DOCSLIB.ORG

Picking Winners: a Big Data Approach to Evaluating Startups and Making Venture Capital Investments by Ajay Saini S.B

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Picking Winners: a Big Data Approach to Evaluating Startups and Making Venture Capital Investments by Ajay Saini S.B Picking Winners: A Big Data Approach To Evaluating Startups And Making Venture Capital Investments by Ajay Saini S.B. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2018) Submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Engineering in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 2018 ○c Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2018. All rights reserved. The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now known or hereafter created. Author............................................................. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science May 25, 2018 Certified by . Tauhid Zaman KDD Career Development Professor in Communications and Technology Thesis Supervisor Accepted by. Katrina LaCurts Chair, Master of Engineering Thesis Committee 2 Picking Winners: A Big Data Approach To Evaluating Startups And Making Venture Capital Investments by Ajay Saini Submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science on May 25, 2018, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Engineering in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Abstract We consider the problem of evaluating the quality of startup companies. This can be quite challenging due to the rarity of successful startup companies and the complexity of factors which impact such success. In this work we collect data on tens of thousands of startup companies, their performance, the backgrounds of their founders, and their investors. We develop a novel model for the success of a startup company based on the first passage time of a Brownian motion. The drift and diffusion of the Brownian motion associated with a startup company are a function of features based its sector, founders, and initial investors. All features are calculated using our massive dataset. Using a Bayesian approach, we are able to obtain quantitative insights about the features of successful startup companies from our model. To test the performance of our model, we use it to build a portfolio of companies where the goal is to maximize the probability of having at least one company achieve an exit (IPO or acquisition), which we refer to as winning. This picking winners framework is very gen- eral and can be used to model many problems with low probability, high reward outcomes, such as pharmaceutical companies choosing drugs to develop or studios selecting movies to produce. We frame the construction of a picking winners portfolio as a combinatorial optimization problem and show that a greedy solution has strong performance guarantees. We apply the picking winners framework to the problem of choosing a portfolio of startup companies. Using our model for the exit probabilities, we are able to construct out of sam- ple portfolios which achieve exit rates as high as 60%, which is nearly double that of top venture capital firms. Thesis Supervisor: Tauhid Zaman Title: KDD Career Development Professor in Communications and Technology 3 4 Acknowledgments First, I would like to thank my advisor, Tauhid Zaman, for all of his guidance and mentor- ship throughout the course of this project. His research advising style is exactly the kind that works best for me. He not only gave me the independence to explore problems in the research of my choosing, but also always took the time to work through questions that came up along the way with me. Tauhid always encouraged me to think big in terms of the applications of my work and in the time I worked with him, changed the way I think about problems. His investment in his students and in this project is what made it a truly enjoyable experience. I would also like to thank David Scott Hunter, a graduate student of Tauhid, with whom I began this project. His advice on data collection and modeling insights were invaluable during the first phases of the project. My gratitude also goes out to all the friends I’ve made at MIT. It was the people I spent time with that made my MIT experience as unforgettable and life-changing as it was. Special thanks in particular to both my living group, Pi Lambda Phi, and the MIT Sport Taekwondo team for being such amazing communities and creating so many memorable moments for me. Lastly, I would like to thank my family, whose immense support throughout my life has allowed me to be where I am today. 