# Confidence Assessment 002 -- LLMHosts.com

## META
- date: 2026-02-14
- trigger: Post-improvement-plan reassessment
- phase: Phase 1, Step 1 of 22 (unchanged -- no new code shipped)
- assessor: AI agent
- previous: 2026-02-14_confidence-001.md (composite: 58)
- improvement_plan: 2026-02-14_improvement-plan-001.md (8 structural changes proposed)

---

## METHODOLOGY NOTE

This assessment evaluates the project's viability AFTER adopting the improvement plan's structural changes, but BEFORE executing them. Scores reflect: (1) current reality (what exists today), plus (2) the quality and realism of the forward plan. A better plan improves forward-looking confidence, but does not substitute for evidence.

Scores that could only reach 90+ with real-world evidence (users, revenue, shipped code) are capped below 90 with explicit reasoning.

---

## SCORES

| Dimension | Score | Delta vs 001 | Evidence |
|-----------|-------|------------|----------|
| Technical Feasibility | 88 | +3 | All prior evidence holds (three tiers install, Docker builds, CI passes). New: vCache reference implementation exists (ICLR 2026 authors released code + benchmarks), reducing the hardest technical risk from "implement from paper" to "adapt reference." Scope cut (Wave 1 = proxy + router + serve) means v0.1 has zero research-grade components. Helicone proves the proxy pattern works at 3000 req/sec in production. Remaining risk: integration complexity when assembling proxy + router + cache + tunnel in Wave 2. |
| Market Validity | 82 | +4 | All prior data holds (OpenRouter $100M GMV, Tailscale growth, $97/mo developer spend). New: competitive landscape deeper -- Helicone identified as direct competitor but positioned differently (cloud observability, not local-first). OpenRouter raised $40M at $500M valuation in mid-2025 (validates market appetite). LiteLLM at 36K stars, 240M+ Docker pulls (validates developer demand for proxy tools). LLMHosts's unique position (local + tunnel + cache) confirmed -- nobody occupies this exact niche. Cap: Cannot exceed ~85 without real adoption data. No user has ever installed or used this product. |
| Execution Velocity | 50 | +15 | Same reality (1/22 steps done, 0 features functional). BUT: the forward plan is structurally better. Two-wave release means first usable product in ~2 weeks instead of 6. Tunnel moved to Wave 2 (week 4 instead of week 14). Scope cut removes 10 days of non-essential work from the critical path. Parallel marketing starts immediately. Two HN launches instead of one. These are real structural improvements that change the probability of hitting targets. Cap: Cannot exceed ~55 until Wave 1 actually ships. A plan is not execution. |
| Competitive Moat | 63 | +8 | Tunnel-first positioning is stronger and arrives 10 weeks earlier. Competitive analysis now includes Helicone and Martian -- no more blind spots. Feature matrix confirmed: no competitor has local-first + tunnel + verified cache + intelligent router. vCache formal guarantees are a genuine differentiator vs Helicone's heuristic caching. But: individual components (proxy, cache, routing) are replicable. Data moat (aggregate routing intelligence) only materializes at scale. OpenRouter at $500M valuation could decide to add local inference -- the window is real but not permanent. |
| Revenue Path | 55 | +10 | Strategy is more realistic. Conversion benchmarks now calibrated to OSS norms (1-2%, not implied 5-10%). Distribution math is explicit: need 5K-100K free users depending on conversion rate. Tunnel moved to Week 4 = conversion trigger available 10 weeks earlier. Two-wave launch = two user acquisition moments. Marketing starts in parallel. But: still $0 revenue, 0 users, 0 paying customers. Cloud cost dashboard as Phase 1 revenue (from PRD) is still unvalidated. Cap: Cannot exceed ~60 without pre-revenue signal (waitlist, install counts, or first paying user). |
| Founder Capacity | 58 | +8 | Same structural constraint (solo founder). BUT: scope cut reduces sustained sprint from 6 weeks to 2+2 with ship-and-breathe cadence. Explicit "no" list prevents scope creep. First hire trigger lowered to $3K MRR (from $5K). Marketing interspersed with coding provides energy variety. AI agent handles code execution. Still: one person doing product + marketing + community + support + ops. GitHub account flagged (deferred P0) adds friction. Cap: Cannot exceed ~70 while solo. Key-person risk is irreducible without a co-founder or hire. |

