Startup Unicorn Diligence Research Report: Cohesity
The underwriting question is whether Cohesity can convert post-Veritas scale, partner-led distribution, and cyber-resilience positioning into durable cash generation after integration, cloud/GPU costs, and channel economics are normalized.
Startup Unicorn Diligence Research Report: Cohesity
Cohesity can be diligenced as an active private unicorn: official sources confirm major private financings, a completed Veritas data-protection combination, and late-2025 commercial activity, while a September 2025 CNBC article frames IPO as prospective rather than completed. Public evidence is strongest on financing headlines, product marketing, named customers, and partner ecosystem breadth, and weakest on standalone financial quality, customer economics, merger leverage, and post-close integration detail.
Public sources provide revenue and ARR headlines but not audited standalone statements, cash flow, backlog, AR aging, gross margin, or a full post-merger bridge.
Diligence request: Obtain audited FY2023-FY2025 statements, monthly management packs, backlog, AR aging, and a combined-to-standalone KPI bridge.
The Veritas combination introduced new debt/equity financing, large shareholders, and integration complexity, but public sources do not show debt terms, synergy plan, or integration costs.
Diligence request: Review Series H documents, debt terms, integration scorecards, and board materials on synergy and restructuring assumptions.
Public valuation anchors jumped from $2.5B to $3.7B to >$7B at the combination level, while current standalone economics and any pre-IPO readiness remain largely non-public.
Diligence request: Request the latest board-mark framework, transaction materials, and any confidential IPO readiness analysis.
Named customers and partner/supplier examples are public, but revenue concentration, NRR, churn, minimum cloud commitments, and supplier spend mix are not.
Diligence request: Request top-customer ARR, cohort retention, supplier spend by vendor, and concentration thresholds by revenue and infrastructure cost.
Cohesity explicitly targets Rubrik and Commvault, but the most detailed superiority claims available publicly are vendor-authored and need neutral validation.
Diligence request: Run independent win-loss analysis, customer references, and neutral technical benchmarking before relying on compare-page claims.
Gaia and FortKnox are core public differentiation levers, but roadmap items, model economics, and operational recovery performance need diligence beyond marketing pages.
Diligence request: Request shipped-feature inventory, roadmap confidence levels, recovery drill evidence, model-cost assumptions, and large-customer references.
2020 and 2023 workforce actions, plus visible leadership changes, raise execution and retention questions during post-merger scaling.
Diligence request: Review attrition by function, retention packages, org changes, succession plans, and leadership-scorecard tracking after the Veritas combination.
Public records show both a defendant-side patent case and a plaintiff-side trademark declaratory-judgment case, even though both matters ultimately closed.
Diligence request: Have IP counsel review the Commvault and HELIOS matters, open claims, settlement scope, and broader patent/trademark portfolio defensibility.
Public sources strongly support Cohesity’s financing history, combined-company scale claims, and continued private funding through the Veritas combination, but they do not disclose audited financial quality, debt terms, or a full cap table.
not publicly verifiable confidence: high
Official releases provide a few operating anchors—such as recurring-revenue growth and combined-company revenue/ARR—but no audited financial statements, cash flow, backlog, AR aging, or product/channel/geography profitability schedules are public.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| FY2019 software-growth markers | Official 2019 release said software revenue doubled, >50% of new contracts were recurring, one software order exceeded $10M, and $1M+ orders rose 350%. | Supports historical traction, but not a full audited P&L. | verified |
| 1H FY2020 growth markers | Official 2020 Series E release said recurring revenue rose 150%, customers and data under management each rose 100%, and cloud-licensed customers rose 135%. | Useful growth indicators before the later transaction, but still management-selected metrics. | verified |
| FY2023 pro forma combined metrics | Official February 2024 transaction announcement said the combined entity had >$1.6B revenue, $1.3B ARR, and 27% adjusted cash EBITDA on a fiscal-year-ended July 2023 pro forma basis. | Strong scale claim, but it is pro forma and pre-close. | verified |
| FY2024 pro forma combined metrics | Official December 2024 close release said the combined entity had >$1.7B revenue, $1.5B ARR, and 28% adjusted cash EBITDA on a fiscal-year-ended July 2024 pro forma adjusted basis. | Current public scale anchor, but still not a standalone audited Cohesity P&L. | verified |
| Standalone margin, burn, cash runway, backlog, AR aging | No public source in this review disclosed standalone gross margin, burn, runway, backlog, or AR aging schedules. | These omissions materially limit financial-quality underwriting. | not_publicly_verifiable |
All numeric operating data above are company-stated highlights rather than audited public-company filings.
not publicly verifiable confidence: high
No public quarterly or annual financial projection model was located. The accessible source set contains growth commentary and a prospective IPO article, but not a diligence-grade forecast package.
