How to Size a VC Fund: Navigating the Balance Between Ambition and Feasibility

The venture capital (VC) landscape is a dynamic and ever-evolving ecosystem that thrives on finding, funding, and nurturing the next generation of high-growth companies.

As a VC, one of the most critical decisions you'll make is determining the size of your fund. This decision not only affects your investment strategy and portfolio construction but also influences your ability to generate attractive returns for your limited partners (LPs). In this blog, we will explore the nuances of sizing a VC fund, drawing insights from recent industry trends and data to guide emerging VCs in making informed decisions.

The Evolution of Venture Capital Ecosystem

Historically, the venture capital ecosystem functioned like a relay race, with different stages of investors handing off companies as they progressed from pre-seed to growth stages. Small firms (with fund sizes less than $100 million), medium-sized firms ($100 million to $500 million), and large firms (over $500 million) all had their distinct roles, objectives, and strategies but shared a common goal: to find and support companies that could achieve IPO-scale outcomes.

However, this relay race metaphor no longer accurately describes the current state of the venture capital industry. The largest firms have grown significantly, both in terms of the assets they manage and their ability to invest across various stages, geographies, and sectors. These mega-firms can now operate independently across the entire private market, encroaching on the territory traditionally occupied by smaller, specialist firms.

The Decoupling of Small and Large VC Firms

One of the most significant changes in recent years is the decoupling of small and large VC firms. Large firms, armed with vast resources and extensive platform capabilities, no longer need to rely on smaller firms to source and develop early-stage companies. This shift has led to increased competition among firms of all sizes, each vying for a more significant role in the investment process and seeking to capture more value before bringing in follow-on investors.

For smaller and medium-sized firms, this decoupling presents both challenges and opportunities. While competition has intensified, it also offers entrepreneurs more choices in terms of whose capital they ultimately decide to take. Smaller firms that can effectively differentiate themselves and provide unique value propositions may emerge as the iconic firms of the next generation.

Understanding the Optimal Fund Size

Determining the optimal size of a VC fund is crucial for achieving the desired balance between ambition and feasibility. According to recent data from Santé Ventures, venture funds smaller than $350 million are 50% more likely to generate a 2.5x return compared to funds larger than $750 million. This insight underscores the importance of fund size in driving performance and highlights the advantages of smaller funds.

Santé's analysis reveals that the optimal venture fund size is between $200 million and $350 million. These funds are better positioned to generate higher returns through typical exits, compared to larger funds which often struggle to achieve the same level of performance. This shift in optimal fund size, from below $200 million to $250 million in 2011 to the current range, reflects the evolving dynamics of the venture capital market.

The Impact of Market Regimes on Fund Performance

Santé's study also introduces the concept of "market regimes"—bear, balanced, and bubble—and their influence on fund performance. VC funds raised in the balanced market regime of 2010-2020 have outperformed those raised in bear or bubble regimes. This finding suggests that the prevailing market conditions at the time of fundraising can significantly impact a fund's performance.

During balanced market regimes, funds benefit from stable economic conditions, moderate valuations, and a healthy supply of capital. In contrast, funds raised during bubble periods may face inflated valuations and heightened competition, while those raised in bear markets may struggle with limited access to capital and conservative investor behavior.

The Challenges of Large Funds

Despite the allure of managing large funds, several challenges can hinder their performance. One of the primary issues is the need for significantly larger exits to generate meaningful returns. For instance, a $500 million fund requires terminal exits of $5-10 billion to impact its fund economics, whereas smaller funds can achieve solid returns with $1-3 billion exits. This discrepancy creates a gulf between what constitutes a successful exit for small versus large funds.

Additionally, large funds often face structural inefficiencies. They need to invest in more companies or allocate larger amounts to each investment, which can dilute returns and reduce the level of support each portfolio company receives. The higher break-even point for generating carried interest in large funds also diminishes the alignment of incentives between general partners (GPs) and LPs.

