B

Small Portfolio Rebalancer

2.70

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Small-scale asset rebalancing
→
Step 2 After-tax return-based asset allocation without a private banker

Problem

A 55-year-old pre-retiree holds approximately 280 million won (~$210,000) in combined assets: 150 million won (~$112,500) in severance pay + 50 million won (~$37,500) in private pension + 80 million won (~$60,000) in savings deposits. Private banking services require minimum 500 million won (~$375,000), putting them out of reach. Securities firm robo-advisors only recommend investment products without providing after-tax return-based rebalancing across their entire portfolio including real estate, savings, and pensions. They end up allocating assets by intuition, unnecessarily overpaying millions of won annually in taxes and health insurance premiums.

Solution

Users enter their holdings (Real Estate, savings deposits, Retirement Pension, private pension, stocks/ETFs) on a web interface, and the system diagnoses inefficiencies in their current allocation based on after-tax real returns, then proposes three rebalancing scenarios (conservative/balanced/growth). Each scenario simulates the annual difference in taxes + health insurance premiums, showing concrete amounts like 'reallocating this way saves 1.2 million won (~$900) per year.'

Target: Ages 50–60, total assets 100–500 million won (~$75,000–$375,000), pre- or post-Retirement, middle class who fall below the private banking threshold, interested in tax and health insurance premium optimization
Revenue Model: Basic asset diagnosis (current allocation inefficiency score): Free. 3 rebalancing scenarios + after-tax simulation Report: 9,900 won (~$7.40) Per Transaction. Quarterly rebalancing alert Subscription: 4,900 won (~$3.70)/month.
Ecosystem Role: Consumer
MVP Estimate: 1_month

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
3.0/5
U Urgency
3.0/5
M Market
3.0/5
R Realizability
2.0/5
V Validation
3.0/5
NUMR-V Scoring System
N Novelty1-5How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency1-5How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market1-5Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability1-5Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation1-5Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.
Each dimension is scored 1-5 and weighted into grade S/A/B/C/D.
SaaS N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20 Senior N=.25 U=.25 M=.05 R=.30 V=.15

Feasibility (58%)

Tech Complexity
24.7/40
Data Availability
20.8/25
MVP Timeline
12.0/20
API Bonus
0.0/15
Feasibility Breakdown
Tech Complexity/ 40Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability/ 25Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline/ 20Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus/ 15Bonus for viable public API leverage.
Total 100 points; below 50% is filtered out.

Market Validation (51/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
14.0/20
Revenue Signals
10.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
7.5/15
Solo Buildability
5.0/10
Validation Breakdown
Competition/ 20Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand/ 20Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing/ 20Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals/ 15Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit/ 15How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability/ 10Practicality for lean-team implementation.
Total 100 points; below 50 is filtered out.

Technical Requirements

Frontend [medium] Backend [high] Data Pipeline [low]
Dashboard