partially verified confidence: high
Public sources identify investor cohorts, transaction financing direction, and some post-close shareholder signaling, but not share counts, preferences, option pool, or debt terms.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Early venture syndicate | 2015-2017 official releases name Sequoia, Wing, ARTIS, Qualcomm Ventures, Accel, Battery, GV, Trinity, Cisco, and HPE. | Public investor roster is visible, but share counts and preference stack are not. | partially_verified |
| Late-stage strategic and financial investors | 2018-2021 official releases add SoftBank Vision Fund, DFJ Growth, Foundation, Greenspring, Baillie Gifford, Sozo, Premji, and STEADFAST. | Later-round support is public; ownership percentages and governance rights are not. | partially_verified |
| Series F strategic investor signal | IBM joined NVIDIA as a strategic investor in April 2024; the company also named Amazon, Google, Cisco, and HPE as backers. | Supports strategic-capital narrative, but Series F amount and post-money are not public. | partially_verified |
| Veritas combination financing | Official February 2024 release said the transaction would be financed with a combination of equity and debt and that Carlyle would become a shareholder at close. | Debt terms, leverage profile, and resulting dilution are not public. | partially_verified |
| Post-close large shareholders | Official December 2024 close release said Carlyle is one of the largest shareholders and Haveli led Series H, with Coatue, Sapphire, and Dragon Fund also key investors. | Useful ownership signaling, but no fully diluted cap table or option pool schedule is public. | partially_verified |
| Fully diluted cap table and debt schedule | No public source in this review disclosed exact common/preferred split, warrants, options, SAFE/notes, or debt covenants. | This is a top-priority private-data request. | not_publicly_verifiable |
Public investor names are available; ownership percentages and security terms are not.
The chart intentionally leaves the current standalone-mark point undisclosed rather than inventing a value.
partially verified confidence: high
Cohesity’s financing history and selected operating milestones are reasonably well supported by official releases, but tax positions, accounting policies, and full financing documentation remain non-public.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 disclosed Series A/B history | Official 2015 release said Cohesity had raised $70M total, including late-2013 $15M Series A and a 2015 $55M Series B. | Anchors early private-capital support and board formation, but not current cap-table ownership. | verified |
| 2017 Series C | Official 2017 release disclosed >$90M Series C co-led by GV and Sequoia with Cisco and HPE as strategic investors. | Shows strong early enterprise-strategic support before later-stage scaling. | verified |
| 2018 Series D | Official 2018 release disclosed $250M Series D led by SoftBank Vision Fund, with Cisco, HPE, Morgan Stanley Expansion Capital, and Sequoia participation. | Large late-stage round before the software-model transition and 2020 valuation step-up. | verified |
| 2020 Series E | Official 2020 release disclosed $250M Series E at a $2.5B valuation and said total funding then exceeded $650M. | Latest clearly priced pre-2021 public financing anchor. | verified |
| 2021 employee tender | Official 2021 release disclosed a $145M non-dilutive tender offer at a $3.7B valuation. | Useful mark for employee liquidity, but not a new primary round. | verified |
| 2024 Series F | Official April 2024 release said Cohesity completed Series F with IBM joining NVIDIA as a strategic investor; amount and price were not disclosed. | Confirms continued private financing, but not dilution or valuation. | partially_verified |
| 2024 Series H / Veritas close | Official December 2024 close release said the transaction was funded by a Series H led by Haveli and that the combined valuation exceeded $7B. | Post-merger capital structure changed materially, but fully diluted ownership remains non-public. | verified |
Series A occurred in late 2013, but the first accessible dated public disclosure was the June 2015 stealth-exit release.
Cohesity’s core product narrative is publicly clear across DataProtect, FortKnox, Data Cloud bundles, and Gaia, but product economics, pricing realization, and roadmap execution still need private diligence.