5 6 Contents 1 Introduction 15 1.1 Our Contributions . 17 2 Literature Review 19 3 Data Analysis 23 3.1 Funding Rounds Data . 24 3.2 Sector, Investor, and Leadership Data and Features . 25 3.2.1 Imputation of Missing Data . 32 4 Model for Startup Company Funding 33 4.1 Brownian Motion Model for Company Value . 33 4.2 Modeling drift and diffusion . 34 4.3 The Data Likelihood . 36 5 Bayesian Model Specification 39 5.1 Homoskedastic Model . 39 5.2 Heteroskedastic Model . 40 5.3 Robust Heteroskedastic Model . 41 5.4 Hierarchical Bayesian Model . 42 5.5 Model Estimation . 43 6 Parameter Estimation Results 45 6.1 Model Fit Scores . 45 7 6.2 Robust Heteroskedastic Model . 46 6.3 Hierarchical Bayesian Model . 49 7 Picking Winners Portfolio 53 7.1 Objective Function . 53 7.2 Independent Events . 54 7.3 Picking Winners and Log-Optimal Portfolios . 56 7.4 Portfolio Construction for Brownian Motion Model . 58 8 Model Validation with Picking Winners Portfolios 61 9 An Online Platform for Venture Capitalists 65 9.1 Company Search and Analysis . 66 9.2 Portfolio Building . 67 9.3 Personalization: Saving Companies and Portfolios . 69 10 Conclusion 71 A Proofs 73 A.1 Proof of Theorem 7.1.1 . 73 A.2 Proof of Lemma 1 . 74 A.3 Proof of Theorem 7.3.1 . 74 A.4 Proof of Theorem 7.3.2 . 76 B Sector Names 81 C Top School Names 83 D Calculation of Company Variance 85 E Sector Groupings for Hierarchical Model 87 F Details of the MCMC Sampler 89 F.1 Details of the Metropolis Step . 89 8 F.2 The Homoskedastic Model Parameters . 90 F.3 The Heteroskedastic and Robust Heteroskedastic Model Parameters . 91 F.4 The Hierarchical Model Parameters . 91 G Companies Chosen in the Portfolios of the four Models 95 9 10 List of Figures 3-1 (left) Histogram of the founding year of the startup companies in our dataset. (right) Distribution of the maximum funding round achieved up to 2016 broken down by company founding year. 26 3-2 (left) Plot of the evolution of funding rounds for different startup com- panies. (right) Boxplot of the time to reach different maximum funding rounds before 2016. 26 3-3 Pie graph of the funding round distribution of companies with maximum acquisition fraction less than 0.5 (left) and greater than 0.5 (right). 28 3-4 Pie graph of the funding round distribution of companies with competitors acquisition less than 0.5 (left) and greater than 0.5 (right). 29 3-5 Pie graph of the funding round distribution of companies with Executive IPO less than 0.5 (left) and greater than 0.5 (right). 32 6-1 Boxplots of the 훽2010 sample values for selected sector (left) and non-sector (right) features. 47 6-2 Boxplots of the 훾 sample values for selected sector (left) and non-sector (right) features. 48 6-3 Boxplots of the 훽2010 sample values for selected features across industry groups. 50 6-4 Boxplots of the 훾 sample values for selected features across industry groups. 51 11 8-1 Performance curve for different model portfolios constructed using com- panies with seed or series A funding in 2011 (left) and 2012 (right). Also shown are the performances of venture capital firms Greylock Partners (Greylock), Founders Fund (Founders), Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers (KPCB), Sequoia Capital (Sequoia), and Khosla Ventures (Khosla). For reference the performance curves for a random portfolio and a perfect port- folio are also shown. 62 8-2 A pie graph showing the distribution of companies for both the independent and correlated portfolios for the hierarchical model model. 64 9-1 The advanced company search feature on the picking winners website. 66 9-2 An example of a company information page on the picking winners website. 67 9-3 The portfolio building page with access to the portfolio from categories, portfolio from names, and portfolio from csv upload tools on the picking winners website. 68 12 List of Tables 6.1 The deviance information criterion scores for each of the four models trained with observation year 2010. 46 6.2 Posterior mean of 훽, 훿, and coefficient of variation for the sector features with the largest magnitude coefficient of variation. 48 6.3 Posterior mean of 훽, 훿, and coefficient of variation for the non-sector fea- tures with the largest magnitude coefficient of variation. 49 6.4 Statistics of the posterior distribution of 휈 and 휏 across sectors. The poste- rior mean is shown with the fifth and ninety-fifth quantiles in parentheses. 