Compliance
Customers don't need to clear documents through internal review or negotiate confidentiality before running an analysis.
For general counsel teams
Full antitrust diligence in minutes, not weeks.
Taimet delivers a full merger antitrust analysis in 10-25 minutes, scored against six real-world regulatory outcome bands, with cited public sources your team can verify before the next meeting.
When corporate development surfaces a target, general counsel needs a substantive antitrust read, not a placeholder. Taimet gives in-house teams the analysis to decide what warrants outside counsel, what needs deeper diligence, and what the board should hear.
Corporate development doesn’t wait for antitrust clearance.
By the time general counsel is asked for a regulatory view, the deal already has internal champions. The CEO is interested. Corporate development has started building the case. Stakeholders want to know whether to proceed, and they want to know today, not next month. A light scan is not enough to protect the company from a late regulatory surprise. A full outside antitrust memo runs tens of thousands of dollars and takes weeks to deliver, making it impractical for every target in the pipeline.
General-purpose LLMs close the speed gap but create a different problem: they are unreliable on antitrust in specific, verifiable ways. Wrong merger guidelines, fabricated state law citations, plausible-sounding market definitions that collapse under scrutiny. When the board relies on your assessment, the analysis behind it needs to hold up. Taimet is purpose-built for this: a full, structured antitrust analysis in 10-25 minutes, on exclusively public data, with cited sources and a scored prediction of what regulators are likely to do. Enough substance to protect the company from surprises, scope what warrants outside counsel, and frame the regulatory conversation before it frames you.
How in-house teams use Taimet
Expert-grade antitrust screening from the public record - fast enough for the deal pipeline, rigorous enough for the boardroom.
Screen the full pipeline - not just the deals you can afford to send out
Corporate development may surface five or ten potential targets in a quarter. Engaging outside counsel on each one before you know whether antitrust risk is material is expensive and slow. Taimet gives you a substantive first read in 10-25 minutes per target, on exclusively public data. Screen five targets in an afternoon instead of staffing one for a month. Reserve outside spend for the deals where regulatory strategy actually matters.
A prediction of the regulatory outcome - not a vague risk flag
The Taimet Score™ maps to six real-world regulatory outcome bands: early termination, pull and refile, second request, remedies, trial on the merits, adverse decision. When the CEO or board asks what regulators will do, the answer can be specific. A score in the 51-70 range means a second request is the likely outcome. 71-85 puts the deal in remedies territory. That specificity changes the conversation from "there might be antitrust risk" to "here is what we should expect and plan for."
Sharper handoffs to outside counsel - and smarter spend
When a deal warrants outside counsel, arrive with a sourced picture of markets, competitive overlaps, vertical exposure, and likely agency interest. Your outside team spends their time on judgment calls, deal structuring, and clearance strategy, not rebuilding the public record from scratch. Taimet helps you direct the most expensive legal hours where they actually matter, and gives you the context to evaluate what comes back.
Board-ready analysis with cited sources
Taimet produces a full written report: executive summary, market overlap analysis, vertical issues, enforcement context, state AG posture, and a scored outcome prediction. Sources are cited throughout for your team to verify. The output is structured for professional readers, not formatted like a chat transcript. Use it to prepare for the board conversation, align corporate development and legal early, or brief the deal team on what to expect from the regulatory process.
Point your organization to the right questions before the meter starts
When the report flags overlap in a specific sector, you know exactly which business-unit leaders to pull into the conversation and what to ask them. More importantly, you can hand outside counsel a focused brief: here are the markets, here is the overlap, here is where we need judgment. They skip the discovery phase and go straight to the questions that matter. That means fewer billable hours rebuilding context and more time on the strategic calls that actually move the deal forward.
No uploads, no compliance review, no confidentiality risk
Taimet needs only the names of the merging companies. No data rooms, no party-supplied materials, no internal document uploads. That keeps compliance simple: no confidentiality review for the tool itself, no risk of exposing sensitive deal information, and no way for the analysis to be shaped by what parties choose to provide. It works weeks before a data room exists and introduces no new information-handling obligations.
Six bands, calibrated to real-world outcomes
Every analysis produces a 0-100 Taimet Score™, mapped to six interpretive bands. The bands are designed to reflect the actual range of merger outcomes - from quick clearance through trial on the merits to adverse decision - as an experienced attorney would predict them.
