B

Inheritance Asset Inventory Builder

3.05

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Asset organization and inheritance digital blind spots
→
Step 2 Tracking assets scattered across institutions
→
Step 3 Inheritance and gift tax simulation per asset type
→
Step 4 Tax savings comparison by gifting timing and method

Problem

People aged 55–65 have assets scattered across multiple institutions—real estate (2–3 properties), insurance (3–5 policies), pensions (national + retirement + private), and financial assets (deposits, stocks, funds). To determine total asset value and estimated inheritance tax, they must log into each institution's app individually and manually enter balances into a spreadsheet. This process takes half a day, and calculating inheritance tax is impossible without a tax accountant consultation (~$225–375 / 30–50만 원).

Solution

Enter current values into asset-type forms (real estate, insurance, pensions, financial assets) to visualize the total asset picture on a dashboard. Input the number and relationship of heirs (spouse, children) to auto-calculate estimated inheritance tax and applicable deductions. Compare gift vs. inheritance scenarios with concrete numbers showing '10-year phased gifting saves X in taxes.'

Target: Ages 55–65, owning 1+ real estate properties, with spouse and 2–3 adult children, in the inheritance and gifting planning stage
Revenue Model: Asset inventory + basic inheritance tax estimate free. Gift vs. inheritance scenario comparison report PDF at ~$7.50 (9,900 KRW). Tax accountant consultation referral commission.
Ecosystem Role: Infrastructure
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
3.0/5
U Urgency
3.0/5
M Market
4.0/5
R Realizability
3.0/5
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 (70%)

Tech Complexity
29.3/40
Data Availability
20.8/25
MVP Timeline
20.0/20
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 (57/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
16.0/20
Revenue Signals
10.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
10.5/15
Solo Buildability
6.0/10
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 [medium] Data Pipeline [low]
Dashboard