Which VCs Have the Most Portfolio Companies with $100M+ of Funding?

Published on in Venture Capital , by

Bill Gurley of Benchmark Capital gave a fascinating interview to the Wall Street Journal, expressing a great deal of concern for the nine digit funding rounds being raised by later stage startups. Interestingly, he wasn’t laying blame at the feet of valuations — it was burn rate that was most worrying, and Fred Wilson chimed in later in the evening, echoing the same sentiment.

While VCs certainly have an obligation to deploy their LPs capital to generate returns, founders also have an obligation to deploy VC money to grow their businesses. Investors are not merely bystanders, they sit on the boards of these companies and are expected to help set their course. With all this in mind, I thought it would be interesting to take a look at which venture capital firms are most complicit in enabling high burn rates, based on the number* of portfolio companies with $100M or more in total funding to date.

VC Firms Ranked by Un-Exited Portfolio Companies with $100M+ in Funding

43 – Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers

35 – New Enterprise Associates

31 – Sequoia Capital, Goldman Sachs

27 – SV Angel, Accel Partners

24 – Intel Capital

22 – DAG Ventures

21 – Tiger Global Management

20 – Bessemer Venture Partners, Greylock Partners

19 – Lightspeed Venture Partners

17 – Benchmark, Founders Fund, Khosla Ventures, Silicon Valley Bank

16 – Insight Venture Partners

15 – Andreessen Horowitz, Google Ventures, Oak Investment Partners

14 – Redpoint

13 – General Catalyst, DFJ, Meritech Capital Partners

12 – Technology Crossover Ventures, Tenaya Capital, Venrock, Salesforce, Temasek Holdings

11 – Adams Street Partners, IDG Capital Partners

10 – SAP Ventures, Mayfield Fund, In-Q-Tel, Menlo Ventures, Canaan Partners, VantagePoint Capital Partners, QiMing Venture Partners, Investment AB Kinnevik

9 – First Round Capital, GGV Capital, Norwest Venture Capital, Matrix Partners, US Venture Partners, QED Investors

8 – GSV Capital, Battery Ventures, Shasta Ventures, Northgate Capital, Sigma Partners, Foundation Capital, North Bridge Venture Partners, Kreos Capital

7 – Felicis Ventures, DFJ Growth, Glynn Capital Management, Qualcomm Ventures, Morgenthaler Ventures, Polaris Partners, Mohr Davidow Ventures, InterWest Partners, Rho Capital Partners

6 – Silver Lake Partners, Scale Venture Partners, Spark Capital, Balderton, Samsung Ventures, DCM, Crosslink Capital, El Dorado Ventures, Bain Capital Ventures, Flagship Ventures, Sofinnova Ventures, Bezos Expeditions, Vulcan Capital, TPG Growth, Google Capital

5 – RRE Ventures, Ignition Partners, Great Oaks Venture Capital, Deutsche Telekom, Fidelity Ventures, General Atlantic, Focus Ventures, Western Technology Investment, Presidio Ventures, Investor Growth Capital, ARCH Venture Partners

4 – CrunchFund, Rocket Internet, Flybridge Capital Partners, Union Square Ventures, Hummer Winblad, Sutter Hill Ventures, Trident Capital, Canvas Venture Fund, Alloy Ventures, Wellington Partners, Atlas Venture, Wellington Partners, Star Ventures, BDC Venture Capital, Austin Ventures, Aisling Capital, Alta Partners, TA Associates, Aeris Capital, Versant Ventures, Columbia Capital, New Leaf Venture Partners

*For the sake of brevity, I cut the list off after 4.

Curious to learn more? Research these portfolios, their underlying companies, employee counts, burn rates, etc. sign up for a free trial of Mattermark Professional today. SIGN UP NOW

Why Ranking Startup Investors Matters For Founders

Published on in Venture Capital , by

At Mattermark we’re all about answering questions with data, arming investors, founders, sales, marketing, biz dev, M&A — any dealmaker, with the information they need to intelligently move forward with a transaction.