Score Ranges
Low riskHigh risk
1–25Early termination
Parties may be granted early termination of the HSR waiting period when the transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen competition.
26–50Pull and refile
The merging parties can withdraw and refile to give enforcers more time, so review often extends beyond the usual 30-day window.
51–70Second request
These deals carry a higher risk of a second request and a longer review; toward the top of the band, negotiated outcomes become more common.
71–85Remedies
A complaint and structural or behavioral remedies are plausible, with lower scores leaning toward settlement and higher scores toward litigation.
86–95Trial on the merits
Substantial antitrust effects with few likely remedies can produce a litigated trial on the merits.
96–100Adverse decision
Strong anticompetitive concerns and limited remedies may lead to trial and an adverse decision against the merging parties.
1 to 25, Early termination: Parties may be granted early termination of the HSR waiting period when the transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen competition. 26 to 50, Pull and refile: The merging parties can withdraw and refile to give enforcers more time, so review often extends beyond the usual 30-day window. 51 to 70, Second request: These deals carry a higher risk of a second request and a longer review; toward the top of the band, negotiated outcomes become more common. 71 to 85, Remedies: A complaint and structural or behavioral remedies are plausible, with lower scores leaning toward settlement and higher scores toward litigation. 86 to 95, Trial on the merits: Substantial antitrust effects with few likely remedies can produce a litigated trial on the merits. 96 to 100, Adverse decision: Strong anticompetitive concerns and limited remedies may lead to trial and an adverse decision against the merging parties.
Built by an enforcer who spent twenty years inside the work
Taimet's Founder, Gwendolyn Lindsay Cooley, served nearly two decades as Wisconsin's Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust. She chaired the National Association of Attorneys General Multistate Antitrust Task Force, leading coalitions of state and federal enforcers and collaborating with international counterparts. She co-led the trial team for the States' challenge to T-Mobile/Sprint - one of the highest-profile telecom antitrust cases in recent history.
Most AI products are built by AI researchers who consult lawyers. Taimet was built by a lawyer who spent two decades doing this work, in partnership with an engineer with two decades building production software. The reasoning encoded into the system isn't theoretical. It's hers.
Read more about Gwendolyn's background →
Things only an enforcer would know
There is a small body of working knowledge - the kind held by people who have spent years doing this - that determines how mergers actually get analyzed. None of it is in a textbook. Almost none of it is in an LLM's training data. All of it is in Taimet.
Pharmaceutical market definition
Small-molecule drugs are in the same market only if they share an identical molecular structure and are AB-rated for each other. Biologics are in the same market only if they’re biosimilars and treat the same disease. The distinction determines whether a pharma deal looks like a horizontal overlap or a non-issue. Most analysts don’t know it. Taimet does - and applies it automatically.
State enforcement patterns
Different state attorneys general challenge different kinds of mergers. Some are aggressive on hospital consolidation. Others on agriculture. Others on tech. Taimet knows which jurisdictions are likely to act on which transactions, which state-level enforcement theories apply, and which mergers will draw multistate coalitions.
Where the evidence actually lives
Pricing-power evidence often surfaces in investor presentations. Foreclosure intent shows up in board materials. Public statements about competitive intent surface in regulatory filings before they show up in press releases. Taimet knows where to look - because the person who designed it spent two decades looking there.
These are three examples among dozens. The full set is what makes the difference between an analysis that sounds expert and one that actually is.
An analyst that doesn't have to specialize
Taimet identifies the transaction structure automatically - horizontal, vertical, conglomerate, cross-market, cluster market, private equity, or any combination. Most real deals involve more than one structure at once. A private equity roll-up in a health services market may face horizontal overlap, vertical foreclosure concerns, and cumulative competition effects simultaneously. The system applies the right analytical frameworks for each without the user needing to classify the deal first.
Horizontal
Companies with overlap in both product and geographic market, competing directly in the same space.
Vertical
Companies in a direct or indirect vertical relationship within the same supply chain.
Conglomerate
An acquisition in an unrelated industry, with no economic relationship between the companies.
Cluster market
Multiple products sold together as a bundle (e.g., supermarket goods, hospital services).
Cross-market
Companies selling identical products but operating in separate, non-overlapping geographic markets.
Private equity
A private equity firm acquiring a company in a market where it has no existing holdings.