partially verified confidence: high
Public product evidence supports a multi-product enterprise data-protection platform spanning DataProtect, FortKnox, Data Cloud bundles, and Gaia, but market share, SKU profitability, roadmap timing, and public price cards remain incomplete.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| DataProtect | Official page markets unified data protection across on-premises, cloud, and SaaS with immutable snapshots and instant mass restore. | Core enterprise backup and cyber-resilience product with broad workload narrative. | verified |
| FortKnox | Official page markets an immutable, air-gapped cyber vault with rapid recovery hosted on AWS, Azure, and GCP. | Key cyber-vaulting differentiator in public messaging. | verified |
| Data Cloud Core Edition | Official packaging page lists Core Edition as a bundle under the Cohesity Data Cloud packaging model. | Supports bundle-level packaging visibility, but not numeric pricing. | partially_verified |
| Data Cloud Enterprise Edition | Official packaging page lists Enterprise Edition and add-ons such as cyber vaulting and data insights. | Shows upsell path and packaging segmentation, but not public rate cards. | partially_verified |
| Essentials / midsize offer | Official pages market Essentials for midsize businesses with self-managed, appliance, and Microsoft 365 SaaS variants. | Signals a segment-specific SKU family, but public volume and margins are unknown. | partially_verified |
| Gaia | Official Gaia page markets AI-ready search, summarization, vector indexing, and air-gapped/self-managed deployment options. | Important R&D and differentiation narrative; commercialization depth requires diligence. | partially_verified |
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cohesity Data Cloud packaging | Official page shows Core vs Enterprise editions and 1-, 3-, or 5-year subscriptions with support included. | Public packaging exists, but no numeric list prices or discount bands are disclosed. | partially_verified |
| Essentials pricing language | Official midsize pages refer to predictable pricing, but public dollar figures were not found in this review. | Good signal on model shape, not on realized pricing. | partially_verified |
| Rubrik public bundle visibility in Cohesity source set | Cohesity’s compare page references Rubrik Foundation, Business, and Enterprise bundles but does not provide neutral price benchmarking. | Competitor pricing remains outside the Cohesity-only evidence set. | not_publicly_verifiable |
| Commvault public bundle visibility in Cohesity source set | Cohesity’s compare page references Commvault Operational Recovery and Cyber Recovery bundles but not neutral pricing data. | Competitor price positioning still requires third-party or customer evidence. | not_publicly_verifiable |
| Discounting, renewals, and gross-margin waterfall | No public source in this review disclosed Cohesity’s discount policy, renewal uplift, cloud-cost pass-through, or product/channel margin structure. | Top-priority commercial diligence request. | not_publicly_verifiable |
Public pricing evidence is packaging-level only; this materially limits commercial-quality analysis.
Architecture shows public relationships and not a complete technical design.
Named customer case studies and partner ecosystems are public, but customer concentration, revenue by customer, supplier spend, and severed-relationship history are largely non-public.
partially verified confidence: high
Public case studies confirm named accounts and deployment details for customers such as Nasdaq and Maryland DoIT, but no full top-customer schedule or application-ranked concentration list is public.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nasdaq | Official case study says a four-person team manages 6,000 M365 accounts, 45 TB of OneDrive/Teams data, and 100 Exchange mailboxes with email restores down to ~5 minutes from 4 days. | High-quality named reference for M365, Exchange, and AWS-backed sovereignty use cases; revenue contribution not disclosed. | verified |
| Maryland Department of IT | Official case study says Maryland DoIT protects ~700 TB for ~40 agencies, achieved 97% faster file restores, and runs Cohesity on Cisco UCS with usage-based licensing. | Strong public-sector and Cisco-infrastructure reference; spend and contract value not disclosed. | verified |
| Conagra | Official customers page highlights Conagra as securing its supply chain from cyber threats. | Named logo and use-case signal, but no contract size or technical depth disclosed on the landing page. | partially_verified |
| Comcast | Official customers page says a telecommunications provider hardens its security posture while cutting three-year TCO by $10M. | Named logo plus a cited efficiency outcome, but underlying methodology and revenue value are not public. | partially_verified |
| Logo page customers (e.g., Toyota, FedEx, First Bank & Trust) | Official customers page displays additional logos, but the page also says case-study outcomes are illustrative only and may not be representative. | Public logos indicate some relationship history, not current ARR concentration. | partially_verified |
Named logos should not be treated as evidence of current ARR or concentration without contract-level data.
This chart intentionally preserves blank concentration values instead of fabricating customer revenue shares.
verified confidence: high
Cohesity’s partner ecosystem is broad and public, spanning hyperscalers, channel distributors, and GSIs, but the revenue contribution and contractual economics of those relationships remain private.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Google Cloud | Official December 2025 release announced an expanded multi-year partnership spanning AI, cybersecurity, sovereignty, FortKnox on Google Cloud, and Gaia/Gemini integration. | Material ecosystem relationship, but revenue share and customer overlap are not public. | verified |
| IBM | Official April 2024 release deepened cyber-resilience collaboration and said IBM joined Series F as a strategic investor. | Important commercial-plus-capital signal, but attached revenue contribution is not public. | verified |
| AWS | Official AWS solution and customer pages describe backup-as-a-service, FortKnox hosting, and Nasdaq data-locality support on AWS. | Strong operating dependency and GTM partner, but spend concentration is not public. | partially_verified |
| Microsoft | Official alliance materials reference Azure, Microsoft 365, and Sentinel integration. | Meaningful platform and go-to-market relationship, but commercial economics are undisclosed. | partially_verified |
| Channel/GSI ecosystem | Official pages name TD SYNNEX, Ingram Micro, Carahsoft, WWT, Insight, and GSIs such as Kyndryl and Infosys. | Breadth of ecosystem is public; revenue contribution, rebates, and partner concentration are not. | verified |
not publicly verifiable confidence: high
No public source in this review disclosed revenue by customer or any list of customers above 5% of revenue.
not publicly verifiable confidence: medium
No accessible public source disclosed a list of significant customer, partner, or supplier relationships severed within the last two years. The absence of public disclosure should not be read as proof that none occurred.
