DOCSLIB.ORG

Preqin and First Republic Update: Us Venture Capital in 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

PREQIN AND FIRST REPUBLIC UPDATE: US VENTURE CAPITAL IN 2017 In association with INDUSTRY-LEADING ALTERNATIVE ASSETS INSIGHTS. FOR FREE. EXPLORE industry reports and newsletters looking at key trends BENCHMARK alternative assets funds and assess the relative performance of private capital asset classes with our index TRACK the latest stats on fundraising, deals, dry powder, industry AUM, investors and more DOWNLOAD charts, league tables and slide decks from Preqin presentations at conferences Gaining full access is easy. To register for free please visit: www.preqin.com/research DOWNLOAD DATA PACK: www.preqin.com/FRUSVC17 CONTENTS p4 Fundraising p6 Funds in Market p7 Fund Managers p8 In Focus: Micro Venture Capital p10 Deals p12 Exits p13 Performance p14 Investors FIRST REPUBLIC BANK First Republic and its subsidiaries offer private banking, private business banking and private wealth management, including investment, trust and brokerage services. First Republic specializes in delivering exceptional, relationship-based service, with a solid commitment to responsiveness and action. Services are offered through preferred banking or wealth management offices primarily in San Francisco, Palo Alto, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, Newport Beach and San Diego, California; Portland, Oregon; Boston, Massachusetts; Palm Beach, Florida; Greenwich, Connecticut; New York, New York; and later in 2018, Jackson, Wyoming. First Republic offers a complete line of banking products for individuals and businesses, including deposit services, as well as residential, commercial and personal loans. For more information, visit www.firstrepublic.com Preqin partnered with First Republic Bank to prepare this information regarding US Venture Capital. This report is for information purposes only and is not intended as an offer, solicitation, advice (investment, legal, tax, or otherwise), or as the basis for any contract. First Republic Bank has not independently verified the information contained herein and shall not have liability to any third party in any respect for this report or any actions taken or decisions made based upon anything contained herein. This information is valid only as of April 2018 and neither Preqin nor First Republic Bank will undertake to update this report with regard to changes in market conditions, information, laws, or regulations after the date of this report. This report may not be further reproduced or circulated without the written permission of Preqin and First Republic Bank. All rights reserved. The entire contents of Preqin and First Republic Update: US Venture Capital in 2017 are the Copyright of Preqin Ltd. No part of this publication or any information contained in it may be copied, transmitted by any electronic means, or stored in any electronic or other data storage medium, or printed or published in any document, report or publication, without the express prior written approval of Preqin Ltd. The information presented in Preqin and First Republic Update: US Venture Capital in 2017 is for information purposes only and does not constitute and should not be construed as a solicitation or other offer, or recommendation to acquire or dispose of any investment or to engage in any other transaction, or as advice of any nature whatsoever. If the reader seeks advice rather than information then he should seek an independent financial advisor and hereby agrees that he will not hold Preqin Ltd. responsible in law or Debt for any decisions of whatever nature the reader makes or refrains from making following its use of Preqin and First Republic Update: US Venture Capital in 2017. While reasonable efforts have been made to obtain information from sources that are believed to be accurate, and to confirm the accuracy of such information wherever possible, Preqin Ltd. does not make any representation or warranty that the information or opinions contained in Preqin and First Republic Update: US Venture Capital in 2017 are accurate, reliable, up-to-date or complete. Although every reasonable effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication Preqin Ltd. does not accept any responsibility for any errors or omissions within Preqin and First Republic Update: US Venture Capital in 2017 or for any expense or other loss alleged to have arisen in any way with a reader’s use of this publication. 3 PREQIN AND FIRST REPUBLIC UPDATE: US VENTURE CAPITAL IN 2017 FUNDRAISING 2017 was a successful fundraising year for Fig. 1: US-Based Venture Capital Fundraising, 2007 - 2017 US-based venture capital fund managers: 350 259 funds reached a final close, raising 316 $34bn in aggregate capital (Fig. 1). 300 263 259 Although fundraising activity declined 252 250 slightly compared to 2016 figures, both the 207 number of funds closed and capital raised 200 171 171 in 2017 were above the annual average 156 150 for the period 2007-2017 (196 funds and 119 123 123 $27bn). 