Across every industry
The FTC specializes. The DOJ specializes. Taimet doesn't.
Both federal agencies build their enforcement staffs around industry teams. A human analyst has to choose what to know deeply. That structural constraint doesn't apply to Taimet. The same system that analyzes a pharmaceutical merger - where market definition turns on molecular structure and AB-rating - analyzes a semiconductor deal, a regional hospital consolidation, or a mining joint venture. No configuration required. For the first time, the analytical breadth of the entire merger landscape is available to a single analyst.
PharmaceuticalsSemiconductorsHealthcare & HospitalsBig TechMining & ResourcesFinancial ServicesAgricultureReal EstateManufacturingTelecommunicationsRetail & Consumer GoodsEnergy & UtilitiesMedia & EntertainmentDefense & AerospaceTransportation & LogisticsFood & BeverageInsuranceBiotechnology
A screening tool, not a substitute for judgment
Taimet was designed first as an initial screening tool. For in-house teams, it gives general counsel a substantive antitrust read before engaging outside counsel - fast enough for the deal pipeline, rigorous enough for the boardroom. Screen five potential targets in an afternoon instead of waiting weeks for outside assessments.
But Taimet stops where human judgment begins. General counsel still advises the board. Outside counsel still structures the deal. The system is built to assist expert judgment, not replace it - and every output is designed to be reviewed, challenged, and built upon by the human in the loop.
What Taimet does
- Analyzes broad and narrow market overlaps
- Reasons like an expert antitrust attorney
- Calculates HHI and estimated market shares
- Performs comprehensive vertical analysis
- Assesses state AG and political exposure
- Reviews related actions and prior conduct
- Predicts likely enforcement outcome with a 0-100 score
- Cites sources throughout
What Taimet doesn't do
- Conduct economic modeling (e.g., diversion ratios, merger simulation)
- Accept or process party-supplied documents
- Operate as a chatbot or interactive Q&A tool
- Replace the judgment of expert counsel, analysts, or enforcers
We only need the names of the companies
Taimet doesn't accept uploads. We don't process party-supplied documents. We don't ingest deal materials. To run an analysis, the system needs only the names of the merging companies. This serves three purposes at once:
Security
No party-confidential data ever enters the system, which means none can leak from it.
Anti-gaming
Taimet can't be used as a sandbox to reverse-engineer which factors lower a score. The integrity of the analysis can't be manipulated.
Hallucination is the central problem with using general-purpose LLMs for high-stakes legal and economic analysis. The errors sound plausible. They're hard for a human reviewer to catch. And once a wrong claim enters the pipeline, downstream analysis builds on top of it.
Taimet addresses this with verification passes throughout the analysis. Citation-checking agents confirm that claims are actually supported by the cited sources. Reasoning-consistency checks compare conclusions across agents. Claims without source support are flagged. Different stages of the pipeline cross-validate each other before the report is finalized.
The system checks its own work.
What practitioners are saying
“When you are reviewing multiple transactions with a small team, the constraint isn't judgment, it's time. A tool like this does not replace discretion, but it immediately shows you where to focus it.”
“Reflecting the creator's experience of regulatory matters, the depth of analysis, and more importantly the consistency, is far beyond anything we've seen from general tools. It's genuinely useful for investment decisions.”
“Even as antitrust enforcement becomes less predictable, the need for a clear, consistent view of risk hasn't gone away - if anything, it's more important. Taimet is one of the few tools that brings real structure to that uncertainty. We've been early believers, and it's become a critical part of how we advise investors in live situations.”
“Taimet is the first tool I've seen that genuinely closes the gap between legal analysis and investor needs. It delivers clarity where there used to be noise, and it's quickly become indispensable to how we advise our clients.”
Video WalkthroughSee how Taimet works,
See how Taimet works,
and how easy it is to use.
For general counsel teams
Informed early enough to shape the outcome.
Taimet delivers a full antitrust analysis in minutes: markets, overlaps, vertical exposure, enforcement context, and a scored prediction of what regulators will likely do, all on public data, with cited sources. Screen the pipeline at deal speed, direct outside counsel where the file warrants it, and walk into the board conversation with substance, not a placeholder.
10-25 min
Full analysis, not a summary
0-100
Proprietary risk score
~15 hours saved
Per merger analysis
