🧵 FOR LPs/GPs in VC: DPI Analysis of Some Seed VC Funds in Our Portfolio Now in “Carry” | Ed Zimmerman | 49 comments
🧵 FOR LPs/GPs in VC: DPI Analysis of Some Seed VC Funds in Our Portfolio Now in “Carry” We (Betsy Zimmerman & I) posted a 🧵 arising from discussions with VC fund managers (GPs) & the limited partners (LPs) who invest in them (we’re personally LPs in >100 VC funds + another >100 through First Close Partners) about expectation for early DPI from seed & pre-seed funds. (DPI = "Distributed to Paid In Capital" - i.e., cash $ back to LPs). Generally, it takes 7 or more years from vintage (the 1st time the VC fund calls capital) for seed/pre-seed VCs to really return any meaningful cash to LPs. This is part of why the asset class rewards "patient capital" & impatience is a mismatch for this asset class. TLDR: VC should NOT ever be thought of as a "get rich quick" strategy. VC, at its best, should be a "get rich slowly but together (with founders, execs, etc) & build big" strategy and, for sure, that requires patience for LPs and GPs alike. 🧵here: https://lnkd.in/eUBhpGk7 For our analysis, we sorted >100 VC funds in which we’ve personally invested over the last decade+. We filtered for stage (logically, growth funds should return $ to LPs sooner than seed funds). We focused on our top performing seed & early stage VC funds, which are already “in carry” (they’ve returned >1x the capital LPs gave them, so now the VCs get an extra % of the “profits”). The above Seed/Early VC funds are among our best performing from a small group in the earlier years of our LP investing (so it's a significant % of our portfolio of seed/early VC funds in that time frame). But the cash on cash wasn't meaningful until year 7 or 8 at the earliest and the inception of that period predates the phenomenon of "Private IPO Rounds" (see Tomasz Tunguz & Josh Kopelman on this topic in 2014/5, which I teach in my VC class Columbia Business School) https://lnkd.in/evPDigkq As Josh Kopelman wrote:"What stood out most was 231 companies raised >$40M in growth rounds in 2014 alone,while ~240 VC-backed IT companies IPO'd in the last 10 yrs...Astounding. I don’t think we’ll fully understand/appreciate the impact of “private IPO” phenomenon for another decade." I think he's right - but if we're not patient with the capital we expressly allocate to seed/pre-seed, we'll be pressuring VCs to sell low (into a down market) rather than allowing them to continue to grow & wait out the cycle. Sure there's risk, but VC is not risk free, nor should VC ever be thought of as a "get rich quick" strategy. We’re not opposed to selling some of a position along the way (esp. opportunistically). We've done that & some of our best performing VCs have too. That is, however, a very different strategy from LPs pressing GPs to push everything to DPI in the first 3 or 4 yrs of a seed fund. | 49 comments on LinkedIn