White Paper: Venture Capital Performance

http://www.cbinsights.com @cbinsights [email protected]

http://www.cbinsights.com/

http://www.twitter.com/cbinsights


Research Brief Page

The Exceedingly Rare Unicorn VC

3

The Unicorn VCs Are Increasing

Their Early Stage Investment Focus

7

What Does It Take to Raise a

Financing Round at a $1B Valuation?

10

The VC Power Law – Analyzing the

Largest 100 U.S. VC-backed Tech Exits

15

Are Top Venture Firms Making

More Bets Outside of California?

21

Which VC Firms See the Highest

Share of IPOs?

24

The Top Healthcare VCs – Which

Firms See the Highest Share of IPOs?

27

The Top Corporate VCs – Which

Firms See the Highest Share of IPOs?

30

The Most Capital Efficient Venture

Capital-backed Exits of 2013 33




Startups that exit for more than $1 billion are a rarity. So are the

VCs who invest in them. Here is the data.

Startups that exit for over $1 billion are a rarity. They’re so rare that folks

have come up with nicknames to describe these rare beasts (unicorns and

thunder lizards to name two). Since building a billion dollar company or

unicorn is so hard and so rare, it naturally follows that identifying and

investing in them is also pretty difficult. And the data on VC exits shows that

there are, in fact, very few unicorn VCs.

While venture capitalists talk about wanting to identify and invest in billion

dollar companies, the reality is that few VC investors actually do. Even when

they do, very few are able to do it again highlighting the challenges that

Ashby Monk of Stanford describes in his essay about bringing scale to

venture capital. Moreover, for those who were astute enough to get into

these big exits, getting in early is even rarer, highlighting the paucity of firms

who can truly see around corners and who have access to truly superior

dealflow.

As we work with Limited Partners, this is an area of increasing interest to

them because performance persistence in venture capital is very real. In

other words, in venture capital, it has been shown by studies that past

performance actually is an indicator of future performance. Of course,

performance persistence must be considered alongside other factors like

network centrality and investment discipline and brand strength which have

been shown to be indicators of VC performance as well. Combined, these

factors create a Mosaic (note: only for LPs) which provides a holistic view

into VC firm quality.

The Data

Using CB Insights venture capital data, we identified 45 venture-backed U.S.-

based tech companies that exited (via either an IPO or an acquisition)

between 2004 and 2013 YTD with a valuation of over $1B. We did not

include companies that have not exited but which have rumored valuations

as there is little certainty that they will be able to maintain those valuations

(see Fab.com as one example).




We then analyzed the investors in these 45 billion dollar plus exits to

understand and identify the trends among the Unicorn VCs.

The Results

104 VCs invested in these 45 billion dollar companies prior to their exits. 68

of them (65%) invested in only a single billion dollar exit.

Andy Dunn of Bonobos asked in his scathing “Dear Dumb VC” blog post,

“How many companies are in your portfolio that have reached $1 billion in

enterprise value? If the answer isn’t two, you are not good yet.” Below is the

answer.

The following chart breaks down these investors by the number of billion-

dollar companies they had invested in. The first bubble represents the 68

VCs who only invested in one billion-dollar company, which amounts to 14%

of all active VCs. As we move to the next bubble – VCs that invested in

exactly two billion-dollar companies – this number drops sharply to 17 (only

3.5%). The far end of the spectrum is comprised of the three VCs who had

remarkably invested in 8 billion-dollar plus exits and who thus represent

0.6% of all active VCs.

The number of large exits in an investor’s portfolio does not necessarily correlate with the investment’s returns as the largest returns from a

company’s exit usually go to the investors who jumped in earliest. In

addition, just counting the number of large exits would serve to reward logo

or trophy chasing VCs who invest in high-flyers late in the game presumably

to say they were investors in the company and benefit from the halo effect

that said participation might offer.




So to assess a venture capital’s investment selection proficiency, it is

important to look at what stage they made their first investment in a

company.

The next chart breaks down the investors based on the stage they invested

in the companies. For example, let us consider the three investors –

Sequoia Capital, Greylock Partners, and New Enterprise Associates (NEA) – with 8 >$1B exit each. In all, they represent 24 investments (3 investors × 8

exits, where an investment refers to the aggregate amount invested

regardless of how many/which rounds the investor participated in). Of

these, 12 investments or 50% were in a Series B or prior rounds.