partially verified confidence: high
Public sources let the reviewer infer meaningful dependencies on AWS, Microsoft, Google Cloud, Cisco UCS, and validated AI hardware partners, but not spend concentration or contract obligations.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| AWS | Official pages say FortKnox can be hosted on AWS, AWS is a cloud alliance, and Nasdaq backup-as-a-service runs on AWS. | AWS appears to be a material hosting and sovereignty partner, but cost concentration is not public. | partially_verified |
| Microsoft Azure / Microsoft 365 / Sentinel | Official pages position Cohesity around Azure/M365 protection and Sentinel integration. | Likely meaningful workload and security-platform dependency, but commercial weight is not public. | partially_verified |
| Google Cloud / Gemini / Vertex AI Search | Official December 2025 release ties Gaia, Gemini, Vertex AI Search, and sovereignty features to Google Cloud. | Meaningful AI-cloud relationship; adoption and pricing are not public. | partially_verified |
| Oracle Cloud | Official alliance page names Oracle Cloud as a partner. | Relationship is public, but workload depth and economics are not. | partially_verified |
| Cisco UCS | Official Maryland case study says Cohesity runs on Cisco UCS and references a Cisco Validated Design. | Public evidence of infrastructure dependency in at least one public-sector deployment. | verified |
| NVIDIA / HPE validated Gaia hardware | Official Gaia page says self-managed deployments run on validated hardware from NVIDIA, Cisco, and HPE. | Supports AI-hardware ecosystem dependence, but procurement economics are not public. | partially_verified |
This table infers supplier exposure from public solution pages; it is not a procurement schedule.
Competition is clearly framed around Rubrik and Commvault in Cohesity’s own materials, but most relative performance/TCO claims are vendor-authored and need neutral validation.
partially verified confidence: medium
Cohesity publicly frames Rubrik and Commvault as core competitors and emphasizes cyber recovery, workload breadth, and efficiency as key differentiators. Most numeric superiority claims remain vendor-authored.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rubrik | Cohesity publishes a dedicated compare page versus Rubrik focused on workload coverage, recoverability, FortKnox, and storage efficiency. | Rubrik is clearly a primary named competitor, but most superiority claims are vendor-authored. | partially_verified |
| Commvault | Cohesity publishes a dedicated compare page versus Commvault focused on UI simplicity, SOAR/SIEM workflows, cyber vaulting, and TCO. | Commvault is another primary named competitor; comparative claims need neutral validation. | partially_verified |
| Other competitors in the Cohesity-only source set | No equally detailed Cohesity-authored compare page for other vendors was validated in this run. | Broader competitor coverage requires sources beyond the strict Cohesity-only set. | not_publicly_verifiable |
Competitor positions below are bounded by the user requirement to keep sources specific to Cohesity only.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Workload breadth | Cohesity’s compare pages argue broader workload support and consistency across on-prem, multi-cloud, SaaS, and cyber-recovery use cases. | Useful positioning signal, but still vendor-authored until validated by references or benchmarks. | partially_verified |
| Cyber-recovery and vaulting | Cohesity emphasizes FortKnox, quorum controls, threat scans, and rapid clean-room or sandbox recovery against both Rubrik and Commvault. | This is a core public differentiation axis, but operating proof needs customer testing. | partially_verified |
| Management UX / single-pane narrative | Public product and case-study pages stress a single platform or single pane for M365 plus on-prem workloads. | Plausible strength, especially in the Nasdaq case study, but not benchmarked broadly. | partially_verified |
| Storage efficiency and TCO | Compare pages cite 25%-30% efficiency advantages versus Rubrik and Commvault. | Treat as sales collateral until a neutral benchmark or customer cohort confirms economics. | partially_verified |
| Ecosystem reach | Official pages show large distributor, GSI, cloud, and strategic-investor ecosystems around Cohesity. | This appears to be a real strength, though partner concentration and margin trade-offs are not public. | verified |
This scoring table uses public Cohesity-authored materials and therefore carries a vendor-bias caveat.
This is a market-positioning heuristic, not a third-party market-share or benchmark chart.
Public GTM evidence points to a partner-heavy distribution model with strong cloud and channel support, yet channel mix, sales productivity, and budget efficiency are not disclosed.
