To generate returns on a $10B acquisition, a PE firm needs a $25B exit, which often means an IPO. They must underwrite this IPO at a discount to public comps, despite having paid a 30% premium to acquire the company, creating a significant initial value gap to overcome from day one.
Related Insights
Navan's post-IPO stock drop, despite strong revenue, is a troubling sign for the venture ecosystem. It highlights that even a multi-billion-dollar outcome can be considered a 'bummer' and may not generate sufficient returns for large, late-stage funds, resetting expectations for what constitutes a truly successful exit in the current market.
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.
Deals like Naveen Rao's $1B raise at a $5B pre-money valuation seem to break venture math. However, investors justify this by stipulating that proven founders in hard infrastructure markets compress key risks, making market size, not execution, the primary remaining question.
During hype cycles, massive venture funding allows startups to offer products below cost to capture market share. If the company fails to achieve a high-value exit, the Limited Partner's capital has effectively been transferred to consumers in the form of discounts, without generating a financial return for the investors.
The paper wealth generated on IPO day is a misleading metric due to lockup periods and market volatility. A more accurate mental model for an investor's actual return is the company's market capitalization 18 months after the public offering. This timeframe provides a truer 'locked in value' after initial hype and selling pressure subsides.
Sequoia Capital's Roloff Botha calculates that with ~$250 billion invested into venture capital annually, the industry needs to generate nearly $1 trillion in returns for investors. This translates to a staggering $1.5 trillion in total company exit value every year, a figure that is difficult to imagine materializing consistently.
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.
The venture capital return model has shifted so dramatically that even some multi-billion-dollar exits are insufficient. This forces VCs to screen for 'immortal' founders capable of building $10B+ companies from inception, making traditionally solid businesses run by 'mortal founders' increasingly uninvestable by top funds.
With trillion-dollar IPOs likely, the old model where early VCs win by having later-stage VCs "mark up" their deals is obsolete. The new math dictates that significant ownership in a category winner is immensely valuable at any stage, fundamentally changing investment strategy for the entire industry.
When evaluating a deal, sophisticated LPs look beyond diversifying customers and suppliers. They analyze the number of viable exit channels. A company whose only realistic exit path is an IPO faces significant hold period risk if public markets turn, making exit diversification a key resiliency metric.
