated from FWDI - Financial Modeling Plan.md
Last updated: January 2026