Get your free personalized podcast brief
We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.
In a high-interest-rate world, locking up capital in illiquid startups is less attractive. Howard Lindzon, a VC, argues that public markets, full of dislocations caused by momentum traders, offer superior opportunities for diligent investors with liquidity.
Related Insights
Because VCs can't easily sell, they're forced to focus on a company's fundamental value growth over 5-10 years, ignoring short-term price swings. Public market investors can adopt this mindset to gain an edge over the market's obsession with quarterly performance.
Success in late-stage venture resembles trading more than traditional investing—it's about buying and selling on momentum. However, this "new public market" has a critical flaw: while liquidity exists on the way up, it vanishes on the downside, making it impossible to execute a true trading strategy when a correction occurs.
Despite median venture capital funds lagging public indexes like the S&P 500 for a quarter-century, capital continues to pour into the asset class. One LP describes this as 'hope over experience,' as investors are lured by the outlier returns of top funds, even though the average dollar invested underperforms.
Most VC funds fail to generate meaningful returns for LPs. Only the top quartile consistently delivers performance that justifies the risk. The asset class as a whole underperforms, challenging the idea that broader retail access would be beneficial.
The venture capital industry is not a balanced market where returns are evenly distributed. Returns are concentrated among a handful of elite firms. For most other investors and LPs, the model is unsustainable due to high entry valuations and a low probability of success, leading to wasted capital.
Despite perceptions of quick wealth, venture capital is a long-term game. Investors can face periods of 10 years or more without receiving any cash distributions (carry) from their funds. This illiquidity and delayed gratification stand in stark contrast to the more immediate payouts seen in public markets or big tech compensation.
Botha argues venture capital isn't a scalable asset class. Despite massive capital inflows (~$250B/year), the number of significant ($1B+) exits hasn't increased from ~20 per year. The math for industry-wide returns doesn't work, making it a "return-free risk" for many LPs.
The ideal period for venture investment—after a company is known but before its success becomes obvious—has compressed drastically. VCs are now forced to choose between investing in acute uncertainty or paying massive, near-public valuations.
The venture capital paradigm has inverted. Historically, private companies traded at an "illiquidity discount" to their public counterparts. Now, for elite companies, there is an "access premium" where investors pay more for private shares due to scarcity and hype. This makes staying private longer more attractive.
The abundance of private capital means the most successful companies no longer need to go public for growth funding. This disrupts the traditional VC model, where IPOs are a primary exit path, forcing firms to re-evaluate how and when they achieve liquidity for their limited partners, even for their best assets.