52 8.1 The top companies in our 2011 portfolio constructed with greedy opti- mization and the robust heteroskedastic correlated model. Shown are the company name, the highest funding round achieved, the predicted exit probability, and the greedy objective value (probability of at least one exit) when the company is added rounded to the nearest hundredth. Companies which exited are highlighted in bold. 63 8.2 The top companies in our 2012 portfolio constructed with greedy opti- mization and the robust heteroskedastic correlated model. Shown are the company name, the highest funding round achieved, the predicted exit probability, and the greedy objective value (probability of at least one exit) when the company is added rounded to the nearest hundredth.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Valuing Young Startups Is Unavoidably Difficult: Using (And Misusing) Deferred-Equity Instruments for Seed Investing
    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository University of New Hampshire – Franklin Pierce Law Faculty Scholarship School of Law 6-25-2020 Valuing Young Startups is Unavoidably Difficult: Using (and Misusing) Deferred-Equity Instruments for Seed Investing John L. Orcutt University of New Hampshire Franklin Pierce School of Law, Concord, New Hampshire, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/law_facpub Part of the Banking and Finance Law Commons, and the Commercial Law Commons Recommended Citation John L. Orcutt, Valuing Young Startups is Unavoidably Difficult: Using (and Misusing) Deferred-Equity Instruments for Seed Investing, 55 Tulsa L.Rev. 469 (2020). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of New Hampshire – Franklin Pierce School of Law at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 42208-tul_55-3 Sheet No. 58 Side A 05/15/2020 10:30:18 ORCUTT J - FINAL FOR PUBLISHER (DO NOT DELETE) 5/14/2020 9:49 AM VALUING YOUNG STARTUPS IS UNAVOIDABLY DIFFICULT: USING (AND MISUSING) DEFERRED- EQUITY INSTRUMENTS FOR SEED INVESTING John L. Orcutt* I. ASTARTUP’S LIFE AND FUNDING CYCLES ............................................................... 474 II. VALUING YOUNG STARTUPS .................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • VC Glossary Index VC Glossary .⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄..⁄..3
    VC Glossary Index VC Glossary .⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄..⁄..3 Basic Processes ..⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄..⁄⁄.4 Business Actors ..⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄5 Documents and Statements ⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄.7 Funding Subcategories ⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄..8 Indicators and Criteria ⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄..10 Investor Types ⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄..⁄⁄⁄⁄.11 References⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄.⁄⁄.14 Credits⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄⁄.⁄.17 VC Glossary The world of Venture Capital is often overwhelming at first sight, even more so when you do not have the primary knowledge. This guide will help you understand the basic context to start getting into this subject. In addition, there will be occasional videos that we believe will help you gain a greater understanding of the concepts listed. 3 Basic Processes First, for a company to raise capital, foundation rounds are necessary. The basic ones that need to be taken into account for these processes are the following. Acquisition: When one company purchases most or all of another company's shares to gain control of that company. Funding Anytime a company raises money from one or more Round: investors. TheyÊre given a letter, such as A Round, B Round, C Round, etc. because each round follows another. The letter identifies which number of rounds theyÊre on. A. Early-Stage Funds: These funds are generally from $2 million to $15 million in size and invest in seed stage and Series A companies but occasionally lead a Series B round. They are also referred to as Seed Rounds, as they help lay the foundation for a company. B. Mid-Stage Funds: These funds usually range from $30 million to $60 million. They generally invest in Series B and later rounds. C. Late-Stage Funds: Take place when the company is successful and self-lowered.