100 43 California-based New Enterprise 50 28 31 26 33 33 34 15 16 18 19 Associates raised one of the largest 0 venture capital funds closed in 2017: 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 New Enterprise Associates 16 secured Year of Final Close $3.3bn and reached a final close in June, No. of Funds Closed Aggregate Capital Raised ($bn) achieving 110% of its initial target (Fig. 3). Source: Preqin Headline commitments came from a mix of new and returning investors, including a Fig. 2: US-Based Venture Capital Fundraising by Fund Size, 2010 - 2017 $300mn commitment from California State 100% 1% 1% 2% 1% 5% 5% 3% 3% 3% Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS) 7% 3% 5% 4% 5% 7% 5% 90% 9% 10% 9% and a $200mn commitment from Teacher 15% 12% 8% 13% 11% 80% 17% Retirement System of Texas. The fund will 12% 23% 70% 17% 23% 23% 26% 20% target early-stage investments in US-based 60% 17% 19% IT, energy, technology and healthcare 7% 14% 50% 18% 9% 15% 18% sectors. 40% 30% The largest proportion of funds closed by 48% 53% 52% 49% 49% 20% 42% 42% 42% US-based managers have typically fallen Proportion of Funds Closed 10% into the micro VC (sub-$100mn) category, 0% accounting for 62% of vehicles closed since 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2007 and 63% of vehicles closed in 2017 Year of Final Close (Fig. 2). At the other end of the spectrum, Less than $50mn $50-99mn $100-249mn just 1% of US-based funds reached a $250-499mn $500-999mn $1bn or More Source: Preqin Fig. 3: Largest US-Based Venture Capital Funds Closed in 2017 Fund Firm Fund Size (mn) Fund Type Geographic Focus New Enterprise Associates 16 New Enterprise Associates 3,300 USD Venture (General) US Emerging Markets, The Rise Fund TPG 2,100 USD Venture (General) North Africa, South Asia Institutional Venture Partners XVI Institutional Venture Partners 1,500 USD Expansion/Late Stage US Clarus Ventures IV Clarus Ventures 910 USD Venture (General) US Sequoia Capital India IV Sequoia Capital 850 USD Expansion/Late Stage Asia Mithril II Mithril Capital Management 850 USD Expansion/Late Stage Global Canaan Equity XI Canaan Partners 800 USD Early Stage India, Israel, US Europe, North America, Summit Partners Venture Capital Fund IV Summit Partners 730 USD Early Stage US Bain Capital Life Sciences Fund Bain Capital 720 USD Venture (General) Global, US Flagship Ventures Fund VI Flagship Pioneering 618 USD Venture (General) US Source: Preqin 4 © Preqin Ltd. 2018 / www.preqin.com DOWNLOAD DATA PACK: www.preqin.com/FRUSVC17 final close on $1bn or more in 2017, the Fig. 4: US-Based Venture Capital Fundraising Success, 2007 - 2017 smallest proportion since 2013. 25 120% Proportion of Target Size Achieved 101% 102% 102% 102% 97% 100% US-based venture capital funds have, on 94% 93% 100% 20 91% 89% average, met or exceeded their target size 83% in each of the past four consecutive years, 80% securing an average 102% in 2017 (Fig. 4). 15 When looking at the average time spent on 60% 22 22 the road, 2017 saw a decline to 19 months 10 19 19 19 19 compared to 22 months in 2016. 17 40% 15 14 15 5 11 20% Generalist venture capital vehicles Time Spent in Market (Months) dominate the US-based venture capital 0 0% fundraising market: 100 such funds 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 closed in 2017 and secured $17bn, almost Year of Final Close double the amount of capital secured Average Time Spent in Market (Months) Average Proportion of Target Size Achieved by early-stage funds (Fig. 5). Early-stage Source: Preqin funds raised $10.7bn in 2017, of which the majority ($9.3bn) was accounted for by broader early-stage strategies, whereas Fig. 5: US-Based Venture Capital Fundraising in 2017 by Strategy seed funds secured $1.4bn. 120 100 100 Few US-based funds target regions outside 100 North America, accounting for just 9% 80 of funds closed in 2017, of which 4% are focused on opportunities in Asia and 3% 60 are Europe focused (Fig. 6). 40 40 19 20 17.3 9.3 6.0 1.4 0 Seed Early Stage Expansion/ Venture Late Stage (General) No. of Funds Closed Aggregate Capital Raised ($bn) Source: Preqin Fig. 6: US-Based Venture Capital Funds Closed in 2017 by Primary Geographic Focus North America Europe Asia 237 4 10 Rest of World 8 Source: Preqin 5 PREQIN AND FIRST REPUBLIC UPDATE: US VENTURE CAPITAL IN 2017 FUNDS IN MARKET s previously mentioned, US-based Fig. 7: US-Based Venture Capital Funds in Market over Time, 2007 - 2018 (As at April Afundraising has grown substantially 2018) over the past decade. A record number 900 70 64 Aggregate Capital Targeted ($bn) (769) of venture capital funds are currently 800 60 in market as at the start of Q2 2018, 700 48 49 50 seeking an aggregate $64bn in capital 48 50 600 (Fig.
Recommended publications
  • ( Studi Deskriptif Kualitatif Tentang Alih Fungsi Situs Microblogging Twitter

