The results of the venture capital Olympics went live last week

@marketswithmadison

5.4K followers · usually 1.4K views a post

Views

8.4K

Likes

383

Comments

SoundTikTok sound · original sound - marketswithmadison

Why it worked

The video leverages a timely and relevant topic (VC rankings) to provide valuable insights for founders, using clear data visualization and a direct, informative tone. The focus on the 'power law' and the concentration of success among a few firms offers a compelling narrative.

Summary

This video discusses the 2026 Streublaev-Jackson Venture Ranking of the top 100 VC firms, highlighting the concentration of deals among top firms and the importance of a strong lead investor's brand for founders. It explains that the ranking is based on valuation, dilution, and actual returns, emphasizing that while unicorn investments are important, the concentration of a fund into successful deals is key.

Structure

1Introduction to the VC ranking and its implications
2Analysis of top-performing VC firms and the power law
3Explanation of the ranking methodology (valuation, dilution, returns)
4The significance of top-tier investors for founders
5The reality of VC investment returns and industry profit concentration

Product placement

The video discusses the 2026 Streublaev-Jackson Venture Ranking, which lists top VC firms. Specific firms like Sequoia, A16Z, DST, Robinhood, Figma, Snowflake, and OpenAI are mentioned in relation to their scores and deal concentration.

On-screen text

2026 Streublaev-Jackson Venture Ranking - Top 100 VC firms Individual and industry rankings will follow soon Top Firm Score Top-deal Firm Score Top-deal Firm Score Top-deal SEQUOIA 10,158 DOORDASH 10,158 orbi med 1,153 checkout.com ACCEL 8,293 dotblobs 8,293 COATUE 1,039 OpenAI DST 4,576 kuai shou 4,576 BERCH 985 SIERRA TKGlobal 4,364 coinbase 4,364 brauze 961 OpenAI LightSpeed 3,811 Mistral AI 3,811 FIREBLOCKS 897 Thrive Capital 3,698 Figma 3,698 AKERO 852 ICONIQ 3,025 Figma 3,025 DEVOTED 842 Kleiner Perkins 2,987 Figma 2,987 FLOCK SAFETY 835 NEA 2,834 PERPLEXITY FUND 2,834 REFLECTION 825 Greylock 2,693 PERPLEXITY FUND 2,693 CRUSOE 798 Khola Ventures 2,540 Robinhood 2,540 ANTHROPIC 794 GENERAL CATALYST 1,639 ATHELAS 1,639 VERKADA 724 RIBBIT 1,636 FIGURE 1,636 CHAOS 680 PARKWAY 1,450 BYTE DANCE 1,450 TOAST 670 Notable Capital 1,440 HASHICORP 1,440 RAMP 654 IVP 1,302 PERPLEXITY FUND 1,302 Altimeter 1,257 KLARNA 1,257 COINBASE 609 Mayfield 1,247 SNOWFLAKE 1,247 BVC 724 TCV 680 Ilya Strebulayev @IlyaStrebulayev Starting out with the big dogs on this list Sequoia scored 10,000 a16z scored 8,000 and just sort of falls off a cliff after that Sequoia literally scored 41 times the firm that ranked 100 on this list No shade to Zig Capital but Sequoia is playing an entirely different ball game 75 companies drove most of the top 100s entire scores and you'll see a few repeats on this list of top deals Robinhood Figma Snowflake which is a perfect example of the power law Snowflake was the single best deal for five different firms on this list and OpenAI was for four So concentration is really the name of the game in this industry All it really comes down to is did you get into one of those 75 companies or not? Investing in unicorns really doesn't mean as much as you would think it does. SP Angel invested in 139 unicorn companies and is still only 31st on this list Meanwhile DST invested in 62 and is No. 4 When you break it all down the ranking measures valuation, dilution and actual returns not the number of logos you can fit on your funding deck. While number of unicorns is a metric that LPs can use to feel good about their investment in a fund, what really matters is the concentration of that fund into those unicorns. But I digress, here's what this ranking means for you as a founder raising from one of these funds. If you're raising from a top 10 your next round will pre-announce itself and the brand of your lead investor will sort of send the signal before you even send the pitch deck. Unfortunately if your term sheet is from a rank 50 firm, you're probably still fund-raising on traction team and technology alone. This score is basically a proxy for how many doors open the second that your investor sends an email on your behalf. The cold hard truth is 75% of VC investments return less than the investors put in and most of the industry loses money. 5 percent of VCs generate roughly 90% of the entire industry's profits. So this ranking isn't really about prestige. It's about identifying who's really in that 5%. The score doesn't say much about how an individual partner will show up for you at a board meeting. But it does say a lot about market power, follow-on access and brand signal of these investors. And it's your job as a founder to know the gaps and know the trade offs.

Original caption

2026 VC rankings just dropped - here’s what it means for founders looking for a lead investor 👀 #startups #fundraising #venturecapital #technews @LinkedIn

More from @marketswithmadison

More breakout videos from this creator.

Transcript

The results of the venture capital Olympics went live last week and it goes to show that not all VC firms are made the same. This Professor of venture capital and private equity at Stanford, Elias Treble, not sure if I'm pronouncing that right, posted his definitive ranking of the top 100 VC firms. And I want to talk about what this means for you as a founder if you're accepting a term sheet from one of these investors. Starting out with the Big Dogs on this list, Socia scored 10,000, A16Z scored 8,000 and then it just sort of falls off a cliff after that. Socia literally scored 41 times the firm that ranked 100 on this list, no shade to Zig capital, but is playing an entirely different ball game. And it's not exactly a tight field. 75 companies drove most of the top 100s entire scores. And you'll see a few repeats on this list of top deals. Robin Hood, figma, snowflake, which is a perfect example of the power law. Snowflake was the single best deal for five different firms on this list and open AI was for four. So concentration is really the name of the game in this industry. All it really comes down to is did you get into one of those 75 companies or not? Investing in unicorns really doesn't mean as much as you would think it does. SP Angel invested in 139 unicorn companies and is still only 31st on this list. Meanwhile, DSt invested in 62 and is number four. When you break it all down, the ranking measures valuation, dilution and actual returns, not the number of logos that you can fit on your funding deck. While number of unicorns is a metric that LP can use to feel good about their investment in a fund, what really matters is the concentration of that fund into those unicorns. But I digress, here's what this ranking really means for you as a founder raising from one of these funds. If you're raising from a top 10 your next round will pre-announce itself and the brand of your lead investor will sort of send the signal before you even send the pitch deck. Unfortunately, if your stem sheet is from a rank 50 firm, you're probably still fun-racing on traction team and technology alone. The score is basically a proxy for how many doors open the second day your investor sends an email on your behalf. The call hard truth is that 75% of VC investments return less than the investors put in and most of the industry loses money. 5% of VC's generate roughly 90% of the entire industry's profits. So this This ranking isn't really about prestige. It's about identifying who's really in that 5%. The score doesn't say much about how an individual partner will show up for you at a board meeting. But it does say a lot about market power, follow-on access and brand signal of these investors. And it's your job as a founder to know the gaps and know the tradeoffs.