Re:The startup bubble that no one is talking about
by lemonlym on Thursday August 28, 2025 @12:00PM
(#45053827)
Great points! Obviously this analysis is not unconfounded as the methodology is pretty scrappy.
On point 3, I think both large and small investment groups saw large growth. This is lightly supported by the spike in filings related to SPV as a service companies like Angellist.
Re:The startup bubble that no one is talking about
by JumpCrisscross on Thursday August 28, 2025 @03:36PM
(#45056159)
I am in this space. Most funds don’t have “fund” in the name. And there is a lot of double counting that will happen with this method because you will have collections of GPs, funds, SPVs, co-invests, feeders, et cetera.
A better data source would be Pitchbook or the VCFA.
Re:The startup bubble that no one is talking about
by yowlingcat on Thursday August 28, 2025 @11:23PM
(#45059797)
Agree with your broader point but have the stupidest point to persecute (arabic vs roman numerals) -- anecdotally seeing a lot of our investor base raise their next funds (all VCs) they have all been roman numeral named for some reason. Is this an east coast vs west coast thing or is it just a luck of the draw thing
Re:The startup bubble that no one is talking about
by piker on Thursday August 28, 2025 @07:48PM
(#45058323)
1) Form D provides a classification response that indicates if the vehicle is a VC fund. Seems like a good fix here.
2) jurisdiction won’t matter if it’s offered into the U.S. it needs to file a Form D (or rely on other exemptions).
1) This Fund+Roman Numeral notation is universal among funds. Meaning this data isn't VC. It's use of fund structures. Real estate, PE, private credit maybe bit of hedge funds etc...and yes also VC.
2) Filling trends are affected by jurisdiction fashions so to speak. One of the big fund jurisdiction makes a small rule tweak and everything pivots there. Or away. The funds we're setting up today are structured differently and in different jurisdictions than 2 years ago. Same for regional focus. Think about what that does to a single jurisdiction trend analysis like this.
3) The spike coincides pretty neatly with covid, lockdown and that sudden injection of cash trillions into the financial system. So a spike in fund entities registered makes sense. Haven't looked at who got those trillions, but I'd wager it was bigger institutions not young VC operations starting their first fund.
Still the core hypothesis seems sound for funds overall. Regardless of type a lot of these funds will indeed be on a 2-4 year investment period. So it does broadly check out that there might be a softening of funding supply coming up.