The Advantages of Small and Micro-VC Funds

In contrast, small and micro-VC funds possess several structural advantages that can enhance their performance. These funds typically have more aligned incentives, with GPs investing substantial personal capital and demonstrating unwavering commitment to generating lucrative returns. Their nimbleness allows for swift investment decisions, enabling them to seize market opportunities that might elude larger counterparts.

Small funds also excel in specialization. By focusing on niche sectors or industries, they can leverage in-depth sectoral insights to deliver superior value. This specialization is particularly valuable in today's market, where capital is concentrated in the best and brightest founders. Small VCs are better positioned to participate in prudently sized rounds and generate consistently strong returns.

Decoding Fund Performance Metrics

Understanding fund performance requires a nuanced approach that considers various factors, including fund size, market conditions, and investment strategy. Quantitative illustrations can help elucidate the impact of fund size on performance. For example, a $50 million fund expecting a 5% terminal exit ownership would need a $1 billion portfolio exit value to return 1.0x the fund. In contrast, a $250 million fund with a 10% exit ownership would require a $2.5 billion exit to achieve the same result.

This example highlights the higher mathematical propensity of smaller funds to deliver multiple returns, even with moderately sized ownership stakes. It also underscores the inherent challenges larger funds face in realizing high returns, as the pool of companies capable of achieving such large exits is relatively small.

The Role of Management Fees and Carried Interest

The standard VC fee model, typically a 2% management fee and 20% carried interest, has significant implications for fund management incentives. For larger funds, the substantial management fees can diminish the incentive to generate true economic value for LPs. In contrast, smaller funds, with their lower management fees, maintain a stronger alignment of interests between GPs and LPs.

Consider two scenarios: a $100 million fund returning 4.0x capital would result in $20 million in fees and $60 million in carried interest, totaling $80 million in GP proceeds. A $500 million fund returning 1.0x capital would result in $100 million in management fees alone, with no carried interest earned. This disparity illustrates the potential misalignment of incentives in larger funds and the importance of carried interest in driving GP performance.

Navigating the Current Venture Capital Landscape

The venture capital landscape has been profoundly impacted by recent economic shifts, including aggressive monetary policy and broad-based valuation recalibrations. Higher interest rates and lower valuations have led to a more cautious and tactical approach among VCs, with a higher bar for new deals and a focus on protecting existing investments.

For institutional investors, the "denominator effect" and challenges in achieving anticipated returns have compounded the complexities of the current environment. As public holdings decrease in value, asset managers are inadvertently skewed towards private market allocations, limiting their ability to increase VC investments. This dynamic has widened the gap between capital demand and supply, especially in later-stage ventures.

Conclusion: The Path Forward for Sizing VC Funds

Sizing a VC fund is a complex and multifaceted decision that requires careful consideration of market dynamics, investment strategy, and performance metrics. While larger funds may offer the allure of significant management fees and broad investment opportunities, they also face structural challenges and a higher threshold for generating meaningful returns.

Smaller and micro-VC funds, on the other hand, present a compelling case for generating higher multiples of invested capital through aligned incentives, specialization, and operational efficiency. As the venture capital landscape continues to evolve, emerging VCs must navigate these dynamics thoughtfully to strike the right balance between ambition and feasibility.

In conclusion, the optimal size of a VC fund is not a one-size-fits-all proposition. It requires a nuanced understanding of market conditions, investor behavior, and the unique strengths and challenges of different fund sizes. By leveraging data-driven insights and aligning incentives with performance goals, VCs can better position themselves to navigate the complexities of the venture capital ecosystem and deliver attractive returns to their investors.

About Taghash

We provide an end-to-end platform for Venture Fund, Private Equity, Fund of Funds and other Alternative Investment Funds. For the last 7 years, we have been working as a tech-arm for top VCs to manage their VC operations including Dealflow, Portfolio, Fund and Limited Partners.

We’re trusted by dozens of top-tier fund managers from India and abroad like Blume Ventures, Kalaari Capital & A91 Partners.

If you want to learn how you can level up from the existing system and better manage your fund with Taghash, click here to book a demo.