partially verified confidence: high
Public GTM evidence shows a strong partner-led model—distributors, GSIs, and hyperscalers—supplemented by direct contact-sales and trial motions. Marketing pillars emphasize cyber resilience, AI, and sovereignty.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct enterprise sales | Official product pages push demo, trial, and contact-sales motions for enterprise buyers. | Direct sales clearly exists, but headcount, quota, and economics are not public. | partially_verified |
| Distributors and resellers | Official partner page names Ingram Micro, TD SYNNEX, Carahsoft, WWT, and Insight. | Channel breadth is public; revenue mix is not. | verified |
| GSIs / managed-service and as-a-service routes | Official partner materials describe GSIs and managed-delivery routes, while Aspire includes Manage and Integrate partner types. | Signals partner-enabled service delivery, but commercial dependency is not public. | verified |
| Hyperscaler alliance motion | Official pages and releases tie Cohesity to AWS, Microsoft, Google Cloud, and Oracle Cloud, including sovereign and AI-use cases. | Cloud alliances are a major distribution and technical route, but revenue share is not public. | verified |
| Public-sector route | Carahsoft is named on the channel page, and Maryland DoIT is a named case study. | Suggests a distinct public-sector motion, but federal/state pipeline detail is not public. | partially_verified |
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Customer-story library | Official customers page prominently features case studies such as Nasdaq, Conagra, Maryland, and Comcast. | Case studies are a major proof-and-demand asset, but the site itself says they are illustrative. | partially_verified |
| Competitive compare pages | Cohesity publishes direct compare pages versus Rubrik and Commvault. | Indicates aggressive competitive marketing in core segments. | verified |
| Trial / demo / contact-sales CTA | Product pages offer trials and contact-sales pathways rather than public procurement-style pricing. | Suggests enterprise consultative selling rather than transparent self-serve monetization. | partially_verified |
| Partner marketing and co-sell support | Aspire promises co-selling, co-branding, pipeline sharing, and demand-generation resources. | Partnership marketing is core to GTM execution. | verified |
| AI and cloud thought-leadership | Late-2025 Google Cloud and 2024 IBM releases frame Cohesity around AI, sovereignty, and cyber resilience. | Supports current messaging pillars, but not campaign ROI or CAC efficiency. | verified |
This chart satisfies the required GTM visual while making the disclosure gap explicit.
partially verified confidence: high
Public case studies suggest traction with enterprise and public-sector buyers, but they do not reveal renewal depth, cross-sell progress, or concentration among major accounts.
partially verified confidence: medium
Public new-business generation appears to come from partner ecosystems, cloud alliances, direct enterprise sales outreach, and compare-page/case-study marketing, but actual sourced-pipeline data is not public.
not publicly verifiable confidence: high
No public sales-force productivity model was found for compensation, average quota, sales cycle, or new-hire ramp.
not publicly verifiable confidence: high
Public evidence does not reveal whether Cohesity’s current or projected budgets can support its marketing plan and partner-led growth motions.
Public R&D signals emphasize Gaia, sovereignty-friendly AI deployment, and 2024 AI/product leadership hires, but roadmap timing, adoption, and cost structure need deeper diligence.
partially verified confidence: high
Public R&D organization signals come mainly from the leadership page and 2024 executive-hire releases, which show investment in product, engineering, and AI leadership but not the deeper org chart or team-size detail.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anubhav Gupta — CTO | Current leadership page names Anubhav Gupta as CTO responsible for the company’s technological vision. | Current public CTO anchor, but transition timing versus the 2024 Craig Martell announcement is not fully explained. | partially_verified |
| Vasu Murthy — CPO | Official October 2024 release appointed Vasu Murthy as CPO after prior roles at Rubrik and Oracle. | Adds product-scaling experience relevant to post-merger integration. | verified |
| Walter Angerer — Chief Development Officer | Current leadership page says Walter Angerer leads vision, strategy, and execution of the product portfolio. | Important engineering/product integration role after the Veritas combination. | verified |
| Dr. Craig Martell — announced CTO hire in 2024 | Official May 2024 release announced Craig Martell as CTO after service as DoD Chief Digital and AI Officer. | Signals strong 2024 AI leadership intent, but current-role continuity needs follow-up because the current leadership page now lists another CTO. | partially_verified |
The current-vs-prior CTO public record should be reconciled in diligence.
This is a public-evidence org sketch, not a full internal R&D organization chart.
partially verified confidence: high
Gaia and related AI integrations are the clearest public pipeline, while post-Veritas roadmap support is stated at a high level. Development costs, adoption depth, and execution certainty remain private.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gaia searchable protected-data platform | Official Gaia page says protected enterprise data becomes searchable, summarizable, and agent-accessible in place. | Core public R&D narrative around enterprise AI on protected data. | verified |
| Gaia self-managed / sovereign deployment | Official Gaia page says Gaia can run fully self-managed on-prem, including fully air-gapped environments, on validated NVIDIA, Cisco, and HPE reference architectures. | Important regulated-market signal, but commercial adoption needs proof. | verified |
| Copilot / Gemini / Glean integrations | Official Gaia page lists Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini, and Glean (coming soon) integrations; the Google Cloud release also discusses Gemini Enterprise and Vertex AI Search plans. | Shows real ecosystem intent, but some features are future-looking. | partially_verified |
| Gaia Catalog | Official Gaia page labels Gaia Catalog as “coming soon.” | Public roadmap item, not yet fully shipped/verified. | partially_verified |
| Issued AI patent support | PR Newswire release says USPTO granted Patent No. 12,619,501 for foundational Gaia technology. | Supports some defensibility narrative, but one patent is not a full moat analysis. | verified |
| Post-Veritas roadmap support | Official February 2024 announcement said the combination would add resources to invest in technology innovation while supporting customers worldwide. | Public intent to preserve and extend roadmaps; execution remains to be proven privately. | partially_verified |
The executive roster and directional headcount growth are public, but detailed org charts, attrition, compensation, option-plan, and retention data are not.
partially verified confidence: high
The executive-level structure is publicly visible from Cohesity’s leadership page, but the internal organization below that layer is not.