    ( Studi Deskriptif Kualitatif Tentang Alih Fungsi Situs Microblogging Twitter

    perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id ALIH FUNGSI TWITTER ( Studi Deskriptif Kualitatif tentang Alih Fungsi Situs Microblogging Twitter pada Pengguna Twitter ) SKRIPSI Oleh : NANA ROHANAWATI D1209059 Diajukan Untuk Melengkapi Tugas dan Memenuhi Syarat Guna Memperoleh Gelar Sarjana Ilmu Komunikasi pada Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik Universitas Sebelas Maret JURUSAN ILMU KOMUNIKASI FAKULTAS ILMU SOSIAL DAN ILMU POLITIK UNIVERSITAS SEBELAS MARET SURAKARTA 2012 commit to user i perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id PERSETUJUAN Skripsi dengan judul : ALIH FUNGSI TWITTER ( Studi Deskriptif Kualitatif tentang Alih Fungsi Situs Microblogging Twitter pada Pengguna Twitter ) Telah disetujui untuk dipertahankan di hadapan Panitia Ujian Skripsi Jurusan Ilmu Komunikasi Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta Pembimbing, Drs. Alexius Ibnu M, M.Si Dra. Sri Urip Haryati, M.Si NIP. 19510717 198303 1 001 NIP. 19570821 198303 2 001 commit to user ii perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id PENGESAHAN Telah Diuji dan Disahkan oleh Panitia Ujian Skripsi Jurusan Ilmu Komunikasi Fakultas Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta Hari : Rabu Tanggal : 11 Januari 2012 Susunan Panitia Penguji 1. Ketua : Drs. Mursito BM, SU (.................................) NIP. 195307271980031001 2. Sekretaris : Chatarina Heny DS, S.Sos, M.Si (................................) NIP. 179612222002122002 3. Penguji I : Drs. Alexius Ibnu M, M.Si (................................) NIP. 195107171983031001 4. Penguji II : Dra. Sri Urip Haryati, M.Si (.................................) NIP. 195708211983032001 commit to user iii perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id MOTTO “ There is a will there is a way “ commit to user iv perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id PERSEMBAHAN Tuhanku “Allah SWT” Ayah dan Ibu, thanks for the best.
  • Website: Friend Or Foe?

    Website: Friend Or Foe?

    VENTURE CAPITAL & PRIVATE EQUITY FUNDS DESKBOOK SERIES Website: Friend or Foe? Many venture capital firms and private equity firms create and maintain websites—usually eponymous— to achieve such far-ranging goals as building brand recognition, communicating with their existing investors, and creating channels of information with existing and potential portfolio companies. It is appropriate to use a website for such purposes and others, such as describing the industry sectors of interest to a venture capital or private equity firm, provided that certain precautions are taken as described in this article. Caution is warranted when establishing a website because there may be unintended legal consequences lurking within seemingly harmless web content. A scrubbed website can be a true friend for a venture capital or private equity firm. A neglected or carelessly composed website can be a terrible foe. Do Not Solicit Investors When engaged in a private offering (i.e., raising a fund), it is important that venture capital firms and private equity firms keep in mind that many of their funds are relying on exemptions to a number of different securities laws that all have one common requirement: there must be no public offering of securities by or on behalf of any of such private funds managed by such firms. Websites are generally viewed as being publicly available. Regulatory authorities, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), have adopted very broad views of what constitutes an offering. As such, any materials on a website that could be viewed as a general solicitation or general advertisement may be considered a public offering by the SEC or other regulatory authorities.
  • Walker Report

