Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

Notable Capital maintains an 84% term sheet win rate. Managing Partner Glenn Solomon attributes this to their small, focused team 'swarming' opportunities—where every partner and platform team member actively engages in the process—a stark contrast to siloed mega-funds.

Related Insights

A16Z’s verticalization was driven by a principle from legendary investor Dave Swenson: an investing team shouldn't exceed five people. This small size ensures that investment discussions remain true conversations, preventing them from becoming unwieldy presentations and preserving decision quality as the firm scales.

A smaller venture fund can catalyze a competitive funding round even without the capital to lead it. By writing the first term sheet for a hot company like Robinhood, Social Leverage forced the market, prompting larger firms like Index Ventures to step in with a better offer.

While every VC has a network, true sourcing edge comes from building a brand and belief system that resonates deeply with founders. This makes founders proactively seek you out, creating a high-quality inbound channel with deals that competitors aren't seeing, allowing a small fund to punch above its weight.

CVC operates its record-breaking private equity fund not by hunting mega-deals, but by empowering deeply embedded local teams. These teams leverage cultural fluency and long-term relationships to source and execute upper mid-market deals, outmaneuvering more centralized competitors.

Rather than competing with mega-firms to lead rounds, small or solo GPs can secure allocations in top deals by being a complementary, neutral "Switzerland" investor. This strategy involves writing a smaller, non-threatening check as the second or third investor on a cap table.

In an environment of large, multi-stage funds, smaller firms differentiate by providing stable, long-term partner relationships and highly specialized networks. This appeals to founders who value dedicated support over just a large check and high valuation from a firm with high employee turnover.

A smaller fund size enables investments in seemingly niche but potentially lucrative sectors, such as software for dental labs. A larger fund would have to pass on such a deal, not because the founder is weak, but because the potential exit isn't large enough to satisfy their fund return model.

By intentionally limiting its team size to around 230 people, the firm ensures senior partners can provide deep mentorship to the next generation. This structure prevents the team from becoming internally focused and keeps them hunting for deals, which are "not in the office."

Parker Gale intentionally keeps its fund and target company size small. This is a deliberate strategy, not a limitation. It allows them to operate in a target-rich environment with less competition from mega-funds and provides a clear exit path by selling to larger PE firms that need smaller, proven platforms to build upon.

Small, dedicated venture funds compete against large, price-insensitive firms by sourcing founders *before* they become mainstream. They find an edge in niche, high-signal communities like the Thiel Fellowship interviewing committee or curated groups of technical talent. This allows them to identify and invest in elite founders at inception, avoiding bidding wars and market noise.