


Giorgi Meskhi
10 hours ago



Mariam Kanashvili
2 days ago



Giorgi Meskhi
Mar 25

56% of pitch decks have a weak or missing use-of-funds slide.
In our experience reviewing 600+ decks, this is one of the clearest signals investors use to judge founders. Not because of the numbers themselves, but because of what those numbers reveal.
A use of funds slide shows how you think about capital.
It answers questions investors rarely ask directly:
Do you understand what actually drives growth?
Are you realistic about cost and timing?
Do you know what this round needs to achieve?
Most founders treat this slide as a breakdown. Investors treat it as a strategy.
This guide shows:
What a use of funds slide actually communicates
The 5 elements investors expect to see
How to build it step by step
How allocation changes by stage
Real examples and mistakes
What Is a Use of Funds Slide?
A use-of-funds slide is a pitch deck slide that explains how the capital you are raising will be allocated across key business functions and the outcomes that capital is expected to produce.
It translates funding into execution.
A use-of-funds slide shows how a startup plans to spend the capital it is raising, typically across categories such as product, hiring, marketing, and operations, with each category tied to specific milestones or outcomes.
Investors are not checking your math.
They are evaluating alignment:
Does your spending reflect your stage?
Does it match your business model?
Does it logically lead to the next milestone?
Key insight:A strong use-of-funds slide is not about allocation. It is about credibility.
A use-of-funds slide investors trust always includes five elements. Missing even one weakens the entire story.
This anchors the slide.
Example:
Raising $2M seed round
Investors immediately assess:
Is this amount realistic?
Is it too small to reach the next milestone?
Is it too large for your stage?
A mismatch here creates doubt before they even read the rest.
This shows where the money goes.
Typical categories:
Product / Engineering
Sales and Marketing
Operations
But investors look deeper:
Are you over-investing in product?
Are you under-investing in distribution?
Are you hiring too early?
Your allocation reflects your priorities.
This is where most decks fail.
Every category should connect to a result.
Example:
$700K product → launch v2.0
$600K GTM → acquire first 1,000 users
Without this, your slide is just a budget.
Investors think in time.
They want to know:
How long this capital lasts
What happens quarter by quarter
Typical expectation:
12–18 months runway
Clear milestone progression
Even minimal traction strengthens credibility.
Examples:
Current revenue
Growth rate
Early user adoption
This ties directly to your financial narrative.
Key insight: Investors do not fund categories. They fund outcomes tied to time.

Keep it simple. This is a thinking model, not a diagram-heavy asset.
Most founders start with categories. Strong founders start with milestones.
Before allocating anything, answer:
What must be true at the end of this round?
Examples:
Reach $50K MRR
Launch product v2
Achieve product-market fit
This defines everything that follows.
Now estimate:
Team size needed
Time required
Cost structure
This defines your raise amount.
Mistake:
Picking a round size first and forcing logic after
Each category must serve the milestone.
Example:
Product spend → feature completion
GTM spend → customer acquisition
This connects directly to your go-to-market logic.
Break into 3–5 categories.
Avoid:
Perfect splits (33/33/33)
Over-segmentation
Investors expect asymmetry.
Now simplify:
One chart
3–4 categories
Clear numbers
Valuation
Deal terms
Financial projections
These belong elsewhere.

Design rule: clarity > design.
A use-of-funds slide that ignores the stage is one of the fastest ways to lose credibility.
Stage | Product | GTM | Operations |
Pre-seed | 70% | 20% | 10% |
Seed | 40% | 35% | 25% |
Series A | 30% | 40% | 30% |

Pre-seed
Focus: building product
Risk: over-investing in marketing
Seed
Focus: validating growth
Risk: scaling too early
Series A
Focus: scaling revenue
Risk: under-investing in sales
Not all companies follow the same pattern.
Examples:
SaaS → more GTM earlier
Hardware → heavier product spend
Deep tech → longer R&D cycle
Key insight: If your allocation does not match your stage, investors question your judgment.
Example 1: WasteHero

WasteHero tied every euro directly to a milestone on a three-year ARR roadmap - €5M, €10M, then €15M - so investors could see exactly what the €8M raise would buy and when it would pay off.
What they showed:
Three-year timeline with ARR targets at each stage
Budget split across sales (40%), product (30%), and implementation (30%)
Projected 5–10x returns framed around SaaS multiples and contract growth
Why it worked:
Milestones turned the ask into a logical progression, not just a number
Equal weighting across sales, product and support showed a balanced growth plan
The return framing answered the "what's in it for me" question on the same slide
Investor signal: capital linked to specific ARR gates - investors could hold the team accountable at each stage.
Example 2: Flux

Flux showed granular line-item allocation across seven categories for a $24.5M raise, with nearly half going to pilot production - signalling that this was a hardware company that understood its cost structure.
What they showed:
$12M (49%) to optimised pilot production setup
$5M to engineering and DVT development
Remaining $7.5M split across IP acquisition, concept development, marketing, and service network
Why it worked:
Specificity at this level signals financial maturity - vague buckets would have raised red flags
Front-loading production cost showed the founders understood the biggest risk and were addressing it first
The donut chart made seven categories digestible without losing the detail
Investor signal: a hardware raise with this level of cost breakdown tells investors the team has built something before.
Example 3: Vikk AI

Vikk AI did something most decks skip: they explained the goal of the round, not just the spend.
The slide showed where the $3M SAFE would go, but also what winning looked like - Tier-1 logos, LLM licenses, 500K–1M users, and a path to Series A.
What they showed:
$700K pre-seed already closed, now raising $3M SAFE
Four spend categories: user acquisition (40%), data infrastructure (30%), sales (20%), product (10%)
"Why we win" panel covering data moat and multi-channel monetisation
Why it worked:
Showing a closed pre-seed round removed execution risk from the ask
The round goal section answered "what does success look like" - rare and memorable
Pairing spend allocation with competitive advantage in one slide did the job of two
These are often confused.
Shows:
Amount
Terms
Shows:
Allocation
Strategy
Early-stage decks
Simpler narratives
Larger rounds
Complex allocation
Key insight: Ask answers “how much.” Use of funds answers “why.”

The most common mistakes on a use-of-funds slide are being too vague, asking for the wrong amount, and failing to connect spending to milestones.
Being too vague
Fix: add outcomes
Wrong funding amount
Fix: tie to milestone
Including valuation
Fix: remove
Perfect split
Fix: reflect reality
No milestone linkage
Fix: connect spending to results
Overdesigning
Fix: simplify
What is a use of funds slide?
A use-of-funds slide shows how a startup plans to allocate the capital it is raising. It breaks spending into categories such as product, marketing, hiring, and operations, and connects each category to milestones.
What should I include?
Include total raise amount, allocation breakdown, milestone-linked outcomes, timeline, and supporting traction.
How specific should it be?
Be specific enough to show logic. Investors should clearly see what each dollar achieves.
Ask vs use of funds?
Ask = amount. Use of funds = allocation.
Should I include valuation?
No. Keep valuation out to preserve flexibility.