    Walker Report

    WALKER REPORT NOVEMBER 2018 Our Support of the Walker Report Over the past several years, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. L.P. Overview of KKR and our private equity business (together with its affiliates, “KKR,” “we” or “us”) has been KKR is a leading global investment firm that manages multiple working to increase the transparency of our investment activities alternative asset classes, including private equity, energy, and processes, both through formal compliance with guidelines infrastructure, real estate and credit, with strategic partners recommending increased levels of disclosure as well as through that manage hedge funds. KKR aims to generate attractive voluntary initiatives with our clients, partners, portfolio investment returns for its fund investors by following a patient companies and the public at large. and disciplined investment approach, employing world-class In November 2007, a working group formed by The British people, and driving growth and value creation with KKR portfolio Private Equity and Venture Capital Association (“BVCA”) and companies. KKR invests its own capital alongside the capital it led by Sir David Walker issued the Guidelines for Disclosure manages for fund investors and provides financing solutions and Transparency in Private Equity. That publication, which is and investment opportunities through its capital markets also known as the “Walker Report,” makes specific business. References to KKR’s investments may include the recommendations for improving the level of public disclosure activities of its sponsored funds. For additional information by private equity firms operating in the United Kingdom. about KKR & Co. Inc. (NYSE: KKR), please visit KKR’s website at www.kkr.com and on Twitter @KKR_Co.
  • FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Commission

    FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Commission

    Louisville Metro Fre Revenue FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Commission Venture Capital Funds and Family Limited Partnerships WHICH BUSINESS ENTITIES QUALIFY FOR THE VENTURE CAPITAL FUND OL TAX EXEMPTION? The occupational license taxes do not apply to venture capital funds business entities as defined in LMCO 110.03(A)(12). To qualify for the exemption, the venture capital fund must be a limited liability company, limited liability partnership, or limited partnership formed and operated for the exclusive purpose of buying, holding and/or selling securities (including debt Are business entities that qualify for securities), on its own behalf and not as a broker, primarily in non- publicly traded companies, and the capital of the fund is primarily the Venture Capital Funds or Family derived from investments by entities and/or individuals which are Limited Partnerships tax exemptions neither related to nor affiliated with the fund. See LMCO required to file an annual OL return? 110.03(A)(12) for additional information and definitions. So long as the entity files an annual informational return along with the required WHICH BUSINESS ENTITIES QUALIFY FOR THE documentation, the entity is not responsible FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP OL TAX for filing an occupational license return. EXEMPTION? The occupational license taxes do not apply to family limited partnership business entities as defined in LMCO 110.03(A)(13). To qualify for the exemption, the income received by family limited partnerships must be from a family-owned non-corporate entity where the sole activity of such entity is the production of investment income not derived from tangible or real property and at least 95% of the equity of the family limited partnership is owned by members of the family.
  • Private Equity in the 2000S 1 Private Equity in the 2000S

    Private Equity in the 2000S 1 Private Equity in the 2000S

    Private equity in the 2000s 1 Private equity in the 2000s Private equity in the 2000s relates to one of the major periods in the history of private equity and venture capital. Within the broader private equity industry, two distinct sub-industries, leveraged buyouts and venture capital experienced growth along parallel although interrelated tracks. The development of the private equity and venture capital asset classes has occurred through a series of boom and bust cycles since the middle of the 20th century. As the 20th century ended, so, too, did the dot-com bubble and the tremendous growth in venture capital that had marked the previous five years. In the wake of the collapse of the dot-com bubble, a new "Golden Age" of private equity ensued, as leveraged buyouts reach unparalleled size and the private equity firms achieved new levels of scale and institutionalization, exemplified by the initial public offering of the Blackstone Group in 2007. Bursting the Internet Bubble and the private equity crash (2000–2003) The Nasdaq crash and technology slump that started in March 2000 shook virtually the entire venture capital industry as valuations for startup technology companies collapsed. Over the next two years, many venture firms had been forced to write-off large proportions of their investments and many funds were significantly "under water" (the values of the fund's investments were below the amount of capital invested). Venture capital investors sought to reduce size of commitments they had made to venture capital funds and in numerous instances, investors sought to unload existing commitments for cents on the dollar in the secondary market.
  • Start Ups and Emerging Companies – 101: Choice of Entity

