Skip to content
Truth Graph · The Platform · By Assay

Engineering has Git. Finance has a ledger. Your GTM team has a shared Drive.

Every other team runs on a real source of truth. Go-to-market runs on a shared Drive, so reps quote pricing you changed and pitch features you killed. The Truth Graph makes every claim typed, sourced, and versioned, then tells you which version actually sells. Accuracy is the floor. Selling more is the point.

Run the audit → See the platform
Every claim typed · sourced · confidence-scored · decay-tracked
Infrastructure Audit — Your Stack
Engineering Git — Version Control
Finance General Ledger
Customer Relationships CRM — Salesforce
Go-to-Market ??? — No Infrastructure
How it works

One fact changes. Every lie in your library gets caught.

When something shifts in your business, a feature ships, pricing changes, a competitor moves, Truth Graph captures it once, then traces every downstream surface that's now wrong. No manual audit. No "I'll update that later."

Source events
Ingests
Truth
Graph by Assay
Updates
Downstream surfaces flagged
Sales Deck, Pricing Slide Multi-currency section needs regeneration
Website Features Page New capability to be reflected
AI SDR Context Window Feature parity claims updated
Partner One-Pager Integration section may be affected
Case Study Library No pricing references detected
The data model

What every claim carries.

It's not a database, it's a graph of claims. Every claim you sell on carries the same four properties, and that's what makes it defensible, catchable when it drifts, and testable when you want to find what wins.

01
Sourced
Every claim traces to where it came from — a Gong call, a CRM record, a Jira ticket, any connected source. Nothing floats unattributed. Click a number, see its receipt.
02
Confidence-scored
A score on every claim, weighted by source, recency, and how recently it held up. Reps see how solid a number is before they put it in front of a buyer.
03
Versioned
Full history on every claim: what changed, when, who signed off, what it touched. No more "who changed this?" Hash-chained and kept ten years.
04
Decay-aware
Claims don't expire, they rot. The graph predicts when each one goes stale and flags it to its owner first, before a prospect catches it.
Why it pays for itself

A graph you can ground is a graph you can improve.

Type, version, and score every claim and your positioning stops being a doc you argue about. It becomes something you can test: generate variations, ship them, measure which framing wins with sample sizes you can defend, then push the winner everywhere.

  • Find the framing that wins. Test 10× more positioning than your team could by hand. Ship the winners; retire the rest.
  • Prove the lift. A real number, not a hunch. Walk into the QBR with a sample size, not a story.
  • Compliance is the floor. Sourced and auditable by default. The reason to build on it is the revenue on top.
Calibration · reply rate by framing · n=312
Compliance-first framing11.4%
Legacy "data lineage" framing6.1%
Lift · 90% confidence range
0%+9.2% mean+14%
winner: compliance-first92% confidence
The Cost of No Infrastructure

What scattered truth costs a 100-person GTM team.

65-70%
of the content marketing builds, sales never sends, because nobody trusts it's current. Forrester
14
versions of the "standard" deck live across a 100-person GTM org. Nobody can say which one is real. composite · our audits
$2.3M
a year in stale claims at a typical $50M-ARR team: time lost re-verifying, deals slipped on bad data, AI trained on last year's truth. composite · our audits
One last thing

Your CFO wouldn't run finance on a shared Doc. You shouldn't run GTM on one either.

The free audit maps your claims into a Truth Graph in 90 seconds and shows you, line by line, what's running on stale truth.

Run the audit → See the platform