←back to thread

167 points lemonlym | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Havoc ◴[] No.45053404[source]
I'm in an adjacent space so quite interesting to me. Couple of concerns:

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.

replies(3): >>45053827 #>>45056159 #>>45058323 #
1. piker ◴[] No.45058323[source]
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).