Agentic land due diligence
infrastructure.
Pestren is an AI-powered land intelligence and geospatial aggregation platform. Our swarm of AI agents queries one parcel or a thousand, gathers and reads physical records and geospatial data per county, reasons privately, suggests action, and cites every claim, in minutes.
Q“Can I set up a grain farm here?”
Yes. Grain is permitted by right.
- zoningAG-20, row crop by rightcounty code
- soilClass 2, Capay silty claySSURGO
- water3.2 AF per acreirrigation district
- farmable51.3 of 57.1 haNAIP 0.6 m
The world spends $10 billion a year valuing land, and still gets it wrong.
- $9.94B spent a year valuing property Real estate valuation services market, 2025
- $116.4B of US property already distressed MSCI balance of distress, Q1 2025 · up 23% year on year
- $10–20K diligence on one complex parcel Buyer pays up front, and forfeits it if the deal dies
- Legal · Financial · Technical · Environmental · Market
- Developers · Insurers · Lenders · Carbon buyers
The industry serves the parcel you already picked. Nobody serves the hundreds you had to reject to find it. That is where the decision is actually made.
Sources: MSCI Capital Trends, US Distress Tracker · Research and Markets · CrowdStreet on the acquisition funnel · published buyer-paid diligence schedules
Built for the people who have to be right about land.
A family grower with half a hectare, an insurer with a book of a thousand addresses, a ministry setting policy for a district. Same evidence, same citations, built into whatever they already use.
You rate a postcode. You pay the claim on a plot.
So you write the risks you should refuse, and lose the ones you should want.
What you can ask for instead- Send a list of addresses, get an answer on every one
- Test a claim against what the satellite saw, on the date it was filed
- Old industrial ground and contamination, flagged before you quote
- Re-run the whole book at renewal and see only what changed
- Count how many policies sit in one flood cell or one fire shed
“For these 1,200 addresses: which flooded before, and where is my exposure stacked?”
We answer, citedOne row per address, problems ranked first, and the register behind every answer.
The acreage on the deed is not the acreage that pays.
A fund sets a threshold, the borrower attests to it, and the loan is sized on both.
What you can ask for instead- What share of these acres is actually under regenerative practice
- Productive acreage measured, not read off a drawn boundary
- Cover cropping and tillage verified season by season, from orbit
- Six years of cropping history before you commit to the seventh
- Timber, water and mineral rights valued alongside the soil
- Liens, UCC filings and ownership chains resolved in one pass
“Is half this farm really under regenerative practice, and how many acres is that?”
We answer, citedThe share, the acre count it rests on, and the season-by-season evidence behind both.
The deal-killer that surfaces on day forty-five.
You screen hundreds on instinct so that one of them gets checked properly.
What you can ask for instead- Filter by zoning, overlays and land-use constraints
- Buildable acres, slope and setbacks measured, not estimated
- Distance to sewer, power, frontage and rail, measured for every parcel
- What sits next door: contamination, floodplain, easements, protected ground
- Highest and best use tested against what the code allows
- Re-screened when the zoning map is amended, so a stale pass gets caught
- Rejections recorded with their reason, so they stay rejected
“Of these 80 parcels, which allow 40 units an acre and have sewer within 500 feet?”
We answer, citedThe shortlist, plus the reason each of the other 71 was dropped.
Credits fail audit for a choice made before planting.
Over-crediting traces to which land you chose, and what you compared it against.
What you can ask for instead- Land-cover change measured back decades, not asserted
- Control land matched on evidence, with the match explained
- Tens of thousands of acres screened before a site is committed
- Credit yield as a number the chosen site can deliver, not a hypothesis
- A baseline an auditor can re-run rather than take on trust
“Across this region, which parcels were not already regenerating, and what are the controls?”
We answer, citedEligible parcels with their cover history, and matched controls with the matching explained.
Eight approvals, eight agencies, one site you already bought.
A site that fails one of them is not slow to approve, it is withdrawn.
