Findex vs Pulley: Comparison for European Startups 2026

Pulley is a US-built cap table platform that positions itself as the modern, founder-friendly alternative to Carta. Findex is a Nordic platform built around shareholder relationships and consolidated net worth visibility. Both target early-stage companies. Both prefer cleaner interfaces over enterprise complexity. They diverge almost everywhere else: geography, pricing logic, secondary feature set, and the question of what a cap table tool is for.

This comparison is for founders and finance leads who have shortlisted Pulley and want to understand where Findex fits, or vice versa. It covers what each platform does well, where they differ, and which company stage and geography fits each one.

TL;DR: which one for you

US-headquartered, US VC investor base, need 409A: Pulley
US-aligned startup that wants Carta features at lower cost: Pulley
Active equity grant program, frequent exercises and vesting events: Pulley
Nordic company, 10 to 200 shareholders, active investor updates: Findex
Want cap table plus investor updates in one platform: Findex
Shareholders are themselves investors who track portfolios: Findex
Pre-seed with five shareholders, single jurisdiction: Neither (spreadsheet or Cake's free tier is enough)

The short version: Pulley is the right tool when cap table administration and US equity workflows are the centre of gravity, with a preference for modern UX and lower cost than Carta. Findex is the right tool when shareholder communication, IR, and consolidated net worth visibility are part of the same workflow.

The fundamental difference

Pulley and Findex solve adjacent problems with different starting points.

Pulley, founded in 2019 by Yin Wu, was built as a cap table tool for founders rather than for finance teams. The product treats cap table as the primary data model, then adds scenario modelling, ESOP administration, and bundled 409A valuations on higher tiers. The pitch is straightforward: Carta-grade equity workflows without Carta-grade pricing or interface friction. Customers are mostly US-based, with a growing international footprint.

Findex started as a personal wealth platform that gives investors a consolidated view of every asset they own across banks, brokers, and private holdings. The IR Portal extends that model to companies, so shareholders see updates, position, and broader net worth in one place. Cap table management is one of the things the platform does. It is not the only thing, and the design choices reflect that.

This difference shapes pricing, feature priorities, and the experience your shareholders end up with.

Side-by-side comparison

Cap table management: Pulley — Yes, strong. Findex — Yes
Equity plan administration (ESOP): Pulley — Yes, solid. Findex — Basic
409A valuation: Pulley — Yes (included on higher tiers). Findex — No
Scenario modelling and waterfalls: Pulley — Yes, native. Findex — Limited
Investor updates and distribution: Pulley — Basic. Findex — Yes, native
Data room: Pulley — Available. Findex — Yes
Shareholder portfolio view (read-only): Pulley — No. Findex — Yes
Two-sided account model: Pulley — No. Findex — Yes
BankID integration: Pulley — No. Findex — Yes
Multi-jurisdiction support: Pulley — US-first, limited EU. Findex — Strong Nordic, expanding EU
Pricing model: Pulley — Tiered, per-shareholder. Findex — Flat
Customer base location: Pulley — Primarily US. Findex — Primarily Nordic

Cap table management

Both platforms handle cap table fundamentals: share issuance, transfers, vesting schedules, option grants, and dilution modelling.

Pulley offers a clean, modern interface with strong scenario modelling, waterfall analysis, and convertible note handling. It supports US share structures, SAFEs at multiple valuation caps, RSU pools, and warrant grants without the workarounds that older platforms require. For a US C-corp with an active fundraising cadence, Pulley covers the cap table workflow end to end.

Findex handles standard Nordic cap table structures: ordinary and preferred shares, option pools, vesting schedules, secondary transfers, and share register sign-off via BankID. It does not match Pulley on US-specific cases. Companies with US warrant structures, multiple SAFE rounds at differing caps, or complex preferred-share preference stacks will find Findex less complete.

Verdict on cap table depth: Pulley for US-structured companies. Findex for Nordic-structured companies. The two platforms model different legal realities first.

Equity plan administration

Equity plan administration covers grant issuance, vesting tracking, exercise flows, tax withholding, and lifecycle management for option holders and RSU recipients.

Pulley handles this well. ESOP administration, vesting tracking, exercise workflows, and tax form generation are core features. For US startups running active option grant programs, Pulley reduces the operational load that spreadsheets and email threads create.

Findex supports basic option plan tracking but is not an equity administration platform. Companies with frequent exercises, RSU cliff events, and complex vesting variations typically need a more specialised tool.