    [Show full text]
  • UF Innovate Startup Primer
    STARTUP PRIMER UF Innovate | Tech Licensing University of Florida 2018 UF Innovate | Tech Licensing Located in UF Innovate | The Hub, Suite 108 747 SW 2nd Avenue, Gainesville, FL 32601 t: (352) 392-8929 f: (352) 392-6600 http://innovate.research.ufl.edu/tech-licensing/ This guide is a publication of the UF Innovate | Tech Licensing based on a similar handbook prepared by the MIT Technology Licensing Office in 2010. It has been updated and modified to reflect policies and procedures at UF Innovate. The image on the cover is credited Sharon Pittaway on Unsplash. ©2018 UF Innovate. All rights reserved. Contents OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................... 3 TECH TRANSFER AT A GLANCE FOR STARTUPS ....................................................... 4 HOW TO LAUNCH A STARTUP ................................................................................. 5 THE UF INNOVATION ECOSYSTEM .......................................................................... 6 UF INNOVATE | TECH LICENSING........................................................................ 6 UF INNOVATE | SID MARTIN BIOTECH ............................................................... 7 UF INNOVATE | THE HUB .................................................................................... 8 UF INNOVATE | VENTURES ................................................................................. 9 COLLABORATORY FOR WOMEN INNOVATORS .................................................. 9 TECHNOLOGY
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Spring Conference Agenda
    2015 Spring Conference Agenda Friday, March 6 – Business Attire 4:00 – 5:00pm Registration……………………………………………..…………..Conference Center, Stoney Creek Inn The theme of the conference is entrepreneuHER: a celebration of the 10th anniversary of a pioneering group of women founding our organization and the importance of an entrepreneurial spirit to being a leader in our personal and professional lives. Check-in and gather your materials for the weekend. Network and catch up with fellow Griffith’s members and meet your mentor/mentee to get the weekend started. Members may have headshots taken during this time. 5:00 – 6:00pm Welcome and Opening Session ………………...………….…..…………………..Salon C, Stoney Creek Inn Welcome Margy Eckelkamp, Griffiths Chair Opening Session: What If You Startup You? Matt Murrie, Social Entrepreneur and edupreneur, Executive Director and Chief Curiosity Curator for What If…? 360 Matt will deliver a session on the entrepreneurial perspective, helping set the tone for the conference: “One of the greatest things I’ve learned we can do to live fuller lives is to think and live like entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship isn’t about opening a business; it’s about adopting a perspective. The entrepreneur’s perspective is unique because it’s a process. This process is one that is laser-focused on solving problems. Successful entrepreneurs solve those problems by using skills like empathy, creativity, curiosity, lifelong learning, communication and collaboration. By embracing this entrepreneurial perspective and applying it to your life, it helps you close the gap between who you are and who you want to be. It’s not always easy or pretty, but the entrepreneurial journey is one that blazes paths of opportunity for more doing, less wondering, and a life full of purpose.” 6:00 – 7:00pm 10 for 10 …………………………………………………………………..Salon C, Stoney Creek Inn We’ve invited 10 remarkable women to help us celebrate 10 years.
    [Show full text]
  • The Anatomy of an Entrepreneur: Family Background and Motivation 1 Table of Contents