Sub-functional reporting lines and employee counts are not public.
partially verified confidence: medium
Directional headcount growth is visible through third-party data and executive-hire announcements, but company-verified historical and projected headcount by function and geography is not public.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 workforce estimate | Revelio estimated 2,918 employees and 106 active postings in 2023. | Directional baseline before the visible post-merger step-up. | partially_verified |
| 2024 workforce estimate | Revelio estimated 5,500 employees and 184 active postings in 2024. | Suggests strong growth around the Veritas combination period. | partially_verified |
| 2025 workforce estimate | Revelio estimated 6,383 employees and 385 active postings in 2025. | Supports continued growth and hiring after the close, but still third-party. | partially_verified |
| Leadership additions in 2024 | Official 2024 releases added Craig Martell and Vasu Murthy and referenced EMEA hires. | Qualitative sign of leadership investment even without a company headcount schedule. | verified |
| Headcount by function and geography | No public source in this review disclosed an audited breakdown by function or location, or projected headcount by year. | Important planning data remains private. | not_publicly_verifiable |
Revelio figures are third-party estimates and should be treated as directional only.
The chart uses third-party estimates because the company does not publicly publish a headcount schedule.
verified confidence: high
Senior management biographies are publicly available for the current top team and show deep backgrounds across VMware, SAP, Rubrik, Oracle, Veritas, and enterprise software operations.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sanjay Poonen — CEO and President | Current leadership page says Poonen leads the mission and brings more than 25 years of scaling multi-billion-dollar enterprises. | Publicly visible chief executive for the post-Veritas era. | verified |
| Eric Brown — CFO and COO | Current leadership page says Brown oversees finance, IT, operations, and M&A integration. | Important dual-role operator for financial diligence and integration tracking. | verified |
| Carol Carpenter — CMO | Current leadership page identifies Carpenter as Chief Marketing Officer. | Current public marketing leader after the 2023 Lynn Lucas departure. | verified |
| Tim Robbins — Chief Legal Officer | Current leadership page says Robbins leads the global legal function. | Key executive for follow-up on IP, regulatory, and transaction diligence. | verified |
| Vasu Murthy — Chief Product Officer | Current leadership page and 2024 release confirm product leadership after prior Rubrik and Oracle roles. | Relevant for roadmap integration and platform strategy. | verified |
| Walter Angerer — Chief Development Officer | Current leadership page says Angerer leads vision, strategy, and execution of the product portfolio. | Likely central to post-merger engineering alignment. | verified |
| Anubhav Gupta — CTO | Current leadership page identifies Gupta as CTO; public transition details from the 2024 Craig Martell announcement were not located in this review. | Current role is public; transition narrative is incomplete. | partially_verified |
not publicly verifiable confidence: high
Public sources do not disclose executive compensation, employment agreements, or benefit-plan detail.
not publicly verifiable confidence: high
No public option-plan or incentive-stock-plan documentation was located for Cohesity.
inconclusive confidence: medium
Public layoffs and executive changes indicate some personnel friction or restructuring, but no major public labor dispute or safety-related employee issue was surfaced in this review.
partially verified confidence: high
Public turnover signals include 2020 layoffs/furloughs, 2023 workforce optimization, the 2023 CMO departure, and an unresolved public record about the CTO transition.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 layoffs / furloughs | ChannelE2E reported a small percentage of employees were furloughed or no longer with the company, said to be well under 100 people. | Evidence of cost action during pandemic-era uncertainty. | verified |
| 2023 workforce optimization | Blocks & Files quoted Cohesity saying it optimized its workforce to increase investment flexibility and become cash-flow positive in FY24. | Operating-discipline signal, but potential morale/continuity risk. | verified |
| 2023 CMO departure | Blocks & Files quoted Cohesity confirming that Lynn Lucas was leaving the company. | Senior marketing leadership changed ahead of the current CMO roster. | verified |
| Current CTO public record inconsistency | The current leadership page lists Anubhav Gupta as CTO, while a May 2024 official release announced Craig Martell as CTO; no transition announcement was located in this review. | This is a diligence follow-up on leadership continuity rather than proof of a problem. | inconclusive |
| Comprehensive attrition and retention data | No public source in this review disclosed annual attrition, regretted-loss rates, or retention-package utilization. | Private HR data required. | not_publicly_verifiable |
Public legal and IP signals are material but bounded: one historical defendant-side patent case, one plaintiff-side trademark dispute that later settled, an announced Gaia patent grant, and broad remaining gaps on contracts, insurance, and counsel-grade regulatory review.