Verdict: Pulley, clearly. If equity plan administration is a primary workflow for your company, Findex is the wrong tool.

409A valuations

409A valuations are required for US C-corps issuing options, and need to be refreshed annually or after material events.

Pulley bundles 409A valuations into its higher-tier plans. For US-aligned startups, this is a meaningful cost saving versus paying separately for valuations. The bundled offering is one of the strongest arguments for Pulley over alternatives that require a separate valuation provider.

Findex does not offer valuations. European startups outside the US C-corp track typically do not need 409A valuations. Companies with a US flip or US-based option grants need a separate provider or a US-aligned cap table platform.

Verdict: Pulley if you need 409A. Not applicable to most European-only companies.

Investor relations and shareholder communication

This is where the two platforms diverge most sharply.

Pulley treats investor relations as an adjacent feature. Its investor portal lets shareholders see their position in the company. Update distribution, data rooms, and ongoing communication are functional rather than first-class. Most Pulley customers run investor updates through email, Notion, or a dedicated IR tool, and use Pulley as the system of record for ownership data only.

Findex treats investor relations as a primary workflow. Companies distribute updates inside the platform, manage data rooms tied to specific deals or rounds, and shareholders see updates, position, and consolidated net worth in one interface. The two-sided model matters here: shareholders invited to a company on Findex receive their own MyFindex account, which means engagement happens inside the platform rather than in inboxes.

For a Nordic company sending monthly updates to 30 to 150 shareholders, Findex removes the split between cap table tool and email distribution.

Verdict: Findex. If shareholder communication is a meaningful workload for your team, this is the difference that matters most.

The shareholder portfolio model

Findex has one capability that Pulley does not attempt to match: shareholders see their holding in your company alongside every other asset they own.

When a shareholder accepts an invitation to Findex, they get a free MyFindex account. From that account they can connect their listed brokerage holdings, add their real estate, and import their other private investments. Their position in your company appears next to the rest of their portfolio.

For most shareholders, especially angel investors, family offices, and active private investors, this is genuinely useful. It also explains why Findex sees organic adoption from shareholders who were originally invited by one of their portfolio companies, then continued using the consumer product.

Pulley does not have an equivalent. Shareholders see their position in your company only. Whether this matters depends on your shareholder base. Founders raising primarily from US institutional VCs will not value it. Founders with angels, family offices, and operator investors likely will.

Pricing

The two platforms use different pricing logic.

Pulley prices in tiered plans, with per-shareholder thresholds and feature gates on higher tiers (including 409A). It is meaningfully cheaper than Carta at comparable stages, which is part of its market positioning. Total cost still scales with shareholder count and feature requirements, so a Series A company with 50 shareholders and active ESOP administration pays more than a seed company with 15.

Findex uses flat IR Portal pricing. Cost does not scale with shareholder count. Companies that grow from 20 to 200 shareholders pay the same monthly fee, and there is no per-seat charge for shareholders themselves.

Verdict: Pulley on bundled service value, particularly for US companies that would otherwise pay separately for 409A. Findex on predictability and cost at scale, particularly for companies adding shareholders quickly without proportional revenue growth.

European fit

Pulley has European customers but its product is US-centric. BankID and similar national eID systems are not integrated. Swedish share register format, Norwegian shareholder filings, and Danish tax handling rely on export rather than native workflows. Customer support is US-time-zone weighted, and European-specific feature requests sit behind a US-focused roadmap.

Findex is Nordic-first. BankID integration, Swedish share register format, and Nordic tax structures are first-class. European coverage outside the Nordics is expanding but is not yet at the depth of Pulley's US coverage, or Ledgy's DACH coverage. Companies with significant German or Swiss shareholder bases may want to evaluate Ledgy alongside.

Verdict: Findex for Nordic companies. Pulley for European companies whose investor base is primarily US.

When to choose Pulley

Choose Pulley if:

Your investor base is primarily US-based, and US-style cap table workflows match your reality.
You need 409A valuations bundled into the platform price.
You run an active equity grant program with frequent exercises, RSU vesting, and tax form generation.
You want modern UX and lower cost than Carta, without giving up equity administration depth.
Your shareholder base is concentrated enough that per-shareholder pricing remains predictable.

When to choose Findex

Choose Findex if:

Your company is Nordic-based, and your shareholders are primarily Nordic or European.
You send monthly or quarterly investor updates, and want them distributed in the same platform as your cap table.
You value flat pricing that does not penalise shareholder growth.
You want shareholders to see a consolidated view of their holdings across every investment, not just their position in your company.
BankID and Nordic eID workflows matter for your share register sign-off.