    The Anatomy of an Entrepreneur Family Background and Motivation Authors: Vivek Wadhwa Raj Aggarwal Krisztina “Z” Holly Alex Salkever July 2009 AUTHORS Vivek Wadhwa Associate Director, Center for Entrepreneurship and Research Commercialization at Duke University and Senior Research Associate, Harvard Law School Raj Aggarwal Dean and Sullivan Professor College of Business Administration, The University of Akron Krisztina “Z” Holly Executive Director, USC Stevens Institute for Innovation Vice Provost for Innovation, University of Southern California Alex Salkever Visiting Researcher Masters of Engineering Management Program Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University Special Thanks: Robert Litan, E.J. Reedy, Bo Fishback Student Researchers: Moline Prak, Francisco Regalado, Neeti Agarwal, Savithri Arulanandasamy, Tahsin Hashem, Swetha Kolluri, Ayoola Lapite, Jeffery Lee, Lynn Lee, Vinay Lekharaju, Aibek Nurkadyr, Rachel Prabhakaran, Keertana Ravindran, Arjun Reddy, Anisha Sequeira, Karna Vishwas ©2009 by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. All rights reserved. The Anatomy of an Entrepreneur Family Background and Motivation July 2009 The Anatomy of an Entrepreneur: Family Background and Motivation 1 Table of Contents Introduction and Findings......................................................................................................................................4 Company founders tend to be middle-aged and well-educated, and did better in high school than in college..........................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • NVCA 2021 YEARBOOK Data Provided by Dear Readers
    YEARBOOK Data provided by Credits & Contact National Venture Capital Association NVCA Board of Directors 2020-2021 (NVCA) EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Washington, DC | San Francisco, CA nvca.org | [email protected] | 202-864-5920 BARRY EGGERS Lightspeed Venture Partners, Venture Forward Chair Washington, DC | San Francisco, CA MICHAEL BROWN Battery Ventures, Chair-Elect ventureforward.org | [email protected] JILL JARRETT Benchmark, Treasurer ANDY SCHWAB 5AM Ventures, Secretary BOBBY FRANKLIN President and CEO PATRICIA NAKACHE Trinity Ventures, At-Large JEFF FARRAH General Counsel EMILY MELTON Threshold Ventures, At-Large JUSTIN FIELD Senior Vice President of Government MOHAMAD MAKHZOUMI NEA, At-Large Affairs MARYAM HAQUE Executive Director, Venture AT-LARGE Forward MICHAEL CHOW Research Director, NVCA and PETER CHUNG Summit Partner Venture Forward DIANE DAYCH Granite Growth Health Partners STEPHANIE VOLK Vice President of Development BYRON DEETER Bessemer Venture Partners RHIANON ANDERSON Programs Director, Venture SCOTT DORSEY High Alpha Forward RYAN DRANT Questa Capital CHARLOTTE SAVERCOOL Senior Director of PATRICK ENRIGHT Longitude Capital Government Affairs STEVE FREDRICK Grotech Ventures MICHELE SOLOMON Director of Administration CHRIS GIRGENTI Pritzker Group Venture Capital DEVIN MILLER Manager of Communications and JOE HOROWITZ Icon Ventures Digital Strategy GEORGE HOYEM In-Q-Tel JASON VITA, Director of Programming and CHARLES HUDSON Precursor Ventures Industry Relations JILL JARRETT Benchmark JONAS MURPHY Manager of Government Affairs
    [Show full text]
  • The Persistent Effect of Initial Success: Evidence from Venture Capital
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES THE PERSISTENT EFFECT OF INITIAL SUCCESS: EVIDENCE FROM VENTURE CAPITAL Ramana Nanda Sampsa Samila Olav Sorenson Working Paper 24887 http://www.nber.org/papers/w24887 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 August 2018 We thank Shai Bernstein, Michael Ewens, Joan Farre-Mensa, Will Goetzmann, Arthur Korteweg, Christos Makridis, Aksel Mjos, David Robinson, Antoinette Schoar, Chris Stanton, Joel Waldfogel, Ayako Yasuda, and seminar participants at Aalto University, Boston University, the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Copenhagen Business School, ESMT, ESSEC, IE, IESE, London Business School, the National University of Singapore, the NBER Summer Institute, the University of Luxembourg, the University of Minnesota, and the VATT Institute for Economic Research for helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper. We gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Division of Research and Faculty Development at HBS, the Centre for Law and Business at the National University of Singapore, and the Yale School of Management. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. At least one co-author has disclosed a financial relationship of potential relevance for this research. Further information is available online at http://www.nber.org/papers/w24887.ack NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2018 by Ramana Nanda, Sampsa Samila, and Olav Sorenson. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source.
