@JoinOdin My mantra is “nothing tests conviction like career risk.” Concentration by design for some, diversification for others. Lean into your own psychological strengths. Not all brains/guts are created equal.
@davidycli Let’s chill on AI funds “returning 5-10x net”. There will be some, as there always are, but AI funds are new. There’s no broad sample set of realized funds. I’ll bet the median is worse than ever.
Good debate happening right now about VC portfolio construction, but no receipts. @IndicatorVC decided to share all the details of a ~4x NET/>1x DPI 2018 fund (gross is meaningless), and how we view the strategy as AUM scales. Feedback welcome!
https://t.co/j1CoUGiRRw
@johnfelix123 great thread! We @indicator published the full construction of our '18 fund with actual numbers. @stepstone has some great data they've shared in aggregate and we hope this provides a kernel of context. Feedback welcome!
https://t.co/j1CoUGiRRw
1/ The VC world loves a good binary debate.
“Concentrated funds outperform.”
“Diversification is better for capturing the power law.”
Both sides argue like it’s obvious. Both sides are missing the point.
Here's the nuance most people ignore 👇
@Trace_Cohen@Struhl@PeterJ_Walker This is super cool! But it's also interesting how big the dispersion is between data sources. Carta is the best, especially for <$150M funds, as it's the closest to the ground truth data. Still, a 15% swing is material!
See data here.
https://t.co/idgFLIsTQY
@PeterJ_Walker THE FOLLOWING SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED AS A SOLICITATION TO INVEST IN ANY FUND OF SECURITY.
Here is the real data as of 12/31/25. This shows our 2018 fund at a 4.09x TVPI, 1.05x DPI, and 29% IRR.
@PeterJ_Walker The same goes for net DPI and net IRR
DPI delta was small, as the net number was 1.04x, with the Carta (gross) number being 1.05x. The difference is the small realized carry (it takes a long time to get your carry check guys!)