Can you use both?

Yes, and some companies do. The pattern: Pulley for cap table administration, ESOP, and 409A. Findex for investor updates, data rooms, and the shareholder portal. The cost of running both is often justified by the difference in workflow quality, particularly for Nordic companies with a US legal structure or US investors.

This is workable at moderate cost but creates two systems of record. The discipline required to keep them in sync is not trivial. Most companies eventually consolidate once one platform clearly covers the dominant workflow.

Migration considerations

Moving from Pulley to Findex, or in the opposite direction, is straightforward at the cap table level. Both platforms support standard CSV export and import. The friction is in the shareholder experience.

Shareholders who have an existing Pulley account do not automatically get a Findex account, and the same applies in reverse. A typical migration looks like:

Export cap table from the current platform
Import into the new platform with mapped fields
Invite all shareholders to verify their position
Lock the source-of-truth in the new platform once everyone has confirmed

Plan two to four weeks for a clean migration with 30 or more shareholders. The shareholder-side activation typically takes longer than the data-side migration.

Frequently asked questions

Is Findex a Pulley competitor?

Findex and Pulley overlap on cap table management but serve different primary use cases. Pulley is built around US-aligned cap table administration, equity plans, and 409A valuations. Findex is built around shareholder relationships, investor updates, and consolidated net worth visibility for Nordic-focused companies. Some companies choose one based on geographic and workflow fit. Others run both for complementary reasons.

Can Findex replace Pulley entirely?

For Nordic post-seed and Series A companies whose investor base is European and whose equity grant programs are modest, often yes. For US-aligned companies with active ESOP administration, frequent exercises, or 409A requirements, Findex is missing capabilities that Pulley provides. The honest answer is geography and workflow dependent.

Does Findex offer 409A valuations?

No. Findex does not provide valuation services. European startups outside the US C-corp structure typically do not need 409A valuations. Companies with a US flip should use Pulley, Carta, or a dedicated 409A provider.

Why does BankID matter for a cap table?

BankID enables legally binding signatures on share register changes, shareholder invitations, and corporate filings without paper forms. In Sweden, BankID has over 95% adult population coverage. Norwegian BankID and Danish MitID play comparable roles in their markets. For Nordic startups, native integration removes friction from every cap table change. Pulley does not currently integrate BankID.

Is Pulley cheaper than Findex?

Total cost depends on stage, shareholder count, and feature usage. Pulley starts at lower price points than Carta and bundles 409A on higher tiers, which is a meaningful saving for US-aligned companies. Findex uses flat pricing that does not scale with shareholder count, which becomes cheaper at higher shareholder counts. Compare current pricing pages and model your projected shareholder count over 24 months before choosing on cost alone.

Which platform do European VCs prefer?

There is no single preference. US-leaning EU VCs are familiar with Pulley and accept it without friction. European VCs accept Pulley, Carta, Ledgy, and Findex equally as long as the cap table is structured, accurate, and exportable. Data quality matters more than platform brand at most stages.

Can shareholders see updates and position in one place on both platforms?

On Findex, yes. Shareholders log in to MyFindex and see updates, cap table position, and consolidated net worth in one interface. On Pulley, shareholders see their position in the Pulley portal but updates typically come via email or a separate IR tool. This split is workable but adds inbox load for both the founder and the shareholder.

Is cap table data confidential when held by a third-party platform?

Yes, when the platform has clear data-handling commitments. After the 2024 Carta secondary-market incident, founders became more attentive to whether platforms can access cap table data for purposes beyond core service delivery. Read each vendor's data use policy. Look specifically for whether shareholder identity and position data is used for any cross-sell, secondary marketplace, or competing-customer pitch activity.

The bottom line

Pulley is the right choice if you are running US-aligned cap table administration with active equity plans, want 409A valuations bundled, and prefer modern UX over Carta's interface. Findex is the right choice if you are a Nordic company that treats shareholder communication, cap table, and consolidated net worth as one workflow.

The decision is rarely "best platform overall." It is "which platform fits the geography, stage, and workflow of this specific company." Spreadsheets do not scale past a handful of shareholders, do not survive diligence, and create operational risk every time a transfer happens. Any of the platforms in this comparison solves that part. The question is which one does so without creating new gaps.

If your answer involves Nordic operations, active IR, and a desire to remove the email-and-spreadsheet split, book a demo to see how the Findex IR Portal handles cap table plus shareholder communication in one place.