B

Couple Investment Style Mediation Board

3.35

Derivation Chain

Step 1 S&P 500 crash fears
→
Step 2 Investment opinion conflicts between couples in their 50s
→
Step 3 No tool for evidence-based consensus when spouses disagree on investment direction

Problem

When couples in their 50s manage joint assets (severance pay, savings, real estate sale proceeds), one spouse thinks 'now is a buying opportunity' while the other insists 'it will drop further, let's wait.' After emotional arguments, they either end up doing nothing, or one spouse secretly invests, escalating into marital conflict. There is no tool to quantify each partner's investment style and risk tolerance to produce a 'joint portfolio consensus plan' for couples.

Solution

Each spouse completes an investment style assessment (12 questions) on the web, which quantifies their risk tolerance. After entering joint assets, target timeline, and required amount, the system proposes 3 portfolio plans acceptable to both partners. Each plan's projected returns, maximum potential loss, and principal recovery period are visually compared to provide an evidence-based foundation for discussion.

Target: Couples aged 50-60 with joint investment assets of 50 million KRW (~$37,500) or more, who have experienced disagreements on investment direction
Revenue Model: Style assessment + basic portfolio suggestions free; customized scenario report (reflecting tax and health insurance premium impacts) at 7,900 KRW (~$6) per transaction
Ecosystem Role: Infrastructure
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
4.0/5
U Urgency
3.0/5
M Market
2.0/5
R Realizability
4.0/5
V Validation
2.0/5
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 (62%)

Tech Complexity
24.0/40
Data Availability
18.3/25
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 (50/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
14.0/20
Revenue Signals
7.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
7.5/15
Solo Buildability
7.0/10
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]
Dashboard