This percentage decreases as one moves backwards across the chart. Of the

68 VCs that only had one >$1B exit, only 38% were first made in a Series B

or prior round. In other words, 62% of the first investments made by the

VCs into these firms were after the Series B stage highlighting how hard it is

for VCs to identify and invest early in winners.

When narrowing the early stage criteria to only include Series A and seed

rounds, the difference between a “lucky” VC and a “great” VC becomes

much more stark. Only 18% of the investors who had only 1 billion dollar

plus exit got in at the Series A or earlier. Farhad Manjoo’s recent piece on

Snapchat suggested that kids are not reliable predictors of technology

trends. Based on the fact that most VCs don’t invest in the big winners

early, can the same be said for VCs?




Methodology / Notes

For companies that exited via M&A, the valuation is simply the amount that

the company got acquired for. For a company that went public, the exit

valuation was calculated using the closing stock prices on the day of the IPO.

The data comprised of exits that occurred between January 1, 2004, and on

or before October 15, 2013.




Since 2010, unicorn VCs have invested in at least half of their

portfolio companies at or before the Series A stage. And it looks

like their appetite for early stage deals is increasing.

In our previous piece on tech’s Unicorn VCs, we talked about two critical

levers in understanding VC performance – one, a history of consistent big

exits, and two, a proclivity for making early investments into these breakout

companies (what we call Selection Aptitude). A lot of readers were curious

about the investors who met these criteria so we decided to dig in a little

deeper to see what stage they’re getting into companies and how this might

be changing over time.

The Data

We used two criteria to identify the best VCs – first, they have had three or

more billion dollar tech exits since 2004 in our tech Unicorn VC analysis,

and second, they have received grades of “AAA” or “AA” in CB Insights’

Investor Mosaic models. These models are used by LPs to monitor and

select VC firms. AAA-rated firms are the top 2% of firms and AA represent

the top 10%.

With these two criteria, 12 VCs remained on the list.

We then looked at all companies these VCs first invested in each year since

2010, and broke these investments down by the stage at which their first

investment was made. We also tracked the stage breakdown over the past

four years to see if there has been a shift in the VCs’ focus.

Breakdown by Stage

The chart below shows the breakdown of investments made by these 12

investors since 2010 by the stage at which they were first made. Early-stage




rounds, which we defined here as Seed and Series A rounds, are in shades of

blue.

The investor with the highest proportion of early stage investments is

Charles River Ventures, who invested in 90% of their portfolio at the Seed

or Series A rounds. Closely following Charles River Ventures is Andreessen

Horowitz (A16Z), with 84% of their investments since 2010 made at the early stage rounds. Interestingly, A16Z has indicated a shift away from this

early stage focus. Union Square Ventures, with 74% early stage investments,

rounds out the top three.

At the other end of the spectrum is Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, who

invested in 51% of their portfolio at the early-stage. While this includes

Seed/Series A investments in notable startups like Coursera and Flipboard

among others, the early-stage share of Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers’

overall portfolio remains lower than the other VCs on our list. Sequoia

Capital and Bessemer Venture Partners round out the bottom three with

52% and 56% of their portfolio at the early-stage, respectively.

Changes in Early-Stage Investments

In addition to the overall stage breakdown, we looked at whether any of the

firms is increasing or decreasing their involvement at the early stages. With




many firms raising growth equity funds and the longer timeframes to exit,

are the top investors shifting their investment allocation away from the early

stages?

What we see among the tech VC elite is actually an increase in share going

to early-stage investment. The next chart shows the change in early-stage

investments (as a percentage of their portfolio for the year) from 2010 to 2013 YTD. Benchmark Capital has seen the biggest relative increase as

compared to other investors. Early-stage investments comprised only 39%

of their investments in 2010 versus 64% in 2013 (a 2500 basis point

increase). But as can be seen below, 10 of the 12 AAA and AA-rated VCs

have actually seen increases in their proportion of early stage investment

since 2010 (more competition for seed VC funds potentially adding to their

woes)

The two investors that are heading in the opposite direction are Union

Square Ventures and Accel Partners, whose early-stage investments have

seen a net change of -5 and -9 percentage points respectively. While the

share of seed and Series B investments in their portfolio went up, Union

Square Ventures this year saw a dip in Series A investments (55% currently

from 78% in 2010). That said, Union Square Ventures remains atop the list

in terms of their focus on early-stage deals (as can be seen in graph

1). Similarly, Accel Partners have made a higher proportion of mid- and later-stage (including growth equity) investments in 2013.




