Founder’s Choice(founderschoicevc.com)
founderschoicevc.com
Founder’s Choice
https://founderschoicevc.com/
19 comments
Good list. One you're missing is:
e) how you're introduced
Who intros you and how they're connected to the fund matters a ton.
As an aside, I think it's true that they're all playing the same book -- with the exception of the very top. The playbook that the "deal guys" are playing and the long-term lead-the-industry game that the leaders are playing are different. The former will always say they're the latter but you will notice differences in the social network topology (as well as how they carry themselves and what their outcomes look like) which will clue you in.
e) how you're introduced
Who intros you and how they're connected to the fund matters a ton.
As an aside, I think it's true that they're all playing the same book -- with the exception of the very top. The playbook that the "deal guys" are playing and the long-term lead-the-industry game that the leaders are playing are different. The former will always say they're the latter but you will notice differences in the social network topology (as well as how they carry themselves and what their outcomes look like) which will clue you in.
> generated anonymously and verifiably
People are so naive about how hard it is to really anonymize data and how surprisingly easy it could be to deanonymize it that I'd never trust it without:
1) Some serious explanations and scrutiny about exactly how their deanonimization process work
2) How data leaks are removed from logs and elsewhere
3) how data is aggregated and presented and what measures are taken to prevent deanonimization
Edit: their FAQ is not nearly close to a "serious" discussion. And looking at their code is not an efficient way of learning whether it's a trustworthy approach.
People are so naive about how hard it is to really anonymize data and how surprisingly easy it could be to deanonymize it that I'd never trust it without:
1) Some serious explanations and scrutiny about exactly how their deanonimization process work
2) How data leaks are removed from logs and elsewhere
3) how data is aggregated and presented and what measures are taken to prevent deanonimization
Edit: their FAQ is not nearly close to a "serious" discussion. And looking at their code is not an efficient way of learning whether it's a trustworthy approach.
I agree with this, but why is anonymizing this data even important? If it's secure just for you, who cares? Maybe I'm missing something.
--------- Updated ------------ I misunderstood the "review" part, but still. How hard is it to secure the name of the reviewer. I still don't think they need to be truly anonymized.
--------- Updated ------------ I misunderstood the "review" part, but still. How hard is it to secure the name of the reviewer. I still don't think they need to be truly anonymized.
I'd be worried about bad reviews.
Founders don't wanna have a bad reputation in the small VC world. A bad review for a VC might piss them off. Pissing one VC off might be a recipe for earning bad rep.
Numerous datasets have been deanonimized from aggregated stats, just by using correlations and other simple techniques...
Founders don't wanna have a bad reputation in the small VC world. A bad review for a VC might piss them off. Pissing one VC off might be a recipe for earning bad rep.
Numerous datasets have been deanonimized from aggregated stats, just by using correlations and other simple techniques...
I don't think it's a particularly active community but http://thefunded.com/ started offering this in the mid 2000s
Nice find. I had used VCGuide before (mentioned in another comment) but I see a different set of reviews than I see in VCGuide -- always good to have more data here considering how thin it is!
They verify using CrunchBase but lots of companies don’t put their vcs on their CrunchBase
Seems like a well intentioned product (certainly would have loved to have this tool prior to raising) but the level of data you're asking for that could get back to a founder will have a chilling effect on the negative reviews which will also happen to be the most valuable.
I get adding the verification steps to make sure the data is "real" but if founders want to leave any feedback online about investors they've worked with (already unlikely), they're more likely to leave it on a forum like vcguide.
I get adding the verification steps to make sure the data is "real" but if founders want to leave any feedback online about investors they've worked with (already unlikely), they're more likely to leave it on a forum like vcguide.
Another similar project: https://www.backchannel.co/old-home
Glassdoor for VCs? Very welcome. Right now I do that by asking around and searching HN for comments referencing the VC.
Susceptible to gaming by cabals.
For example, a set of fraternal VCs could encourage their fraternal entrepreneurs to skew the rankings in their favour and against the smaller seed fund rounds.
For example, a set of fraternal VCs could encourage their fraternal entrepreneurs to skew the rankings in their favour and against the smaller seed fund rounds.
If they're fraternal and supportive with the entrepreneurs they've invested in then maybe they deserve to be high up in the rankings! /s?
Its fraturtles all the way down
Another version: https://www.landscape.vc/
A similar site I've used before is https://www.vcguide.co/
Good Accelerators offer this to their cohorts as a service. Techstars, which I was a part of, has a login-required site where founders post their experiences. Pretty useful to save you time with VCs that won’t participate in your round because of sector, size, competing portco
a) the partner you meet
b) how badly they want you
c) macro/fund context
d) what’s your fit to them or the competitive environment around your company
And it’s not always apparent what’s good and what’s bad, long term speaking. We’re deep into an A round meeting many funds and I can’t say any single one stands out. Sure some have better chemistry with us, but they are all playing the same book. (other than one who has been especially shit and crafty).