AI Data Brokers Compared: Troveo vs BizBuyData vs SimpleClosure vs DataVendor (and micro1, Polyshares, Mercor)

These programs aren't interchangeable. Mode's BizBuyData, micro1, Polyshares and Mercor buy or license your data directly for a negotiated payment. Troveo licenses it on your behalf and pays you on every sale. SimpleClosure's AssetHub mainly serves startups that are shutting down. DataVendor is a marketplace for code, RL environments and tasksets, with operational data listed as coming soon.

Who wrote this, and how did we compare?

DataLicensingAudit.com is a paid referral partner of Mode's BizBuyData program. If a company we introduce licenses data through Mode, Mode pays us a fee. That is a reason to be skeptical of us. To keep this fair:

• Every fact about a program comes from that program's own public page, viewed on October 29, 2026, or from named press coverage. Where we rely on a third-party comparison, Regulr, we say so.
• We list each program's weaknesses, including Mode's.
• We have not independently verified any program's payouts. Published ranges are marketing figures, not offers.

Our full disclosure and methodology are linked. Most programs in this market pay referral fees to whoever introduces a company, so it's worth asking anyone advising you who pays them.

How do the programs compare at a glance?

Sources: Mode, Troveo, SimpleClosure, DataVendor, micro1, Polyshares, Mercor, Regulr.

What is BizBuyData, and who is it for?

BizBuyData.com is the brand for the company data program run by Mode Mobile, LLC, doing business as mode.inc (Mode ToS); bizbuydata.com redirects to Mode's program page. Mode's intake form says "Mode is the direct buyer and payer" (intake). It exports and de-identifies an "agreed copy" of your records, and your originals stay with you. You approve systems and date ranges before export, and Mode says no passwords are handed over.

Strengths, from Mode's own materials:

• The lowest published headcount floors we found for professional firms: 6+ employees for legal and 10+ for accounting, finance and medical (data.mode.inc). Many other buyers publish 20–30+ minimums; Polyshares, which publishes none, is the exception.
• The widest published range among the programs above, $100K–$5M, though Mode calls its calculator illustrative.
• A broad named source list of 20 systems, including AutoCAD, Paychex and ServiceTitan, which suits non-tech businesses.
• Nonprofits are explicitly eligible (Business Wire).
• Mode says it built its own de-identification tools after other vendors wouldn't let it audit their PII removal (Business Wire).

Watch-outs:

• Slower published timeline. About three months from first conversation to payment, versus Mercor's 2–4 weeks after signing and Polyshares' net 30–60. The October 13 release described payment "expected within approximately 60 days."
• Inconsistent thresholds. The program page says 30+ for general businesses, the launch release said 20, and the referral page lists 10/15/50 targets limited to the US, Canada, UK and Australia. Confirm during intake.
• One-time sale. Unlike Troveo's model, you're paid for the agreed copy, not per downstream sale. Read the exclusivity terms.
• Not an offer until it's written. Mode's terms say published figures "are not offers" and don't guarantee Mode will make one.
• No insurance in place. On The LFG Show, CEO Dan Novaes said Mode is "working on" a third-party insurance policy for a potential data leak. Nothing on Mode's site describes one.
• Company background. Mode is best known for consumer earning apps and the EarnPhone. It reports raising $100M+ mostly from retail investors under Regulation A+ (investor FAQ). Expect to see consumer-app reviews when you search the company; judge the data program on its contract.

We cover Mode in more depth in our BizBuyData review.

What is Troveo, and who is it for?

Troveo pitches "recurring revenue": it anonymizes your data "to a documented standard," licenses it on terms you approve, and pays you "on every sale, not just the first." It says there's no OAuth into your systems; it guides you through the export instead.

Strengths:

• Upside beyond one sale. Troveo's illustrative example shows a dataset sold to a frontier lab for $200,000, then to three more buyers, totaling $850,000. It labels this "illustrative example · actual terms scoped per partnership."
• Scale claims: "$20M+ paid to licensors," "40+ active buyers," and an average of "4×" sales per dataset (self-reported).
• Broad system coverage, including code and data warehouses (GitHub, Snowflake, Databricks) and business platforms (ServiceNow, Workday, SAP).
• Confidentiality: "Your company is never named publicly — buyers are confidentially introduced only after an agreement is signed."

Watch-outs:

• Payment depends on future sales. Recurring revenue is potential, not committed. Ask what the first sale is likely to be and when.
• Fee split not shown on the page we reviewed; Regulr describes the model as a percentage of net license fees. Get it in writing.
• Wider distribution. Multiple buyers means more parties holding a copy of your de-identified data. That may be fine, but weigh it against an exclusive one-time license.
• Self-interested content. Troveo publishes a large library of guides that rank well. It's a principal, so read them as you'd read ours: as an interested party.

What is SimpleClosure AssetHub, and who is it for?

SimpleClosure is a platform for winding down startups. Its AssetHub product helps founders recover value from two asset types: SourceCode (repositories, documentation, testing) and WorkspaceData ("communications, documents, designs, tickets, workflows," across tools like Slack, Google Drive, email, Notion and Figma). Buyers include, per the page, "leading AI foundation labs, reinforcement learning environment builders, and other technology companies."

