Horowitz categorizes VCs into two types. The all-time greats are "disagreeable" because their independent thinking is crucial. "Agreeable" VCs, who want to be liked, can thrive in boom markets as "heat seekers" by following hot trends, but they often disappear in downturns.

Related Insights

Limited Partners, much like VCs searching for outlier founders, are often looking for fund managers who are "a little off." They value investors who think differently and don't follow the consensus, as this non-traditional approach is seen as the path to generating outsized returns.

Venture capitalists thrive by adopting one of two distinct personas: the "in the flow" consensus-driver focused on speed and connections, or the "out of the flow" contrarian focused on deep, isolated work. Attempting to straddle both paths leads to failure.

The most successful venture investors share two key traits: they originate investments from a first-principles or contrarian standpoint, and they possess the conviction to concentrate significant capital into their winning portfolio companies as they emerge.

In a rising market, the investors taking the most risk generate the highest returns, making them appear brilliant. However, this same aggression ensures they will be hurt the most when the market turns. This dynamic creates a powerful incentive to increase risk-taking, often just before a downturn.

Sequoia's founder taught that the best investments are in individuals who are both exceptional and "not so easy to get along with." These founders challenge convention and refuse to accept the world as it is, a trait that makes them unconventional but also uniquely capable of building category-defining companies.

Ben Horowitz categorizes VCs into two groups. 'Heat-seekers' are often agreeable, chase hot deals, perform well in booms, but fade away. In contrast, long-term 'truffle-hunters' are typically disagreeable, conviction-driven investors who must think for themselves to find non-obvious opportunities and build enduring careers.

Unlike corporate executives who respect hierarchy, top VCs are idea-generators who resist rules. Horowitz states the key to managing a VC firm is proactive organizational design that minimizes potential conflicts, which are far more destructive than in a typical company.

Managing VCs is harder than managing corporate execs. VCs are high-IQ, disagreeable idea generators who dislike rules. The burden is on leadership to design an organization that minimizes conflict, as VCs can easily 'wreck each other's businesses' through competing investments, making interpersonal issues far more destructive.

In today's market, 90% of VCs chase signals, while the top 10% (like Sequoia or Founders Fund) *are* the signal. Their investment creates a powerful self-reinforcing dynamic, attracting the best talent, customers, and follow-on capital to their portfolio companies.

The institutionalization of venture capital as a career path changes investor incentives. At large funds, individuals may be motivated to join hyped deals with well-known founders to advance their careers, rather than taking on the personal risk of backing a contrarian idea with higher return potential.