On average, unicorns-in-training, take five rounds of financing and

over $200M in aggregate financing before hitting the billion dollar

valuation threshhold.

Among VCs, Sequoia Capital leads the way having invested in 10

companies in the billion-dollar startup club globally.

Raising financing at a billion-dollar plus valuation has gotten a lot more

common. With corporations, hedge funds and mutual funds increasingly

investing in private tech companies along with VCs, the hunt for unicorns is

on in a big way. As a friendly reminder, most VCs are not very good at

identifying unicorns, but that’s a story for another day.

In this analysis, we wanted to look at billion dollar financing valuations and

what it takes to get there.

Many of the companies as you might imagine are part of our Tech IPO

Pipeline. But not all of them, as some companies that got the billion dollar

distinction have fallen from grace. Fab.com and LivingSocial being two

primary examples. These companies highlight that these gains are mostly on

paper as David Hornik of August Capital points out:

“We have all seen high flying companies go out of business before they

reach liquidity. As a VC, I have no intention of taking a victory lap until I

actually deliver results to my LPs. To my mind, these interim financings have

gotten far too much fanfare.”

Using CB Insights venture capital data, we identified 47 venture capital-

backed private companies that have raised a funding round at a $1B+

valuation. (Note: the list of companies is below). We then analyzed these

unicorns-in-training to understand:

How quickly these companies were able to reach a $1B valuation?




How much money do you need to raise before you hit the $1B

valuation mark?

Which VCs have the most wannabe unicorns in their portfolio?

Geographic Breakdown

From enterprise firms like MongoDB and Nutanix to hot consumer apps

including Uber and Snapchat, the 47 venture-backed companies that make

up the billion dollar club span a diverse lot. But geographically, the US still

dominates which should not be surprising. 30 of the companies are

headquartered in the U.S. 9 are based in China while Sweden counts two

billion-dollar startups.

Within the U.S., 77% of the billion-dollar startups are based in California and

primarily in Silicon Valley. As a testament to the rise of NY’s tech VC

ecosystem, 14% of the companies are headquartered in NY including

MongoDB, AppNexus and Gilt Groupe.




Financing Requirements

The chart below breaks down the history of rounds it took for the 30 U.S.

billion-dollar private companies to achieve a $1B+ valuation. While a handful

of the U.S.-based firms took just a couple of rounds and others more than

seven, notching a billion-dollar valuation, on average, took five rounds of

financing. Firms that raised three or fewer rounds prior to a $1B+ valuation

include Wayfair, which recently raised a $150M Series C at a $2B valuation

and Automattic, which raised two rounds before a secondary deal from

Tiger Global at a $1B valuation. Of course, Wayfair bootstrapped itself to

$380 million in 2010 revenue before it took outside financing so they’re a

unique beast.




In terms of total funding, getting to the billion dollar mark requires a decent

chunk of change. Just two of the current companies took fewer than $100M

leading to their $1B+ valuation, which include NEA and Venrock-backed

CloudFlare and WordPress parent Automattic, which raised funding from

investors including Polaris Partners and True Ventures. On average, the

companies took $237M prior to getting their $1B+ valuation.




The Investors

Two indicators of venture capital investor performance we are actively

tracking in our Investor Mosaic models are selection aptitude and illiquid

portfolio strength. Specifically, selection aptitude highlights each investor’s

ability to source and ultimately select high quality investments and then

shepherd them to favorable outcomes. Illiquid portfolio strength measures

the quality of current, non-exited companies in an investor’s portfolio and

also looks at the investor’s entry point into the company.

So who has backed or taken stakes in the most billion dollar valuation

companies is an important measure in the Mosaic models. And based on

this analysis, that distinction goes to Sequoia Capital which has backed 10 of

the companies globally including four at the Series A stage or earlier. Two

VCs count seven of the companies in their portfolio including New

Enterprise Associates and Andreessen Horowitz. Digital Sky Technologies

and Goldman Sachs have also taken stakes in seven of the firms,

respectively.

The chart below highlights the 12 firms who are in five or more of the

companies that have raised prior funding at a $1B+ valuation. 7 are VCs,

while the rest are made up of hedge funds, mutual funds, investment banks

and holdings companies.




The full list of companies who we looked at that raised a round at a billion

dollar valuation are below. As mentioned earlier, not all companies on the

list have maintained the billion dollar valuation.

