Here are the three questions I'd pick. Each one is backed by a query I already ran, and each comes with a data caveat that affects how far you can trust the answer. ## 1. Is funding activity accelerating or slowing, and is the deal mix shifting from many small bets to fewer large ones? This is the timing question for founders and investors. - **Deal count falls steadily.** Deals drop from 935 in 2015 to 993 in 2016, then 687 in 2017, 310 in 2018 and 111 in 2019. The 2020 figure is only 7, which is a partial period (data ends 2020-01-13). - **Median ticket size rises.** The median disclosed amount goes from $1.5M in 2015 to $1.0M in 2016, $2.25M in 2017, $4.0M in 2018, $12.0M in 2019 and $9.0M in 2020. - **Disclosed totals are not a steady trend.** Totals are about $8.6B in 2015, $10.4B in 2017, $5.1B in 2018 and $9.7B in 2019. Fewer, larger deals are holding the total up. - **Caveat:** only 2,066 of the 3,044 deals have a numeric amount. The 2016 total came back as `nan` because of at least one malformed amount value, so I can't state it. The 2016 median is still usable. A few dates are also malformed (for example `0015-07-01`, which should be 2015). ## 2. Which cities and verticals concentrate deal flow, and do they command different ticket sizes? This is the question for choosing where to launch, open an office or source deals. - **Bangalore leads on count.** The city table shows Bangalore with 700 deals, then Mumbai with 567, New Delhi with 421 and Gurgaon with 287. - **Median tickets differ by city.** Medians are $2M in Bangalore, Mumbai and Gurgaon, and $1M in New Delhi and Hyderabad. Kolkata is much lower at about $157.5K, though on only 10 disclosed deals. - **The city field is fragmented, so rankings are understated.** "Bangalore" (700) and "Bengaluru" (141) are the same place, as are "Gurgaon" (287) and "Gurugram" (50), and likely "New Delhi" and "Delhi". Merged, Bangalore is clearly even more dominant. - **Industry Vertical has 822 distinct values**, and many are near-duplicates, so it needs grouping before a vertical ranking means anything. ## 3. What does a "typical" round look like by sector and city, and who is investing in it? This is the benchmarking question: how much to raise, what round type to expect, and which investors to approach. - **Coverage looks sufficient.** Every one of the 3,044 deals has an investors field, and there are 57 distinct round types and 2,459 distinct startups. - **Cross-tabs are possible.** Round type × vertical × city, plus investor co-investment patterns, can show typical ticket size and the most active backers. - **Cleanup is needed first.** Round-type labels have spelling variants, and the investor field holds multiple names in one cell, which must be split. - **Repeat funding is visible.** There are fewer distinct startups (2,459) than deals (3,044), so you can trace how follow-on rounds progress and how much time passes between them. ## Data-quality notes that apply to all three - About a third of deals have no usable amount. - Date strings are inconsistent. - City and vertical labels have many duplicate spellings. - Standardise these before drawing conclusions, especially for the city and vertical comparisons.