For founders, ranking investors can help answer extremely important questions:

FUNDRAISING: if you want to ensure you’ll raise your next round, which is the best firm to work with? (first attempt at these rankings is here) if you want to ensure you won’t waste your time, which funds are actively investing right now? (the original “zombie VCs” post that started it all) at which stages and in which sectors? TEAM: if you are expecting a firm to create value-add in recruiting, which firm’s portfolio companies have been most successful at hiring after raising from them? (see our first attempt at these rankings here)

TRACTION: if you are expecting a firm to create value-add in marketing/sales, which firm’s portfolio companies have been most success increasing their momentum after raising? (first attempt here)

MARKET: if you’re working to ensure a range of exit options for your company, which firm’s portfolio companies have been most successful in M&A transactions and/or IPOs?

BOARD CONSTRUCTION: within each firm, which partners have the best returns, follow-on funding rates, recruiting, distribution, etc?

PRODUCT: what firms have produced the most companies with products that have real product/market fit? Which firm’s portfolio companies have survived product pivots the most successfully?

I’ve tackled some of these questions with four unique analyses… but we still have a long way to go to collect all the data needed — especially when it comes to partner attribution and actual fund performance data. As Jonathan Weber of The Information explains in his post last week (paywall), historically the VC industry has been extremely opaque.

There are other questions we could answer but choose not to focus on, like which investors have made the most investments or deployed the most capital. While these are interesting questions from a macro perspective, I don’t believe they actually help founders make the decisions listed above.

How You Can Help

If you are an angel investor, venture capitalist, limited partner or founder who would like to work with us to move data-driven answers to these questions forward we would love to do a data exchange with you. Please feel free to email me directly at danielle (at) mattermark.com

If you are a technical analyst (read: has scripting and database skills), software engineer with a focus and experience in machine learning, deep learning, neural networks, artificial intelligence — or simply love this data and these questions and want to spend all day every day working to answer them you should know Mattermark is hiring! Check out our open jobs.

Mattermark is the premier source for private company research, utilized by the world’s most influential venture capital firms to source, track and diligence potential investments. Sign up for a free trial or learn more here >>

Mattermark Daily – Thursday, September 4th

Published on in Venture Capital by

From the Investors

Frederick Arnander of Standard Ventures suggests tech could disrupt the time horizon of both capital returns and innovation in “The Capitalist’s Dilemma — and Opportunity

Angel Investor Jocelyn Goldfein explores the connection between risk, failure and openness in the process of creating something great in “The Innovation Dead End

Techstars announces a founder satisfaction guarantee for their startup accelerator program in “Techstars Equity Back Guarantee

Sam Altman of Y Combinator updates the follow-on policy for YC investors in “YC Investment Policy and Email List

Zander Pease of Union Square Ventures walks through a new market he’s into, in “Agricultural Supply Chain

Li Jiang of GSV Capital imagines the space economy beyond SpaceX and tourism in “The New Space Race

Angel Investor Semil Shah shares some trends he’s excited about for the VC “busy season” in “From Seed to Market, A Peek Into Fall 2014

From the Operators

Serial Entrepreneur Elad Gil breaks down the ways in which “YC is a Network Effect Business” and is clearly on the same wavelength with Semil Shah, who says we should “Think of YC as a Growing Startup

Steve Klein of StatusPage.io races users to the “aha” moment in “Our User Onboarding Toolbox

Matt Schlict of ZapChain shares his enthusiasm and a list of resources to get started in “Why You Should Stop What You’re Doing and Start a Bitcoin Company

David Brussin of Monetate proposes a different approach in “Annual Planning is Killing Your Growth — Try This Plan Instead

Tristan Walker of Walker & Company is featured in the latest Andreessen Horowitz podcast (they’re on a tear!) in “Building Brands and Running Retail – Ron Johnson and Tristan Walker Break It Down

Twitpic is shutting down and cites a trademark conflict with Twitter as the cause