AirBnB

AppNexus

Automattic Bloom Energy

Box

CloudFlare

Coupons.com

Deem

Dianping

Dropbox

Evernote

Fab.com*

Fanatics

Flipkart

Gilt Groupe

Good Technology

Woodman Labs

Jawbone

JD.com

Kakao Corp.

Klarna

Lashou Group

Legendary Entertainment

Lending Club

LivingSocial*

Mobileye

MongoDB

Nutanix

Palantir Technologies

Pinterest

Pure Storage

Shopify

Snapchat

Sogou

Space Exploration Technologies

Spotify

Square

Stripe

Trendy Group Intl.

Uber

UCWeb

VANCL




Vente Privee

Wayfair

Xiaomi

Zalando

Zhaogang




Of the 100 largest VC-backed tech exits since 2009, Sequoia

Capital invested in a remarkable 22 of them. Benchmark Capital

invested in the highest percentage at the early stage.

Venture capital returns are often said to follow a power law. Simplistically,

the best investment returns more money than the rest of the investments

combined. We analyzed the largest 100 U.S.-based tech M&A or IPO exits

since 2009 to see whether the power law actually holds and who the most

frequent investors in those companies are.

The data below.

Top 100 VC-Backed U.S. Exits Since 2009 – Valuation Distribution

Curve

The chart below highlights the distribution of top U.S.-based exits since

2009 by valuation at the day of IPO or M&A exit. The largest, by far, was

Facebook’s IPO in May 2012 initially valuing the company at $104 billion. In

power law fashion, the dropoff after Facebook is significant with a handful of

exits in the $10B to $20B range – think Groupon, WhatsApp, etc.




Top 100 VC-Backed U.S. Exits Since 2009 – Top Investors

Sequoia Capital’s exit of WhatsApp was just 1 of 7 exits out of the 100 that counted just a single institutional investor. But whether going it alone or

with others, being part of large exits is old hat for Sequoia. In fact, Sequoia

Capital portfolio companies made up a remarkable 22 of the top 100 tech

exits. NEA and Accel Partners, respectively, participated in 13 of the exits

each, while late-stage VC Meritech Capital Partners counted 12. The chart

below highlights the 15 investors who invested in 7 or more of the top 100

U.S. tech exits since 2009. (Note: Investments by way of secondary

transactions were not included in the chart below.)




Top 100 VC-Backed U.S. Exits Since 2009 – Top Investors By

Stage of First Investment

Of course, simply “getting in” on a big exit does not guarantee strong

investment returns as the nature of VC is such that those investors who

jumped in earliest are most richly rewarded. So to assess a venture capital’s

investment selection aptitude, it is important to look at what stage they

made their first investment in a company.

The next chart breaks down the top 15 investors based on the stage they

invested in the companies. Benchmark Capital backed the highest percentage

of its exits at the early-stage (Series B or earlier), followed by Accel and

Norwest Venture Partners. Conversely, Technology Crossover Ventures

and Meritech Capital Partners saw under 10% of their first investments at

the Series B stage or earlier, which is unsurprising given their late-stage

focus.




Methodology/Notes

For companies that exited via M&A, the valuation is simply the amount that the company got acquired for. For a company that went public, the exit

valuation was that on the day of the IPO. Tech sectors include internet,

mobile, software, computer hardware and electronics (chips & semis).

The time period covered ranges from January 1, 2009 to February 24, 2014.




The data suggests that the later-stage you go, the further from

California and other major venture hubs you look.

In March we examined the venture capital power law to understand the

distribution of exits in VC across the 100 largest exits in tech. We also

identified the VC investors who had invested in the greatest # of these 100

companies. They can be seen below.

Of these top investors, we wanted to see where they were investing from a

geography perspective. Specifically, we wanted to look at their investments

in the three major US venture hubs (California, NY and Massachusetts)

versus other regions. While California was unsurprisingly the overwhelming

leader, some of the investors, especially some of the more later-stage or




growth equity firms, have looked outside the main venture hubs. Others

such as Sequoia Capital and Benchmark Capital are sticking to California.

VCs Focused On California & Major Markets

Just under half of the investors (7 of 15) do over 75% or more of their deals

in California. While other investors on the list have substantial figures for

other markets outside of NY, MA, and CA, Sequoia Capital, Andreessen

Horowitz, and DAG Ventures are incredibly focused on the major markets,

which account for 91%, 90%, and 89% of their investments respectively.

New York

When looking at investments in New York, Battery Ventures, Accel

Partners, Bessemer Venture Partners, and Institutional Venture Partners led

the pack with between 15-16% of their investments taking place in the Big

Apple.

