Artifact

What do they actually do

Artifact is a web-based workspace for designing electrical systems. Engineers use it to build a shared parts library, draw system-level schematics, trace nets and pinouts, manage versions of their designs, and generate synchronized outputs like BOMs, pin tables, and cable/harness drawings. The app is live and accessible via the company’s site and login portal, and the company positions it as a single source of truth that keeps documentation in sync with the diagram Artifact homepage News page.

Today it primarily replaces ad‑hoc tools like Visio, PDFs, and spreadsheets with a collaborative, versioned ECAD‑style environment for teams building complex electrical systems. Early users include aerospace, defense, automotive, robotics, and industrial teams; the company is early-stage and growing its product and integrations from this base Artifact homepage YC profile.

Who are their target customer(s)

• Aerospace/defense electrical systems engineers: They manage interdependent subsystems and strict compliance. Manual datasheet entry and scattered docs create traceability gaps and costly errors during design reviews and certification.
• Automotive wiring/harness engineering teams: They coordinate large harnesses and connectors across many variants. When drawings and parts lists fall out of sync, it causes assembly defects, delays, and rework.
• Robotics and industrial automation hardware teams: They integrate sensors, actuators, and custom PCBs. Context switching across diagrams, PDFs, and spreadsheets slows iteration and makes tracing nets/pinouts error‑prone.
• Manufacturing, integration, and test engineers at OEMs/suppliers: They need accurate, machine‑readable outputs for procurement and assembly. Mismatches between diagrams and BOMs trigger build delays and line‑side fixes.
• Small hardware startups and cross‑functional product teams: They rely on ad‑hoc files with poor version control. Collaboration is slow and it’s hard to keep design docs, procurement info, and build outputs consistent.

How would they acquire their first 10, 50, and 100 customers

• First 10: Run 6–12 week paid pilots with known aerospace/defense and robotics teams under NDA, with a scoped SOW and 1–2 measurable outcomes (e.g., deliver error‑free BOM and harness drawings for one subsystem). Provide white‑glove onboarding and rapid product tweaks to capture case studies Artifact product/exports YC profile.
• First 50: Leverage initial case studies for referrals and targeted outreach to automotive and industrial teams. Offer short, outcome‑focused engagements and joint workshops with procurement/integration, while a field engineer builds requested CAD/PLM integrations and measures ROI for sales proof points Artifact exports & integrations YC profile.
• First 100: Launch self‑serve trials with templates and automated onboarding (import parts, AI datasheet parsing) to reduce time‑to‑value. Build a channel program with contract manufacturers, harness houses, and CAD consultancies; use trade shows and targeted search to capture procurement/engineering intent YC roadmap mentions AI parser Artifact product.

What is the rough total addressable market

Top-down context:

Artifact sits between ECAD software and wiring‑harness/electrical‑systems design tools. The ECAD market is estimated at roughly $2.8–3.0B in 2024 and projected to grow toward ~$6.9B by 2035 MRFR ECAD market. The more specific wiring‑harness design software segment is smaller, around ~$225M in 2024 with ~10% CAGR 360iResearch wiring harness design software.

Bottom-up calculation:

Assume ~100,000 relevant engineering seats globally across aerospace/defense (≈30k), automotive OEM/Tier‑1/2 and harness suppliers (≈40k), and robotics/industrial integrators (≈30k). At a blended $2,500 per seat per year for SaaS (mid‑market pricing below legacy enterprise tools), TAM ≈ $250M annually. This aligns with published wiring‑harness design software market estimates and represents Artifact’s initial wedge within the broader ECAD space 360iResearch wiring harness design software MRFR ECAD market.

Assumptions:

• Seat count distribution across verticals approximates current industry staffing patterns for system/harness design teams.
• Blended annual pricing of ~$2,500/seat reflects SaaS adoption with team collaboration features, below traditional enterprise ECAD/harness pricing.
• Initial TAM focuses on system‑level electrical and harness documentation workflows, not the entire ECAD/PLM market.

Who are some of their notable competitors

• Zuken E3.series: Purpose‑built wiring‑harness and electrical‑system design used widely in automotive, aerospace, and industrial supply chains; generates manufacturing‑ready formboards, wire lists, and reports, with MCAD/PLM integrations.
• Siemens Capital: Enterprise platform for electrical systems and harness design with rules‑driven validation, variant management, cost modeling, and end‑to‑end traceability; common at large OEMs with heavy process control needs.
• Dassault Systèmes CATIA / 3DEXPERIENCE Electrical: Electrical engineering within a 3D/PLM platform that ties schematics, 3D harness routing, and manufacturing outputs into the mechanical model; strong when customers want tight ECAD–MCAD integration in one environment.
• Altium (Altium Designer / Altium 365): PCB‑first toolset with cloud collaboration, version control, supplier data, and BOM workflows; competes when teams prioritize PCB‑to‑BOM processes and managed collaboration over specialized harness tooling.
• Autodesk Fusion 360 / EAGLE: Integrated ECAD–MCAD environment with PCB capture, BOM export, and cloud collaboration; adopted by smaller teams or mechanically‑driven projects needing boards+enclosures rather than full harness manufacturing features.