partially verified confidence: high
The most visible public defendant-side matter is Commvault’s 2020 patent suit, which later closed via stipulation of dismissal in 2022. No additional pending public defendant-side case was confirmed in the accessible source set.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Commvault Systems, Inc. v. Cohesity Inc. (D. Del. 1:20-cv-00525) | ZDNet reported Commvault sued Cohesity for patent infringement in Delaware on April 21, 2020. | Confirms a meaningful historical IP dispute against Cohesity. | verified |
| Disposition of Commvault case | PacerMonitor shows a stipulation of dismissal and case closed on January 27, 2022. | Publicly visible closure lowers immediate overhang but does not eliminate future IP risk. | verified |
| Other current public defendant-side cases in this source set | No additional pending lawsuit against Cohesity was confirmed in the accessible Cohesity-specific source set used here. | Absence of evidence is not a clean bill of health; counsel-grade review still required. | not_publicly_verifiable |
partially verified confidence: high
Cohesity’s publicly visible plaintiff-side matter is its Helios declaratory-judgment action against Cartesian Theatre, filed in late 2024 and dismissed after settlement in March 2026.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cohesity, Inc. v. Cartesian Theatre Corp. filed 2024-12-17 | CourtListener shows Cohesity filed a declaratory-judgment complaint for non-infringement on December 17, 2024. | Demonstrates that Cohesity has actively litigated trademark/IP positioning when challenged. | verified |
| Motion to dismiss denied 2026-02-02 | VitalLaw summarized the Northern District of California order denying Cartesian Theatre’s motion to dismiss. | Shows the case proceeded materially before settlement. | verified |
| Case settled and voluntarily dismissed 2026-03-31 | CourtListener shows the settlement conference on March 30, 2026, case settled in full, and a notice of voluntary dismissal on March 31, 2026. | Publicly visible closure limits current pendency but still signals IP sensitivity. | verified |
| Other plaintiff-side matters in this source set | No additional Cohesity-initiated public lawsuit was confirmed in the accessible Cohesity-specific source set used here. | Counsel should still run a broader docket search. | not_publicly_verifiable |
inconclusive confidence: medium
No public environmental or employee-safety liability was surfaced in this review. The more relevant public issue set is cyber resilience and data sovereignty, which still require control-level validation beyond marketing statements.
partially verified confidence: high
Public IP evidence includes a Gaia-related patent announcement and a Helios trademark history with resulting litigation, but not a full portfolio, licensing schedule, or freedom-to-operate analysis.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| U.S. Patent No. 12,619,501 | PR Newswire said USPTO granted Cohesity Patent No. 12,619,501 for foundational Gaia RAG technology. | Supports some technical defensibility around AI-ready protected data. | verified |
| HELIOS trademark chronology | VitalLaw said Cohesity has offered a Helios product since August 2018, applied to register HELIOS on July 2, 2020, and the mark registered on July 4, 2024. | Shows active trademark development and resulting dispute exposure. | verified |
| Branded product portfolio | Official product pages prominently use brands such as DataProtect, FortKnox, and Gaia. | Brand presence is public, but portfolio-wide trademark schedule is not. | partially_verified |
| Material IP-license agreements | No public source in this review disclosed material inbound or outbound IP-license agreements, open-source obligations, or royalty burdens. | IP-licensing diligence requires private files. | not_publicly_verifiable |
not publicly verifiable confidence: high
No public insurance schedule, limits, or deductibles were found in the accessible source set.
not publicly verifiable confidence: high
Material contracts—customer, cloud, partner, debt, and insurance—remain overwhelmingly private in the accessible public source set.
partially verified confidence: high
The strongest public regulatory-style signals are that the Veritas combination required and passed closing approvals, and that USPTO granted a Gaia-related patent. No public enforcement action was confirmed in the accessible source set, but counsel-grade review is still required.
| Item | Public evidence | Diligence readout | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Veritas transaction approvals | Official February 2024 announcement said the combination was subject to regulatory approval and customary closing conditions; the December 2024 release confirmed completion. | Shows at least one significant approval process was successfully navigated. | verified |
| USPTO patent grant | PR Newswire said the USPTO granted Patent No. 12,619,501 in June 2026. | Relevant agency action on IP, though not a regulatory enforcement event. | verified |
| Public enforcement actions identified in this source set | No public FTC, SEC, or similar enforcement action against Cohesity was confirmed in the accessible Cohesity-specific source set used here. | Helpful negative signal, but not a substitute for counsel and regulatory searches. | not_publicly_verifiable |
| Cyber/data-sovereignty control evidence | Public releases market sovereignty and cyber-resilience heavily, but underlying audit/control artifacts were not public in this review. | Control validation remains a diligence request. | not_publicly_verifiable |
Legal timeline combines litigation, transaction approval, and patent milestones because public regulatory coverage is sparse.
