Skip to content
Aziz · Saif   Investor Research
Report 15 · Energy · Renewables

Distributed Solar-Plus-Storage Platform for Commercial Rooftops
Zero-capex PPA model with proprietary load-shaping AI

Region: GCC commercial · India industrial corridor expansion Stage: Series B Ask: $40M (Series B equity + $80M project finance facility)

Investor Dashboard

Key financial KPIs at a glance — % against revenues in QuickBooks-statement style.

Y1 Revenue
$18M
Initial scale
Y3 Revenue
$58M
↑ Year-3 target
Y5 Revenue
$165M
↑ Year-5 target
Gross Margin
62%
% vs Revenue
EBITDA Margin
32%
% vs Revenue
CAC Payback
24 mo
Time to recoup
LTV / CAC
8.0x
Unit economics
Capital Ask
$40M
Series B

Revenue Mix · % of Top Line

Cost Structure · % of Operating Cost

Use of Funds · % of $40M Raise

Problem & Solution

Zero-capex PPA model with proprietary load-shaping AI

The Problem

Commercial and industrial buildings own ~30% of grid demand and are paying $0.09–$0.16/kWh while their rooftops sit idle. Self-financing solar is capex-heavy and ROI-uncertain; traditional PPAs lack storage and fail to address peak-shaving / time-of-use tariffs that drive 40% of the actual bill.

Our Solution

A zero-capex solar-plus-storage PPA platform — we own, install, and operate the system; the customer pays only for kWh delivered at 30–55% below grid. Proprietary load-shaping AI optimizes dispatch to maximize storage arbitrage, peak-shaving, and demand-charge mitigation.

Market Opportunity

$420B Distributed Energy TAM addressable today

C&I solar+storage segment $98B (2025) → $310B (2030) · 26% CAGR

20-year PPA contracts at $0.06–$0.085/kWh with annual escalator (~2%). Project IRR 14–18%; equity IRR 22%+ with leverage. Asset-light SaaS layer (load-shaping AI) sells separately to utility partners.

Financial Statements · % vs Revenue

QuickBooks-style readout — every line shown as percentage of its parent total.

Revenue Mix

Revenue Stream% of RevenueShare
PPA Energy Sales70.0%70%
Storage Arbitrage / Grid Services15.0%15%
AI Software Licensing8.0%8%
O&M & Retrofit Services7.0%7%
Total Revenue100.0%100%

Cost Structure

Cost Line% of CostShare
Project Finance Interest25.0%25%
O&M & Asset Mgmt22.0%22%
Engineering & EPC Oversight18.0%18%
BD & Origination15.0%15%
G&A12.0%12%
Insurance & Compliance8.0%8%
Total Operating Cost100.0%100%

Use of Funds — $40M Raise

Allocation% of RaiseShare
Project Equity (lever 2:1)55.0%55%
Engineering & AI Software18.0%18%
BD & Origination Team15.0%15%
Working Capital8.0%8%
Regulatory & Permitting4.0%4%
Total Use of Funds100.0%100%

Valuation, Capital Structure & Forward View

An investment is a bet on the forward plan, so a trailing snapshot isn't enough. These are derived from this report's own ask and projections — not external estimates.

Rev CAGR (Y1→Y5)
~74%
Forward growth
Capital Efficiency
4.1×
Y5 rev per $ raised
Rule of 40
~106 ✓
Growth + EBITDA margin
Implied Valuation
n/d
not disclosed
Entry Multiple
Valuation ÷ Y3 revenue

Capital Structure & Funding

A blended equity + debt structure — this round layers a credit facility (loan / project / trade / inventory finance) on top of the equity cheque. That puts leverage, debt service and lender covenants into the capital structure: drawdown conditions and coverage ratios are first-order diligence items, not footnotes.

How to read these

Rule of 40 sums forward revenue growth and EBITDA margin — ≥40 is healthy; below it flags growth bought at the cost of profit. Capital efficiency is Year-5 revenue per dollar raised. Entry multiple divides the disclosed cap / pre-money / asking price by Year-3 revenue, shown only where disclosed (n/d = not derivable). Verify against primary diligence.

Traction & Proof Points

Moat & Exit Strategy

Defensible Moat

Proprietary load-shaping AI lifts project IRR by 280–400bp vs static dispatch. Operating data from 184MW deployed creates feedback loops competitors with no fleet cannot reach. Project finance relationships with 8 lenders create lower cost of capital than new entrants.

Exit Path

YieldCo IPO at maturity, strategic sale to an infrastructure fund (Brookfield, BlackRock RealAssets, Macquarie), or platform sale to a utility — typically at 11–14x EBITDA on operating assets.

Key Risks

When the Thesis Breaks

Read this before trusting the forward numbers. The case rests on operating leverage — revenue growth converting into a holding-or-expanding EBITDA margin. The fastest way it breaks: a period where revenue grows but EBITDA falls (margin compression).

If any of the Key Risks above materialise, the forward projections in this report should be treated as suspended until the model is re-underwritten. The single most material trigger to watch: Interest-rate sensitivity on project IRR — 100bp move = ~3pp IRR compression.