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf; See LEWIS BRANSCOMB & PHILLIP AUERSWALD, BETWEEN INVENTION and INNOVATION: an ANALYSIS of FUNDING for EARLY- STAGE TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT (Nov
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Washington University St. Louis: Open Scholarship Washington University Global Studies Law Review Volume 17 Issue 2 2018 The Coalition Model, a Private-Public Strategic Innovation Policy Model For Encouraging Entrepreneurship and Economic Growth in the Era Of New Economic Challenges Anat Alon-Beck New York University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies Part of the Economic Policy Commons, Economic Theory Commons, Entrepreneurial and Small Business Operations Commons, Finance and Financial Management Commons, Growth and Development Commons, Law and Economics Commons, Other Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration Commons, and the Political Economy Commons Recommended Citation Anat Alon-Beck, The Coalition Model, a Private-Public Strategic Innovation Policy Model For Encouraging Entrepreneurship and Economic Growth in the Era Of New Economic Challenges, 17 WASH. U. GLOBAL STUD. L. REV. 267 (2018), https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies/vol17/iss2/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Global Studies Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Washington University Global Studies Law Review VOLUME 17 NUMBER 2 2018 THE COALITION MODEL, A PRIVATE-PUBLIC STRATEGIC INNOVATION POLICY MODEL FOR ENCOURAGING ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IN THE ERA OF NEW ECONOMIC CHALLENGES ANAT ALON-BECK* ABSTRACT Innovation driven entrepreneurial firms have an important role in contributing to job creation, generating technological innovation, and stimulating the United States economy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Global Startup Ecosystem Ranking 2015
    The Global* Startup Ecosystem with Foreword by Steve Blank from The Startup Ecosystem Report Series by Compass.co (formerly Startup Genome) Ranking 2015 with the support of Crunchbase *excluding China, South Korea and Japan August 2015 Version 1.2 2 Contents 3 Foreword 112 Torontoindings Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin - The Writing is On the Wall 117 Vancouverndings About Compass 122 Amsterdamngs Compass.co (formerly Startup Genome) 5 Startup Revolution Series 127 Montreal gs 6 The Great Transition: Industrial to Information Revolution 132 Feature: Hong Kong We came together for one reason: 8 The Decline of the Blue Chip 134 Feature: Kuala Lumpur To radically improve the success rate of businesses. 12 The Rise of the Startup 139 Feature: Ecosystem Canvas With 34,000 signups, Compass is the leading solution for 16 The Critical Role of the Startup Ecosystem cted Findings automated management reports and benchmarks for small and medium-sized online businesses. 19 Introduction 142 Methodology 143 Overview 22 The Global Startup Ecosystem Ranking Compass is made for executives who seek visibility on how 143 1. Stakeholder Objectives to improve their ROI without having to rely on analysts or 28 Top 20 Deep Dives 143 2. Data Sources consultants. Compass automatically prepares best- practice 143 3. Definitions Used reports and benchmarks for your weekly and monthly business 32 Silicon Valley 143 4. Ranking Methodology meetings. 37 New York lected Findings 144 5. Changes from 2012 42 Los Angeles Se #lected Findings 144 6. Index Details You get your first interactive report in less than 2 minutes after 47 Boston elected Findings 145 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Capability Statement
    COMPANY SNAPSHOT Government Business POC: Snorkel AI Charlie Greenbacker Enterprise AI Made Practical Phone: 860-965-8885 Email: [email protected] Company Address: CAPABILITY STATEMENT 2100 Geng Road, Suite 210 Snorkel AI, Inc. is a Series B startup company founded in 2019 by a team spun out of the Palo Alto, CA 94303 Stanford AI Lab and backed by some of the most distinguished venture capital firms in Silicon Valley and beyond, including Greylock, Accel, GV (Google Ventures), Blackrock, Website: https://snorkel.ai Lightspeed, In-Q-Tel, and SV Angel. Snorkel’s technology is already in use by leading Phone: 650-752-6970 AI/ML organizations like Google, Apple, Intel, and large enterprise customers across Email: [email protected] banking, insurance, telecom, retail, pharma, energy, defense/intelligence, and more. PRODUCT: Snorkel AI's software