Public data in. Development strategy out.
Aquier aggregates public data, listings, land registry, permit history, market references, and computes accelerated development strategies on top of it in minutes. No proprietary feeds, no black box: the same public-data engine works in any market we operate in, now live for US deal flow.
Sources
- · Funda & listing sources
- · Kadaster / public records
- · Municipal permit history
- · CBS & demographic data
- · STABU construction-cost data
- · Bank-accepted cost model (Stiko)
Update frequency
Data is refreshed daily. Follow any deal and you get updates as its inputs change, pricing moves, permit status, market shifts.
Exclusions
- · No personal data of owners or residents
- · No off-public-record or scraped private data
- · No guaranteed returns, screening, not a promise
- · No figures we can't trace to a source
Every score is traceable to its source.
What we do: aggregate public data and compute development strategies in minutes. Built in the Netherlands and engineered for any market, the same public-data engine works wherever we operate, now live for US deal flow. No black box: you see the method and the data behind every number, which is what makes it bank-ready.
Listings + public records are gathered and normalised per object.
Rule-based scoring: deal, risk, financeability, fully traceable, no black box.
Valuations cross-checked against broker/appraiser data; missing data is flagged, never guessed.
Bank-ready output with sources and an auditable rationale per score.
Cost and financeability figures are calibrated on a bank-accepted development cost model and cross-validated against public construction-cost references (2025). We work in ranges, not false precision. Validation runs via a bank-reviewed source model plus external benchmarks, traceable per figure; we do not claim an independent third-party audit. A score is a forward-looking screening, not a record of realised returns. We give no guarantees; the developer or investor stays responsible for execution.
A redacted example of a stichtingskostenopzet (development cost model) of the type used in real financing applications. Anonymised, figures fall within our calibrated bands, source per line.
| Line | Source | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| Acquisition | Residual · CBS land price | € 1.180.000 |
| Buyer's costs | Transfer tax + notary | € 135.000 |
| Construction | Market 2025 band | € 2.520.000 |
| Other costs | Advisory, permit, contingency | € 302.000 |
| Financing | Arrangement fee | € 50.000 |
| Total development cost | € 4.187.000 | |
Depth per deal, not a headline number.
We don't lead with a large national count. Every score runs on real cost, interest and return bands, each figure triangulated across three independent sources, shown as a range, never false precision.
| Class | Deal score | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| A | ≥ 85 | Investment-grade. Scores on every axis at once. |
| B | 72 t/m 84 | Solid, one or two axes still need work. |
| C | below 72 | Falls outside the acquisition filter. |
How the score is built
| Yield (BAR / NAR) | Validated against the bank-reviewed model: BAR 10,6 to 13,0%, NAR 9,7 to 11,5%. |
| Development margin | Checked against the 12 to 25% band realistic for NL developers. |
| Permit probability | Modelled per municipality from permit history and zoning. |
| Location and risk | Transit, amenities and demand weighed against build cost, vacancy and exit. |
KANSENRADAR-elite = elite score ≥ 70 and opportunity score ≥ 60: only opportunities that score on multiple axes at once.
Bank-accepted cost model (Stiko) →
A real stichtingskostenopzet used in an actual financing application, the structural backbone of our cost & return figures.
Multi-party transformation budget →
A church-to-housing conversion with several independent contractor budgets for the same work, real price spread, not one quote.
Realized contractor cost split
Actual structural-works breakdown (steel/ruwbouw ≈61%, labour ≈20%, timber ≈15%) + payment-term schedule.
Practitioner band + 2025 benchmark
Calibration band (NL 2024–2026) cross-validated against a public 2025 construction-cost benchmark.
Validation is a forward-looking screening calibrated on real, bank-reviewed and externally cross-checked sources. It is not a record of realised client returns and not an independent third-party audit.
Real projects behind the analysis.
The engine is calibrated on real own development/contracting projects, realised and bank-grade calculated. Anonymised to type + region (no addresses), the way we treat every figure on this platform.
6 realised own projects across 7 locations in 5 provinces. Validation anchor: in a realised case the sale came in 15.6% above appraisal; the cost engine is built on a bank-accepted model, STABU data and public references (CBS, 2025 benchmarks). No founder claims, no invented credentials, authority rests on the method and the projects. See the method →
Fresh, correctable, traceable.
Trust starts with how the data is kept: how fresh it is, how errors are handled and where every number comes from.
Refreshed daily
Data is refreshed daily; every deal shows a 'last updated' timestamp and you can follow a deal to get updates as its inputs move.
Correction policy
Missing data is flagged, never guessed. We work in ranges, not false precision. Spot a wrong figure? Report it and we re-check the source and the score.
Data provenance
Listings (Funda), Kadaster & public records, municipal permit history, CBS, STABU construction-cost data and a bank-accepted cost model, public or own sources, traceable per figure. No black box.
Honest boundaries
We don't claim a team of named experts or an uptime SLA we haven't committed to. Credibility rests on the method, the sources and the proof artefacts, formal SLA terms available on request.
We score the downside, not just the upside.
Every analysis flags where a deal can fail. These are the real risk categories our engine assesses per object, surfaced openly, because hiding the downside would make the score worth less, not more.
Permit risk
Likelihood the municipality blocks or delays the change of use, based on zoning and local permit history.
Market risk
Exposure to price and demand movement in the asset class and region between purchase and exit.
Execution & construction risk
Complexity of the build, structural and renovation uncertainty that can push cost and timeline.
Legal risk
Title, objection sensitivity and other legal factors that can stall a project.
Liquidity risk
How quickly the finished asset can realistically be sold or refinanced.
Return risk
Sensitivity of the modelled return to interest, cost and timeline assumptions.
Clear boundaries build trust.
- Investment or financial advice, you and your committee keep the decision.
- A return guarantee, a score is a forward-looking screening, not a promise.
- A due-diligence replacement, every figure is a flag to investigate, not a conclusion.
- A backtested track record we don't have, we show the method and the data, not invented results.
- A bank-grade screening: cost, risk and financeability calibrated on a bank-accepted model.
- Traceable to the source, you see the data and the rationale behind every number.
- Honest about ranges and uncertainty instead of false precision.
- Faster triage so your scarce hours go only to deals that earn them.
Built in the Netherlands, engineered for any market. NL is the production tier; US deal flow is live, with further markets in rollout.