The Bay State

Massachusetts-based investments did not account for more than 17% of any

of the Power Law investor’s portfolios. Technology Crossover Ventures led

the way with the aforementioned 17%, with Bessemer Venture Partners




(11%) and Battery Ventures (9%) placing 2nd and 3rd for investment in the

state.

Technology Crossover Ventures Diversifies Geographically

The funds least-heavily invested in California were Technology Crossover

Ventures, Battery Ventures, and Insight Venture Partners, all with under half

of their investments being sourced out of the Golden State. While TCV was

the most-heavily invested in Massachusetts, they also invested in other regions outside of CA, MA, and NY more than any other investor on the

list, with almost half of their deals coming from outside of the major tech

markets in the US. The most recent non-major market deal was last week’s

$42M Series E deal for Act-On Software, an Oregon-based marketing

automation software company, while previous years saw investments in

TOA Technologies, based in Ohio, as well as Alarm.com (Virginia), and

iPipeline (Pennsylvania).




Intel Capital and Accel Partners have seen the most exits in the

last five years while New Enterprise Associates (NEA) and

Venrock have seen the highest percentage of IPO exits. Micro

VCs, as expected, see more M&A exits than IPOs.

With the venture-backed IPO market hitting its stride in both the healthcare

and tech sectors, we wanted to take a look back and see which VCs have had the most exits over the last five years and how do these exits break

down between acquisitions (M&A) and IPOs.

Top Venture Capital Investors By Number of Exits Since 2009

There are 22 corporate venture or venture capital investors who have

recorded 40 or more M&A/IPO exits since the start of 2009. Intel Capital

tops the list with over 100 exits in the period.

It’s also not surprising to see a slew of mega-funds round out the top 5

including Accel Partners, New Enterprise Associates, Kleiner Perkins and

Sequoia Capital (which has gotten in early to a slew of home run exits

including WhatsApp and LinkedIn over the period).

Perhaps more surprising is that smaller VC funds (aka Micro VCs) including

First Round Capital, SV Angel and Felicis Ventures make it onto this

list. While micro VC funds are clearly of varying quality, these are clearly a

few of the elite ones.




IPO versus M&A

When we analyze each investor by looking at IPO versus M&A exits, we see NEA and Venrock on top, each with over 1/4 of their exits during the

period occurring via IPO. Mega VCs Kleiner Perkins, Sequoia, Greylock as

well as “coattail” fund DAG Ventures which co-invests in later stage

financings saw nearly 1/4 of their exits come through the public markets.

Given fund arithmetic, micro VCs can see strong returns with more modest

exits and so don’t necessarily require IPOs. And so as might be expected,

the micro VCs on the list, SV Angel, Felicis Ventures and First Round

Capital, generally see a higher share of M&A exits. Of course, this doesn’t

mean those M&A exits are necessarily small. As an example, Felicis saw

portfolio company Meraki get acquired by Cisco for $1.2 billion and fellow portfolio company The Climate Corporation get snapped up by Monsanto

for $930 million in cash.



http://www.cbinsights.com/blog/trends/felicis-ventures-floodgate-fund-investment-syndicate


MPM Capital has seen the highest number of M&A or IPO exits in

the healthcare sector since the start of 2009. But Cambridge-

based Flagship Ventures sees the highest share of its exits come

via healthcare IPOs.

The biotech market has seen an upswing in venture-backed IPO activity in

2013 and hasn’t shown signs of slowing in 2014 as well. So which healthcare

venture capital firms have racked up the most healthcare exits and of these

firms, who has seen the highest share of exits via IPOs vs. M&A exits.

The data below.

Top 15 Healthcare VC Investors By M&A/IPO Exits Since 2009

Since the start of 2009, MPM Capital has realized the highest number of

M&A or IPO exits in the healthcare sector (biotech, pharma, drug, medical

devices), followed by fellow life sciences & healthcare-focused venture

investors, Domain Associates and Alta Partners. Each has seen over 20 exits

over the past five years. Outside of pure-play healthcare-focused firms, we

see multi-sector funds such as Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, Venrock

and New Enterprise Associates (a unicorn VC within the sector) also among

the top investors ranked by healthcare exits.




The Top 15 Healthcare VC Investors By Share of IPO/M&A Exits

But of these 15 venture capital investors, who has seen the highest share of

healthcare IPO exits relative to M&A exits over the period? Below is a

breakdown of the top 15 by highest share of healthcare IPO exits.