Strengths:

• The natural choice if you're already shutting down: asset sale and wind-down in one process.
• Handles code and workspace data together, and says every dataset is processed for PII before licensing.
• Offers sale or licensing, plus help "from offer through the final sale or licensing transaction."

Watch-outs:

• Built for closures. Regulr reports AssetHub opened to operating companies in September 2026; confirm directly.
• No payout range on the page; Regulr reports "tens to hundreds of thousands."
• Pricing and timelines sit behind collapsed FAQs we couldn't read. Ask for them before you engage.

What is DataVendor, and who is it for?

DataVendor, built by HUD, is a marketplace that "matches valuable data, code, and technical expertise with AI companies." Its supply-types page lists five kinds of supply: RL environments, tasksets, codebases, zip bundles, and operational data (coming soon), meaning CRM exports, SaaS data and SOPs. HubSpot and Salesforce connectors are "not live yet."

Strengths:

• You set the price. Vendors set per-asset pricing; checkout runs through Stripe. Buyers can sample fungible items like tasks and environments.
• Built for technical supply. GitHub connector, an estimator for codebases, and homepage sample listings for codebases priced from $68K to $220K.
• Data proposals let you signal what you could deliver without building a full listing.

Watch-outs:

• Not yet a fit for most operating businesses. If your value is in email, chat and CRM rather than code, the operational-data category isn't live.
• Marketplace dynamics. A listing is an offer to the market, not a commitment from a buyer. You may wait.
• Fees not published on the pages we reviewed. Ask before listing.

How do micro1, Polyshares and Mercor compare?

These three aren't in the title, but they're the most active direct buyers and belong in any honest comparison.

micro1. Business Insider reported micro1 committed to spend $1 billion on company data over 12 months. Its program page publishes tiers: $100K–500K for qualified enterprise partnerships, $500K–2M for large-scale datasets, and $2M+ for highly unique data. It asks for 30+ full-time employees and English-language records, licenses only to buyers in the U.S. and allied countries, and pays within 30 days of invoicing after a 30-day review. It also offers to license trajectories from companies' own AI agents for "$1–2M annually."

Polyshares. A direct buyer that says it is the counterparty, charges "no fee, no commission," makes an offer within one to two weeks and pays net 30–60. It doesn't set a headcount minimum, saying "the length and texture of the record matter more." Its license "does not cover what you hold on behalf of your own clients," and it doesn't disclose which labs take which data.

Mercor. Its data program connects to "100+ supported tools," says no AI lab sees your raw data, cites SOC 2 Type II, and pays "typically… within 2-4 weeks of the signed agreement." It publishes no payout range. Its target-industry list includes legal "case files, discovery docs" and healthcare "clinical notes," categories that carry heavy confidentiality obligations; scope carefully. Business Insider reported former Mercor contractors allege in a lawsuit that the company encouraged them to upload work materials without employer consent; Mercor has denied the claims in court.

What other programs exist?

Regulr counts more than 30 buyer programs. A few with figures on their own pages:

One-time sale or revenue share: which model pays better?

There's no public data to settle it, so reason it through. The three models put risk in different places:

• Direct buyer, one-time payment (Mode, micro1, Polyshares, Mercor). The buyer takes the resale risk. You get a fixed number on a defined schedule and are done. The cost is any upside if your data turns out to be in high demand, plus whatever exclusivity you grant.
• Licensing agent with revenue share (Troveo). You keep the upside of multiple sales and share the risk that buyers don't materialize. Payment timing depends on when buyers buy. You also accept that more parties may hold a copy of your de-identified data.
• Marketplace (DataVendor). You set the price and the market decides. That suits standardized technical assets like code, environments and tasksets better than one-off corporate archives.

If you need a known amount by a known date, a direct buyer is the better fit. If you can wait and your records are unusual, deep or in a high-demand field, a revenue-share model may be worth more over time. Either way, the license terms decide the real outcome: exclusivity, duration, permitted downstream uses and what happens to your data if the buyer is acquired or shuts down.

Which program fits your situation?

Whatever you choose, get more than one written offer. Published ranges overlap almost completely, so the differences that matter are in the contract.

What should you ask every buyer or broker?

1. Who is the counterparty and payer? Mode, micro1 and Polyshares say they are; marketplaces aren't.
2. Exclusive or non-exclusive? For how long, and covering which records?
3. What triggers payment, and can any of it be clawed back?
4. How is data de-identified, and can you review a sample first? micro1 says companies can review representative samples.
5. Who gets a copy downstream, and does the buyer commit not to re-identify?
6. What do you warrant about your rights to the data, and what's the indemnity?
7. What is excluded by default? Credentials, client-confidential and privileged files, tax return information, PHI and customer data held under contract should be out unless counsel says otherwise.
8. Who is paying the person who referred you? Including us.

Business Insider reported six-figure "exploding offers" that expire in 48 hours, and an AI trainer who was offered a stolen codebase. A legitimate buyer will give you time for counsel to review.