So what’s the problem?

Grab a coffee and sit tight — there are quite a few.

Starting with the product, Witzard doesn’t seem particularly disruptive. There are already plenty of platforms that let users build and analyze portfolios. In a market like this, differentiation is key. To truly stand out, a startup needs to be at least 10x better or cheaper than existing alternatives. Without that, it risks fading into the background.

The target audience is also unclear. The advanced features are too complex for beginners, but too basic for experienced investors. On top of that, the platform tries to do too many things at once — increasing complexity without necessarily adding value. A sharper focus on a few standout features would help define a clearer identity and real differentiation.

The business model also shows cracks. Much of the perceived value comes from portfolio analysis, which is essentially a one-time service — not something that justifies a monthly subscription. Users could easily sign up for a month, run their analysis, and cancel. That makes recurring revenue very unstable.
A more solid approach might be: keep an educational section free, charge a one-off fee for portfolio analysis (say, €100), and reserve advanced tools for the subscription plan — targeting more experienced investors with actual capital to manage.

Then there’s the equity structure, which raises red flags.

• Matteo holds 62%, Alessandro 23%, while Chiara — despite being the public face — owns just 2.5%. Her tiny stake, coupled with the fact she hasn’t invested her own capital, weakens her long-term incentive to stay committed.

• 12% of equity has already been given away during the seed round, leaving less flexibility for future fundraising.

• The accountant’s 1.5% stake might be useful administratively, but it also represents equity that could have been allocated more strategically — for example, to attract key talent or advisors.

The team composition is another issue. While Matteo and Alessandro have skills in finance and software, there’s limited direct experience in the regulated financial sector. That hurts credibility with investors and partners and increases compliance risks.

Finally, the go-to-market strategy seems fragile. Early traction depends almost entirely on Chiara’s community. If her followers don’t convert into paying users, growth could stall fast. It’s unclear whether they’ve done proper market validation — like testing user willingness to pay or analyzing churn — so it’s hard to tell if Witzard actually solves a real problem.

In short: Witzard has enthusiasm and technical skills, but it’s weighed down by structural flaws — a product that’s not truly innovative, a fuzzy target audience, a shaky business model, unbalanced equity, and a team lacking deep sector expertise. Without quick course corrections, the risk of stagnation in the coming months is high.

My personal bet?
The app will gain some early traction — maybe a few thousand users in the first months — but growth will soon plateau. The business model won’t hold, one founder will eventually step away, they’ll attempt a fundraising round but fail, and within a year, the startup will likely fall apart.