What you can ask for instead- Grid capacity, water, wetland, flood and protected land in one view
- The authority that actually decides each approval, named
- Candidate sites compared side by side on identical evidence
- Utilities and GIS resolved without standing up a GIS team
“Compare these six candidate sites on grid capacity, water, wetland and who signs off.”
We answer, citedOne table, six sites, every constraint sourced and every deciding authority named.
The screen is the job, and it has no tooling.
You evaluate far more land than you will ever hold, on spreadsheets and phone calls.
What you can ask for instead- Off-market ownership, portfolios and contact paths surfaced
- Adjacent ownership stitched into assemblage opportunities
- Protected status, easements and conservation overlays flagged
- A whole region ranked before anyone visits a site
“Which parcels here are over 200 acres, unprotected, and next to land we already hold?”
We answer, citedThe candidate set with owner, acreage, protection status and the neighbours worth approaching.
Proving what land can do, one field at a time.
Nobody says what a switch costs in the early years, how long it runs, or how often it works.
What you can ask for instead- Live market insights and data-driven comps on every parcel
- What regenerative did to yield on comparable fields, season by season
- How long the dip ran, how often it recovered, what the switch commits you to
- Supply risk read across a sourcing region before the season, not after it
- Six years of cropping history
- Farmable acreage measured, not read off a drawn boundary
- A region screened for suitability before acreage is committed
“With a 60% drought risk this season, which of these fields can still carry a rice crop?”
We answer, citedThe fields that held through past dry years, with the water source and soil behind each one.
The proposal is unpaid. The land work behind it is not.
Every pre-assignment draft carries the same GIS and diligence, and most never turn into a fee.
What you can ask for instead- Hundreds of acres screened in minutes, before the work is even priced
- Cited evidence that goes straight into the draft, sources attached
- The assembled, cited evidence as an API or a report
- Comps, market rents and precedents alongside the constraints
- The same standard on every parcel, so proposals compare
- Ask, compare and check rather than reading someone else's PDF
“Constraints, authorities and precedents for this site, with sources for a client proposal.”
We answer, citedA sourced constraint set you can hand a client, not a screenshot of a map.
Plug into any system.
One layer, four ways in. API, MCP, the platform, or data files, and the API itself is two calls: ask a question across a set of parcels, or fetch the fields behind them.
We cite the public record. Your work on it stays yours.
Every answer names a source you can open yourself. What you asked, which parcels you screened, and the client discussion around them are not part of anyone else's answer. We do not train models on your data, and we contractually prohibit our providers from doing so.
Your data stays yours
We do not train models on your questions, coordinates, uploaded boundaries or documents, we contractually prohibit our providers from doing so, and we never sell them on.
What gets cited is public record
Registers, surveys, and satellite passes: FAO, national agencies, ESA Sentinel, NASA, SoilGrids and live weather. Your own parcels never become a source in anyone else's answer.
Client work stays in your account
The parcels you screen, the reports you assemble, and the discussion around them are visible to your account only.
Access is by key, and revocable
Every call is authenticated with a token you issue and can revoke from your dashboard. Nothing reads without it.
Confidence tiers
Every fact is tagged literature-only, field-verified, or lab-confirmed. You always see which, and what it rests on.
Certification, honestly
We are not audited or certified yet. Independent attestation and a formal data processing agreement come with the enterprise tier. Ask what we can commit to in writing today.
Security questions, or anything you need in writing for a client: core@pestren.com
What's your vibe on ungrounded answers?
Pause and see which vibe matches your energy after knowing about Pestren and share your thoughts.
Questions, answered.
The things partners and growers ask us most, starting with where the intelligence actually comes from.
- Europe: LPIS (Land Parcel Identification System), CAP declarations
- USA: USDA Cropland Data Layer (CDL)
- Brazil: CONAB, MapBiomas
- India: state agriculture departments, ICAR institutes, FASAL outputs, plus PMFBY and the Digital Crop Survey where access permits (both restricted)
- Australia: ABARES
- Canada: AAFC Crop Inventory
timestamp so you always know how recent it is.
literature-only, field-verified, or lab-confirmed, so you always see whether it's backed by published sources, ground truth from the field, or lab results.