    Start Ups and Emerging Companies – 101: Choice of Entity

    JANUARY 14, 2013 | HANSON BRIDGETT CORPORATE PRACTICE GROUP What type of corporate entity is best for my business? Start Ups and As a founder/entrepreneur, you (and your partners) have an idea Emerging for a new venture are willing to invest your time and money in the start-up of a new business. Selecting the right corporate vehicle Companies – 101: for your business is critical to your success. The goal of the Choice of Entity founder is to choose an entity that (1) "fits the business model" for the venture, and (2) makes the company "attractive" to investors. How do you know what entity is the best fit? A good starting point for making this determination is to ask yourself: "How am I going to fund my company?" Many founders start their company with their own funds on a "shoe string", focusing their resources on developing the "big idea" and bringing the product to market. However, after your "founder funds" are exhausted (self-funding), you will need to either sell your company, or seek investment from one or more of the following Private Equity sources: • Friends and Family • Angel Funds • Venture Capital by Derek A. Ridgway The investment path you choose will pay a significant role in the corporate vehicle you select for your company. What are the typical corporate entities to choose from? Generally, there are three main types of entities to choose from: Corporations, Limited Liability Companies and Partnerships. Corporations: A Corporation is owned by its shareholders, who buy stock or shares in the company in exchange for consideration.
  • NVCA 2021 YEARBOOK Data Provided by Dear Readers

    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
  • Venture Capital, Private Equity and Hedge Funds: an Introduction

    Venture Capital, Private Equity and Hedge Funds: an Introduction

    Venture Capital, Private Equity and Hedge Funds: An Introduction UGBA 195T, 2 units Course Overview: This course will provide a high level introduction to venture capital, private equity, and hedge funds. In the course, students will learn: • What are venture capital, private equity, and hedge funds? • What types of investments do they make? • How do they generate superior investment returns? • What do the professionals in these firms do? • How are these firms organized, structured and managed? • What are the career paths in these firms? • What are the risks and rewards experienced by these firms? Teaching Method: The course will use Harvard Business School case studies written for MBA students. There will be some lectures to introduce core concepts. The course syllabus will focus approximately 50% on venture capital, 25% on private equity and 25% on hedge funds. Prerequisites / Grading / Homework: • Course is best suited for UC Berkeley seniors with extensive prior course work in business. First preference to seniors enrolled in Haas School of Business. • Some interest or experience in start-ups, investing or finance will be helpful. • Homework will include reading and analyzing one business case per week of approximately 15- 20 pages in length. • Grading will be based on classroom participation (25%), pop quizzes (25%) and a final project (50%). Instructor: Rob Chandra serves on the Haas School of Business faculty where he teaches an undergraduate course on alternative investing and co-teaches an MBA course on entrepreneurship. He is a general partner with Avid Park Ventures, a San Francisco based venture capital firm. His current or prior investments include Alibaba, CrowdStrike, Dropbox, Lending Club, MongoDB, Nutanix, Robinhood, Snap, Twitter and Uber.
  • Evolution of Japanese Venture Capital

    Evolution of Japanese Venture Capital

    Evolution of Japanese Venture Capital April 24, 2008 Michael Korver Managing Partner Global Venture Capital Some Observations • Both “high-growth expectation” entrepreneurial activity and VC funding levels in Japan are much lower than in the US (even when adjusted for population and size of economy). Also lower than in Europe. • According to the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), Japan ranked second from last among high-income countries surveyed in terms of the prevalence rate of high- growth expectation early-stage entrepreneurship during 2000 – 2006. • Venture capital is available in Japan, but much of it comes from organizations affiliated with large financial institutions. • Most VC-backed companies in Japan target domestic market exclusively. According to GEM, Japan ranks last among high-income countries surveyed in terms of the prevalence rate of the international orientation of its entrepreneurial ventures. • According to GEM, Japanese have the lowest perceptions of the positive attributes about entrepreneurship activity in the world. • Japanese VC’s depend heavily on a handful of Japanese stock exchanges for exits (and performance) of their domestic portfolio companies. • Japan is a technologically sophisticated country with large domestic early-adopter markets and global companies generating significant amounts of technology innovation. What is the role of entrepreneurship and venture capital in driving this innovation? International Comparisons • U.S. venture capitalists invested $29.4B in 3,813 deals in 2007 – marking the highest yearly investment since 2001 (MoneyTree Report) • According to preliminary figures released by the EVCA, European venture capitalists invested €11.5B in 2007 • Japanese VCs invested ¥2,800 hundred million in 2,773 companies in the year ended Mar.
  • Venture Capital Industry: Evidence from Two Randomized Controlled Trials∗

