top of page

[Week 5/8] What LPs Want You to Know: VC Fund Structure, Ownership, and Investment Terms




As I navigate my adventure with the Dorm Room Fund Women Investor Track, Week 5 has provided invaluable lessons about VC fund structures, ownership, and investment terms from a family office's perspective. Let’s dive into what makes the world of VC tick!



VC Lifecycle: Venture Capital funds operate on a 10-year cycle. Yes, ten years of dynamic highs and inevitable lows, with fundraising rounds every three years. This cycle is the backbone of VC, shaping how funds manage and nurture their investments. Knowing this helps you anticipate the rhythms of the investment world.

Cap Table Insights: Think of the cap table as a startup’s financial blueprint. It lays out who owns what and how investments are allocated. Mastering Cap table is key to understanding equity distribution and investment stakes. It’s a powerful tool for spotting potential and assessing how value is shared.


Market Performance: Here’s a noteworthy insight—many VC funds underperform compared to the S&P 500. This reality underscores the importance for Limited Partners (LPs) to be discerning. It’s not just about chasing returns; it’s about making informed, strategic choices. Take First Round Capital, for example. Their success is attributed to a disciplined focus on early-stage investments and a persistent hustle. Their approach highlights the importance of staying committed and continuously improving—qualities that can set you apart in the VC world.


LP's Preferences - Fund Size Matters: Fund size is crucial to investment success. Some LPs prefer smaller, nimble funds


specializing in early-stage investments, managing assets between $100 million and $250 million. In contrast, larger funds with multi-billion-dollar portfolios often face challenges in delivering high returns. The size of a fund can influence its performance.


Unique Contributions: When LPs invest, they bring more than just capital. Their expertise and insights can provide substantial value to the ventures they support. Think of it as adding a layer of strategic depth that can propel startups forward.


Case Studies: Look at Sequoia’s investment in Google—a prime example of the complexities of timing and exit strategies.


In 1999, Sequoia Capital made a bold move by investing $12.5 million in Google’s Series A round. As Google’s trajectory soared, Sequoia faced a pivotal decision: when to exit. By September 2005, just a year after Google’s IPO, Sequoia executed its exit, valuing their stake at $4.18 billion. This remarkable exit yielded a return of over 160 times their initial investment.


However, when we examine Google’s stock price today, we see a staggering 23.7-fold increase since 2005. Here's Google’s stock price over the past 20 years:



This case underscores a critical lesson for investors: exiting too early might mean missing out on substantial future gains, while waiting too long can expose you to market volatility and potential downturns. There is a delicate balance of timing, strategic planning, and market awareness necessary to navigate successful exits in venture capital.

bottom of page