Interestingly, the top 15 is led by Cambridge-based firm Flagship Ventures,

who has seen a notable over 80% of its 11 healthcare exits come via public

issuances. Other investors who have seen 60%+ of their healthcare exits come via IPOs over the period are Advanced Technology Ventures,

Venrock, Polaris Partners and Arch Venture Partners. It’s worth noting that

NEA and Venrock are at the top of this list when looking at venture capital

overall.




Intel Capital has seen the most IPO or M&A exits since the start

of 2009. But SAP Ventures has seen the highest share of its exits

come via IPOs.

Armed with big balance sheets and a need to stay ahead of emerging tech

trends, corporations are increasingly diving into venture investing for both

strategic gain and financial returns. Using CB Insights data, we took a look at

which corporate venture capital arms have racked up the most exits since

2009 and of these firms, who has seen the highest share of exits via IPOs vs.

M&A.

The data below.

Top 15 Corporate VC Investors By M&A/IPO Exits Since 2009

Since the start of 2009, Intel Capital has realized the highest number of M&A

or IPO exits of any investor (corporate or pure-play VC), followed by Cisco

Investments and Motorola Solutions Venture Capital. Note: Exits by

Comcast Interactive Capital that took place over the period were included

under Comcast Ventures.



http://www.cbinsights.com/blog/trends/venture-capital-rankings-exits-2013


Top 15 Corporate VC Investors By Share of M&A/IPO Exits Since

2009

Of these corporate venture arms, we see that SAP Ventures has notched the highest share of IPO exits including Criteo, Violin Memory and

Control4, followed by healthcare corporate VC Novartis Venture Funds.

Qualcomm Ventures and Samsung Ventures also saw 1/5 of their exits over

their past five years come via public offerings. Google Ventures, the most

prolific CVC from a deals perspective over the period, counted

RetailMeNot, HomeAway and SilverSpring Networks among the IPOs in its

portfolio.




From Veeva Systems to Tableau Software, the top 15 tech exits

by value creation in 2013 saw an aggregate valuation of $18.57B on

total funding of just $471.5M.

As the year quickly comes to an end, we wanted to take a look at a few of

the top venture-backed tech exits of 2013 as measured by “value creation”.

Specifically, we examined the top 15 IPO or M&A exits with a disclosed exit

valuation at or over $100M based on their valuation (real or rumored) at

time of exit and compared to the amount of financing they’d received prior

to exit.

Analyzing value creation or capital efficiency is helpful in

understanding Selection Aptitude in our LP-focused Investor Mosaic models.

Selection Aptitude measures the ability of investors to source and ultimately

select high quality investments and then shepherd them to favorable

outcomes.

Below are some high-level trends and data observed among the top 15 U.S.-

based tech exits calculated by value creation including the sectors they

operate in and their geographies. While the typical 2014 Tech IPO Pipeline

company has raised over $100 million in financing, the list below are

companies who were judicious in raising financing raising average of $33

million prior to exit.

The Data

The top 15 exits by value creation in 2013 saw an aggregate valuation at

time of exit of $18.57B and raised total financing of just $471.5M. Cloud-

based life sciences software firm Veeva Systems tops the list of venture-

backed exits by value creation, netting a valuation of over $4B in its IPO on

just $4M of financing from Emergence Capital Partners. The top 3 was

rounded by NEA-backed big data analytics firm Tableau Software and U.S.

Venture Partners-backed cybersecurity specialist Trusteer (acquired by

IBM).




Silicon Valley takes 40% of the exits on the list, while Washington saw two

of the exits in Zulily and Tableau. Massachusetts also notched three of the

top 15 tech exits by value creation.



http://www.cbinsights.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/valuecreationexits1.jpg


Interestingly, the chart below shows that just under a third of the top VC-

backed exits by value creation went to companies in the hardware sector

including the likes of 3D printing firm MakerBot. There are three investors

who invested in or bought private market secondary shares in more than

one of the top 15 exits detailed above. They include Norwest Venture

Partners (ScaleIO, FireEye) and later-stage investors Meritech Capital

Partners (Zulily, Tableau) and JAFCO Ventures (MoPub, FireEye). Another

interesting tidbit is that two of the top M&A exits calculated by “value

creation” were 2013 acquisitions by Twitter (MoPub, Crashlytics).



White Paper: Venture Capital Performance

Business

Transcript of White Paper: Venture Capital Performance