    Venture Capital Industry: Evidence from Two Randomized Controlled Trials∗

    Discrimination in the Venture Capital Industry: Evidence from Two Randomized Controlled Trials∗ Ye Zhang † October 30, 2020 Abstract This paper examines discrimination based on startup founders' gender, race, and age by early-stage investors, using two randomized controlled trials with real venture capitalists. The first experiment invites U.S. investors to evaluate multiple randomly generated startup profiles, which they know to be hypothetical, in order to be matched with real, high-quality startups from collaborating incubators. Investors can also donate money to randomly displayed startup teams to show their anonymous support during the COVID-19 pandemic. The second experiment sends hypothetical pitch emails with randomized startups' information to global venture capitalists and compares their email responses by utilizing a new email technology that tracks investors' detailed information acquisition behav- iors. I find three main results: (i) Investors are biased towards female, Asian, and older founders in \lower contact interest" situations; while biased against female, Asian, and older founders in \higher contact interest" situations. (ii) These two experiments identify multiple coexisting sources of bias. Specifically, statistical discrimination is an important reason for \anti-minority" investors' contact and investment decisions, which was proved by a newly de- veloped consistent decision-based heterogeneous effect estimator. (iii) There was a temporary, stronger bias against Asian founders during the COVID-19 outbreak, which started to fade in April 2020. Key Words: Venture Capital, Entrepreneurship, Discrimination, Field Experiments JEL Classification: C93, D83, G24, G40, J15, J16, J71 ∗I would like to express my deepest appreciation to Jack Willis, Harrison Hong, and Wei Jiang for their guidance, support, and profound belief in the value of my work.
  • The Wisdom of Compounding Capital the Wisdom of Compounding Capital

    The Wisdom of Compounding Capital the Wisdom of Compounding Capital

    INSIGHTS GLOBAL MACRO TRENDS VOLUME 11.1 • FEBRUARY 2021 The Wisdom of Compounding Capital The Wisdom of Compounding Capital Ultra High Net Worth investors have increasingly become more influential leaders in the global asset management industry, leveraging a more sizeable base of assets under KKR GLOBAL MACRO & ASSET management to participate in more complex transactions, ALLOCATION TEAM all while broadening their global reach. In an effort to Henry H. McVey Head of Global Macro & Asset Allocation better understand this growth opportunity, we recently +1 (212) 519.1628 [email protected] engaged with around 50 CIOs from leading Ultra High Frances B. Lim Net Worth family offices with whom KKR does business. +1 (212) 401.0451 [email protected] Most families with whom we spoke are also led by self- Rebecca J. Ramsey made entrepreneurs, which dovetails closely with the +1 (212) 519.1631 [email protected] way founders Henry R. Kravis and George R. Roberts have been building KKR for the last forty five years. Their Special thanks to Eric Mogelof, Jim Burns, investment profiles also mesh well with KKR and its Monica Mandelli, Blake Shorthouse, Stanley Ho, Jeff Schachter, Dan Parant, balance sheet heavy strategy, given the Ultra HNW’s focus Doug Krupa, Elizabeth Di Cioccio, on capital appreciation as well as their commitment to a Mohamed Attar, Shannon Rutter, Ryan McGrath, George Stephan, long-term investment horizon via private investments. Alice Chung, and Junaid Arefeen. While underlying fundamentals are robust in this sector of the market, many CIOs are looking to further refine their business models.
  • Open Internet Investors Letter the Honorable Tom Wheeler, Chairman Federal Communications Commission 445 12Th Street

    Open Internet Investors Letter the Honorable Tom Wheeler, Chairman Federal Communications Commission 445 12Th Street

    7/2/2014 Open Internet Investors Letter Open Internet Investors Letter The Honorable Tom Wheeler, Chairman Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street, SW Washington D.C. 20554 May 8, 2014 Dear Chairman Wheeler: We write to express our support for a free and open Internet. We invest in entrepreneurs, investing our own funds and those of our investors (who are individuals, pension funds, endowments, and financial institutions). We often invest at the earliest stages, when companies include just a handful of founders with largely unproven ideas. But, without lawyers, large teams or major revenues, these small startups have had the opportunity to experiment, adapt, and grow, thanks to equal access to the global market. As a result, some of the startups we have invested in have managed to become among the most admired, successful, and influential companies in the world. We have made our investment decisions based on the certainty of a level playing field and of assurances against discrimination and access fees from Internet access providers. Indeed, our investment decisions in Internet companies are dependent upon the certainty of an equal­ opportunity marketplace. Based on news reports and your own statements, we are worried that your proposed rules will not provide the necessary certainty that we need to make investment decisions and that these rules will stifle innovation in the Internet sector. If established companies are able to pay for better access speeds or lower latency, the Internet will no longer be a level playing field. Start­ups with applications that are advantaged by speed (such as games, video, or payment systems) will be unlikely to overcome that deficit no matter how innovative their service.