Your Art Collection, Protected Forever
Art provenance is one of the most complex problems in the commercial gallery world — and the tools haven't kept up.
Galleries manage ownership chains, authentication records, and exhibition history spanning generations.
Spreadsheets can't verify evidence. Traditional databases weren't designed for multi-decade reliability.
Your reputation depends on unbreakable provenance chains and ironclad data security.
Enterprise-grade architecture designed specifically for art world compliance and provenance tracking. Production-ready from day one.
Partitioned architecture ensures your 2050 data has a home today.
Database-enforced isolation means your data stays yours — always.
Cryptographic hashing links proof to every provenance claim.
Automated extraction and smart linking reduce manual effort dramatically.
Enterprise SaaS security architecture that isolates every gallery at the database level — not the application layer.
Each gallery sees only their own artworks. Database-enforced isolation prevents any cross-tenant data leakage — no exceptions.
Unlike competitors who rely on application-layer filtering, our security is structural. Every query is automatically scoped to your tenant at the connection level.

All relationships include tenant ID, making cross-tenant references structurally impossible.
Authentication sets tenant context at connection. Every query automatically filters to your gallery.
Security lives in PostgreSQL policies — not in application code that can be bypassed.
Art collections span generations. Your database should too.
Audit tables automatically partition by quarter. Old data stays accessible, new data stays fast.
Primary keys include partition columns. Queries hit only relevant quarters, not decades of history.
Future partitions create automatically. Your 2050 data already has a home.
Designed for true multi-generational storage
Partition pruning eliminates irrelevant data scans
Cryptographic hashing and immutable audit trails
Every provenance claim needs proof. We track both the claim and the evidence — down to the page and paragraph.
PDFs, images, and certificates stored with content hashing. Verify file integrity at any point in time — forever.
OCR and text hashing link specific document passages to provenance events. Span-level citations, not generic attachments.
Polymorphic relationships connect evidence to artworks, transactions, exhibitions, and condition reports.

Let AI handle the tedious. You handle the art.
AI reads invoices, certificates, and correspondence to extract provenance events automatically.
AI suggests relationships between documents, artworks, and constituents based on content similarity.
Every AI extraction includes certainty levels. Review what needs review, trust what's solid.
Query your collection in plain English. No SQL required.
System flags missing dates, conflicting claims, and incomplete chains automatically.
Every AI extraction goes to a review queue. You approve, reject, or edit before it's final.
Powered by Claude 4.5 Sonnet with structured output
Technical excellence you never think about. Gallery operations that just work.
Battle-tested reliability
Real-time sync
Natural language queries
Why our architectural moat is defensible — and why incumbents cannot easily replicate our evidence-first model.
Incumbent databases model provenance as text fields — not graphs with claims and evidence.
Adding an evidence layer requires schema rewrites that break thousands of existing integrations.
They optimize for cataloging speed. We optimize for forensic defensibility.
No framework for human-in-the-loop extraction or assertion lineage.
They use app-layer filtering. We use database-level isolation.
→ Competitive Window: 18–36 Months
Fundamental architectural divergence makes replication a 3-year project.
Artlogic, TMS
Hardware Gallery
Leading Gallery CRM — 3,000 customers • $299–499/month • Strong in presentation and inventory
Expected response: "Evidence Manager" add-on (generic tagging) by Month 12–24
Museum standard — MoMA, Getty, Met • $50–150K setup + $15–30K/year
If they launch "TMS Lite": Captures top 5% (major dealers). We capture 80% mid-market.
Why half-measures fail. Artlogic's most likely response — a generic "Evidence Tagging" feature — cannot compete.
Evidence attached to artwork, not to a specific ownership period.
Can't model "seller says X, catalogue says Y" — forced to pick one.
Overwrites provenance when correcting errors. History lost.
No extraction pipeline, review queue, or assertion lineage.
Can't cite "page 3, paragraph 2" as proof of a specific claim.
Three real-world scenarios illustrate why tagging isn't our product.

Claim-level citations require the graph model — a 3-year rewrite for any incumbent. Tagging is a feature. Our provenance graph is infrastructure.
Migration friction creates natural lock-in — but only in one direction.
Low Friction
High Friction
Our lock-in: Evidence vault + daily workflow + compliance dependency + network effects
Why the next 18 months are critical for category ownership.
If we execute on schedule, the category is ours before incumbents can respond.
We're not "better Artlogic." We're a new category: Provenance Compliance SaaS.
Prepared responses for the questions you'll hear in every meeting.
"Our moat is the provenance graph with supersession — a schema rewrite that would break 3,000 customers. By the time they commit, we'll own the category."
"TMS is a Rolls Royce for institutions. We're a Tesla for commercial galleries. Different segment, different speed, different job."
"Their DNA is 12-month enterprise sales. We're 60-day product-led. 10× cheaper, 6× faster. Mid-market won't wait."
"The moat isn't the LLM — it's the governed pipeline. Review queue, rules registry, assertion lineage. That's 18 months of workflow engineering."
"If Artlogic gets PE for a rewrite, that's 36 months. We'll have 700 customers by then. We're the acquihire target."
What looks like "features" is deep infrastructure divergence.
→ Non-linear provenance graph with chain identity
→ Governed pipeline: IR → LLM → resolution → review queue
→ Supersession without overwrite + assertion lineage
→ Span-level citations with stable textHash verification
Incumbents see "evidence linking" as a feature. We know it's a 3-year schema rewrite. That asymmetry is the moat.
The competitive window is 18–36 months. The architecture is ready. The market is turning. The time is now.
MaterielDB • Confidential