Despite seeing 100x revenue multiples reminiscent of 2021, VCs are not accelerating their fund deployment or rushing back to fundraise. This more measured pace indicates a potential lesson learned from the last bubble, where rapid deployment led to poor vintage performance and pressure from LPs.
Mega-funds can justify paying "stupid prices" at the seed stage because they aren't underwriting a seed-stage return. Instead, they are buying an option on the next, much larger round where they'll deploy real capital. This allows them to outbid smaller funds who need to generate returns from the initial investment itself.
VCs are willing to "hold their nose" and pay extremely high multiples for one or two exceptional companies they feel are essential to win. However, unlike in 2021, they are not applying this undisciplined, high-valuation strategy to their entire portfolio, demonstrating a more disciplined approach to portfolio construction.
The current fundraising environment is the most binary in recent memory. Startups with the "right" narrative—AI-native, elite incubator pedigree, explosive growth—get funded easily. Companies with solid but non-hype metrics, like classic SaaS growers, are finding it nearly impossible to raise capital. The middle market has vanished.
Valuations don't jump dramatically; they 'sneak up on you.' An investor might balk at a $45M cap when they expected $40M. But the fear of missing a potential unicorn is stronger than the desire for a slightly better price, causing a gradual, batch-over-batch inflation of valuation norms.
The standard VC heuristic—that each investment must potentially return the entire fund—is strained by hyper-valuations. For a company raising at ~$200M, a typical fund needs a 60x return, meaning a $12 billion exit is the minimum for the investment to be a success, not a grand slam.
Aggregate venture capital investment figures are misleading. The market is becoming bimodal: a handful of elite AI companies absorb a disproportionate share of capital, while the vast majority of other startups, including 900+ unicorns, face a tougher fundraising and exit environment.
Seed funds that primarily act as a supply chain for Series A investors—optimizing for quick markups rather than fundamental value—are failing. This 'factory model' pushes them into the hyper-competitive 'white hot center' of the market, where deals are priced to perfection and outlier returns are rare.
In frothy markets with multi-billion dollar valuations, a key learned behavior from 2021 is for VCs to sell 10-20% of their stake during a large funding round. This provides early liquidity and distributions (DPI) to LPs, who are grateful for the cash back, and de-risks the fund's position.
AI startups' explosive growth ($1M to $100M ARR in 2 years) will make venture's power law even more extreme. LPs may need a new evaluation model, underwriting VCs across "bundles of three funds" where they expect two modest performers (e.g., 1.5x) and one massive outlier (10x) to drive overall returns.
Contrary to the common VC advice to "play the game on the field" during hot markets, Founder Collective reduces its check size for high-valuation deals. This strategy allows them to maintain exposure to promising companies while intentionally keeping the fund's overall weighted average cost basis low.