The 'classic' VC model hunts for unproven talent in niche areas. The now-dominant 'super compounder' model argues the biggest market inefficiency is underestimating the best companies. This justifies investing in obvious winners at any price, believing that outlier returns will cover the high entry cost.

Some companies execute a 3-5 year plan and then revert to average returns. Others 'win by winning'—their success creates new opportunities and network effects, turning them into decade-long compounders that investors often sell too early.

Unsexy markets like plumbing or law have less competition, higher profit margins, and customers who are more receptive to expertise. This creates an environment for faster growth, akin to driving on an empty road.

Earning a high return on invested capital is only half the battle. True compounding requires the ability to redeploy large amounts of capital at similarly high rates. Amphenol achieves this through its disciplined M&A playbook in a fragmented market, answering the crucial question of reinvestment.

The dominant strategy of investing huge sums into companies believed to be generational outliers has a critical failure mode: it can destroy viable businesses. Not every market can absorb hyper-growth, and forcing capital into a 'pretty good' company can lead to churn, stalls, and ultimately, a ruined asset.

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.

Figma's market initially seemed too small to attract major VC interest or intense competition, giving them space to build a defensible product. Founders can gain a significant advantage by working in overlooked spaces, provided they have genuine passion to sustain them for a decade or more.

Ken Griffin warns startups against direct, head-on competition with industry giants, stating, "you're going to lose." To succeed, you must find an asymmetrical advantage—operating "under the radar" or solving niche problems incumbents ignore. Citadel initially did this by hiring unconventional quantitative talent.