The heatmap is a synthesis artifact built from the report’s risk register.
| ID | Claim | Status | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
| EC-001 | Official Cohesity releases disclose a multi-round private funding history from Series A/B through Series E, reaching more than $650M total funding by April 2020. | verified high | SRC-008SRC-007SRC-006SRC-005 |
| EC-002 | A March 2021 employee tender established a $3.7B valuation without primary dilution. | verified high | SRC-004 |
| EC-003 | The February 2024 Veritas transaction announcement described a ~$7B combined-company value, >$1.6B revenue, $1.3B ARR, 27% adjusted cash EBITDA margin, and equity-plus-debt financing subject to regulatory approval. | verified high | SRC-002 |
| EC-004 | Cohesity publicly confirmed Series F completion in April 2024, with IBM joining NVIDIA as a strategic investor and major technology companies identified as backers. | verified high | SRC-003 |
| EC-005 | At the December 2024 close, Cohesity publicly said the combined business would serve more than 12,000 customers and had over $1.7B pro forma FY2024 revenue, $1.5B ARR, and 28% adjusted cash EBITDA margin, with Series H led by Haveli and Carlyle among the largest shareholders. | verified high | SRC-001 |
| EC-006 | As of September 2025, Cohesity still appeared private because CNBC described the IPO as a potential 2026 event rather than a completed listing. | partially verified medium | SRC-010 |
| EC-007 | Cohesity remained an active operating company in late 2025 and was expanding commercial AI/cloud partnerships. | verified high | SRC-011 |
| EC-008 | Cohesity’s current public leadership roster includes Sanjay Poonen, Eric Brown, Carol Carpenter, Walter Angerer, Tim Robbins, Vasu Murthy, and Anubhav Gupta, with investor-linked directors from Wing, Carlyle, and Haveli. | verified high | SRC-012 |
| EC-009 | Cohesity DataProtect is marketed as a unified data-protection platform across on-premises, cloud, and SaaS workloads with immutable snapshots and instant mass restore. | verified high | SRC-013 |
| EC-010 | Cohesity FortKnox is marketed as an immutable, air-gapped cyber vault with rapid recovery and multi-cloud hosting options. | verified high | SRC-014 |
| EC-011 | Cohesity’s public pricing disclosure is packaging-level only: official pages show bundle names and 1/3/5-year subscriptions but not numeric price cards. | partially verified high | SRC-015 |
| EC-012 | Cohesity publicly markets named customer examples and logos, but the company itself says case-study outcomes are illustrative rather than necessarily representative. | partially verified high | SRC-016 |
| EC-013 | The Nasdaq case study shows Cohesity protecting 6,000 Microsoft 365 accounts, 45 TB of OneDrive/Teams data, and 100 Exchange mailboxes with materially faster restore times and AWS-backed data-locality support. | verified high | SRC-017 |
| EC-014 | The Maryland Department of IT case study shows a public-sector deployment protecting about 700 TB for roughly 40 agencies, with 97% faster restores, Cisco UCS deployment, and usage-based licensing. | verified high | SRC-018 |
| EC-015 | Cohesity’s public GTM model includes distributors, integrators, GSIs, hyperscalers, and a 2025 Aspire program with co-selling and pipeline-sharing benefits. | verified high | SRC-019SRC-020SRC-021 |
| EC-016 | Rubrik and Commvault are named competitors in Cohesity’s own compare pages, but the detailed TCO/performance deltas are vendor-authored marketing claims rather than independent benchmarks. | partially verified medium | SRC-022SRC-023 |
| EC-017 | Gaia is Cohesity’s clearest public AI/RAG roadmap, with self-managed and air-gapped deployment options, planned integrations, and 2024 product/AI leadership hires supporting execution. | partially verified high | SRC-024SRC-025SRC-026 |
| EC-018 | Cohesity has at least one publicly announced issued AI patent and a public Helios trademark history that resulted in 2024-2026 litigation. | verified high | SRC-027SRC-033SRC-034 |
| EC-019 | Third-party workforce intelligence suggests sharp headcount and hiring growth from 2023 to 2025, but the figures are not company-filed. | partially verified medium | SRC-028 |
| EC-020 | Cohesity publicly experienced workforce optimization in 2020 and 2023, including the 2023 departure of CMO Lynn Lucas. | verified high | SRC-029SRC-030 |
| EC-021 | Commvault sued Cohesity for patent infringement in 2020, and the Delaware case later closed on a stipulation of dismissal in January 2022. | verified high | SRC-031SRC-032 |
| EC-022 | Audited standalone financials, full cap table, customer concentration, supplier spend, compensation, insurance, and material contracts are not publicly verifiable from the reviewed source set. | not publicly verifiable high | SRC-001SRC-002SRC-015SRC-016SRC-019SRC-020SRC-012 |
| EC-023 | Before the Veritas combination, Cohesity publicly reported strong recurring-revenue and software-growth markers but still did not provide audited standalone P&Ls. | verified high | SRC-009SRC-005 |
This report is a public-evidence diligence snapshot, not investment advice. Important financial, legal, technical, and contractual facts remain non-public and should be verified directly with management and primary documents before any investment decision.