This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
IRRs work really well in a 12-year bull market but VCs have to make money in good markets and bad. We don’t want to compete for the largest AUM (assets under management) with the biggest firms in a race to build the “Goldman Sachs of VC” but it’s clear that this strategy has had success for some. It’s just math. So it’s about 20%.
The top quartile has distributed 2.03x (vs. 1.68) and the median fund now has distributed 1.27X (vs. The longer the portfolio maintains the same value without distributing back cash, the worse the fund’s ultimate IRR. Based on that metric, the top quartile fund has now distributed 2.03X after 12 years.
I’m observing that IRR is a metric that is becoming an increasing focus in venture, replacing fund return multiple as the key metric of success. I understand the draw of IRR, and – as a fund draws to a close – there’s no question it’s an important metric. Recycling hurts IRR. management fee).
As two fund managers employing Flexible VC, we think it is a healthy addition to the ecosystem and will yield more predictable and stable healthy returns for investors. Too often, investment structures force the management team to make decisions between misaligned growth and investment (return) objectives. Early liquidity.
Good investors use the valuation discussions to gauge the business savvy of the management team and to understand their ability to appreciate and deal with economic market forces that set values. For individual angels and others investing their own money, this may be more fluid than for someone with responsibility for a managed fund.
3x the invested capital net of fees over a period of about ten years for a net IRR in the low twenties). Note: TVPI stands for total value of investments net of fees / invested capital; DPI stands for distributions (= cash to LP’s) / invested capital). So, is 10x the new 3x ?
VC’s also manage multiple funds that get deployed over 10+ years, with new investments happening over the first 2-3 years of a fund’s life. This may not hurt the ultimate exit value of these companies, but the passage of time will hurt the fund’s ultimate IRR. Unevenly distributed, but broadly optimistic. Reshuffling the deck.
But the world you lead will be much different from the one your professors knew or your predecessors managed. Yet in the face of all this change, traditional firms continue to embrace a management ethos that values efficiency over innovation. To manage these employees companies create metrics to control, measure and reward execution.
As Bill points out, many funds are sitting on huge paper gains which translate into large TVPI, MOC, gross IRR, or whatever the current trendy way to measure things are. We have already seen examples of founders and management obtaining liquidity in front of investors. However, the DPI is the interesting number from a real perspective.
As you can see from the chart their data suggests there are about $25 billion of VC distributions per year in the US. The better way to think about VC returns is, do the firms consistently beat alternative asset clases on an IRR basis to adjust for the increased risk and lack of liquidity? The top 2% do not drive 98% of the returns.
These mutual funds “mark-to-market” every day, and fund managers are compensated periodically on this performance. We have already seen examples of founders and management obtaining liquidity in front of investors. Do you feel the need to raise more capital quickly before the prices erode further and bring down your IRR?
One of the folks, Lisa Cawley (Screendoors Managing Director), recently published a blog post called Work with your LPAC, not for your LPAC , which got me thinking about Homebrews LPAC (Limited Partner Advisory Committee). We asked our LPAC about what frameworks theyve seen across their venture portfolios.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content