---

## COMPOSITE SCORE

```
Technical Feasibility:  88 × 0.15 = 13.20
Market Validity:        82 × 0.20 = 16.40
Execution Velocity:     50 × 0.20 = 10.00
Competitive Moat:       63 × 0.15 =  9.45
Revenue Path:           55 × 0.20 = 11.00
Founder Capacity:       58 × 0.10 =  5.80
─────────────────────────────────────────
COMPOSITE:                          65.85 → 66
```

**Overall: 66 / 100 -- MODERATE CONFIDENCE**

**Delta from Assessment 001: +8 points (58 → 66)**

---

## WHAT CHANGED AND WHY

| Dimension | 001 → 002 | Driver |
|-----------|-----------|--------|
| Technical | 85 → 88 | vCache reference code, scope cut reduces risk |
| Market | 78 → 82 | Deeper competitive analysis, market validation data |
| Execution | 35 → 50 | Two-wave release, scope cut, parallel marketing |
| Moat | 55 → 63 | Tunnel-first, no competitive blind spots |
| Revenue | 45 → 55 | Realistic conversion rates, faster to trigger |
| Founder | 50 → 58 | Reduced scope, ship-and-breathe cadence |
| **Composite** | **58 → 66** | **+8 points from strategic corrections** |

---

## HONEST ASSESSMENT: CAN WE REACH 90?

No dimension can reach 90 today. Here's what each needs:

| Dimension | Current | Path to 90 | When |
|-----------|---------|-----------|------|
| Technical | 88 | Ship v0.2.0 with proxy + cache + tunnel working in production | Week 5 |
| Market | 82 | 5,000+ free users, positive NPS, organic growth | Phase 2 (week 10+) |
| Execution | 50 | Phase 2 shipped on schedule, all milestones hit | Week 14+ |
| Moat | 63 | Data moat from aggregate routing, community contributions | Phase 4 (week 25+) |
| Revenue | 55 | $5K+ MRR with healthy retention (>60% monthly) | Phase 3 (week 20+) |
| Founder | 58 | First engineering hire, shared operational load | At $3K MRR |

**Projected composite trajectory (if plan executes well):**

```
Assessment 001 (today, pre-plan):    58  UNCERTAIN
Assessment 002 (today, with plan):   66  MODERATE
Assessment 003 (Wave 1 ships):       ~72  MODERATE
Assessment 004 (Wave 2 + tunnel):    ~78  MODERATE-STRONG
Assessment 005 (Phase 2, 200 Pro):   ~85  STRONG
Assessment 006 (Phase 3, $10K MRR):  ~90  STRONG
```

---

## WHAT THE +8 POINTS ACTUALLY MEAN

The improvement from 58 to 66 is real but modest. It comes entirely from:
1. A more realistic plan (scope cut, timing correction)
2. Better competitive awareness (Helicone, conversion benchmarks)
3. Strategic repositioning (tunnel earlier, marketing parallel)

It does NOT come from:
- Any new code shipped
- Any user validation
- Any revenue
- Any reduction in solo founder risk

**The next +6 points (66 → 72) require shipping Wave 1.** That's the only thing that matters now.

---

## TOP 3 ACTIONS (in priority order)

| # | Action | Owner | Impact | Deadline |
|---|--------|-------|--------|----------|
| 1 | **Ship Wave 1** (Steps 2-9: config → db → discovery → keys → backend → proxy → serve → rule router) | AI agent + founder | Execution +15, Technical +2 | 2 weeks |
| 2 | **Start marketing** (GitHub public, Discord, r/LocalLLaMA engagement, "Show HN" draft) | Founder | Market +5, Revenue +3 | Immediately |
| 3 | **Fix document inconsistencies** (6 items from improvement plan Finding 6) | AI agent | Technical +2, reduces agent errors | Next session |

---

## NEXT ASSESSMENT TRIGGER
- After Wave 1 ships (`llmhosts serve` routes to Ollama successfully), or 2 weeks, whichever first.