product, called Snorkel Flow, accelerates enterprise AI DUNS #: 117209813 application development by enabling your in-house subject matter experts (SMEs) to label CAGE Code: 8FWA2 massive amounts of machine learning (ML) training data in hours, without requiring armies of outsourced labelers spending months painstakingly labeling data by hand. Incorporated: March 22, 2019 Snorkel Flow can be deployed in the cloud or on-premise with no external dependencies. Type: Delaware C Corporation Employees: 60 (full-time) SERVICES: ● ● AI/ML Application Design AI Strategy Development ● Deployment & Integration ● Explainability & AI Security ● Tech Talks & Keynotes ● User Training & Support ● Data Readiness & Labeling ● Executive AI/ML Training NAICS CODES 511210: Software Publishers UNIQUE DIFFERENTIATORS: Snorkel Flow is the only ML development platform powered by weak supervision and 518210: Data Processing, programmatic labeling, greatly reducing the time required to build AI/ML applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Venture Capital Funded Startups December 2017
    BUSINESS RESEARCH & CORPORATE INFORMATION SERVICES Global Venture Capital Funded Startups December 2017 **The information in this report is aggregated by the team at AM Research from various sources across the web. **The team at AMR tracks the global startup funding ecosystem closely and profiles thousands of VC firms and their portfolio startups. AM Research Services is a provider of desk research services to high growth startups and large global corporations. Kindly visit our website www.amresearch.in and contact us at [email protected] for any desk research requests, samples and quote. BUSINESS RESEARCH & CORPORATE INFORMATION SERVICES 10 Most Active Venture Capital Firms in December’ 2017 AM Research Services is a provider of desk research services to high growth startups and large global corporations. Kindly visit our website www.amresearch.in and contact us at [email protected] for any desk research requests, samples and quote. BUSINESS RESEARCH & CORPORATE INFORMATION SERVICES Breakout By Funding Rounds AM Research Services is a provider of desk research services to high growth startups and large global corporations. Kindly visit our website www.amresearch.in and contact us at [email protected] for any desk research requests, samples and quote. BUSINESS RESEARCH & CORPORATE INFORMATION SERVICES Series - A Funded Companies Amount Company Country Description Investors Raised Guardian Guardian optical Technologies is an Maniv Mobility Optical innovative israeli startup developing an $5.1 million Israel Mirai Creation Fund Technologies advanced 3D sensor. Noodle Noodle Partners helps colleges and United Owl Ventures $14 million Partners Inc universities create and manage first-rate States online and hybrid programs. Mayfield Earny United Earny, santa Monica, California-based a Comcast Ventures $9 million States personal finance service company.
    [Show full text]
  • Venture Capital Contracts
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES VENTURE CAPITAL CONTRACTS Michael Ewens Alexander S. Gorbenko Arthur Korteweg Working Paper 26115 http://www.nber.org/papers/w26115 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 July 2019 We are grateful to Ilona Babenko (discussant), Tania Babina (discussant), Vincent Glode (discussant), Will Gornall (discussant), Igor Makarov (discussant), Pavel Zryumov (discussant), Steven Kaplan, Gordon Phillips, seminar participants at Caltech, Northwestern University (Kellogg), Tulane, and USC, and participants at the 2019 American Finance Association meetings, the 2019 Midwest Finance Association meetings, the 2019 Financial Intermediation Research Society meetings, the 2018 NBER Entrepreneurship Summer Institute, the 2018 London Private Equity Symposium, the 2018 Financial Research Association conference, and the 2018 Stanford Financing of Innovation Summit. Jun Chen provided valuable research assistance. We thank the Linde Institute of Economic and Management Sciences for funding. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. At least one co-author has disclosed a financial relationship of potential relevance for this research. Further information is available online at http://www.nber.org/papers/w26115.ack NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer- reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2019 by Michael Ewens, Alexander S. Gorbenko, and Arthur Korteweg. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source.
    [Show full text]