Leesa S.’s Post

View profile for Leesa S., graphic

Managing General Partner @ R3i Capital | Venture Capital | Independent Non Executive Director | Applied AI Investor | Philanthropy | Adjunct Faculty

The next 3-5 years in venture capital will be a Hunger Games-style showdown between the mega funds and emerging managers. The rich get richer, and the rest get crushed. The biggest funds will hoard capital, scoop up the best deals, and keep the gates locked. VC is evolving into an oligopoly where a few behemoths control the game. The rest? They fight for scraps or die quietly. For LPs, it means one thing: if you’re not in with the biggest players, you’re out. Top-tier VCs get the money, deals, and returns, while newer, smaller players are left behind. This means fewer exits, more stagnation, and less excitement. The romantic vision of venture capital—backing scrappy founders in a garage—is being replaced by institutional checks and thinking. Risk aversion is at an all-time high, and innovation is dictated by the big dogs, not driven from the bottom up. But the role of emerging managers isn’t dead—it’s just getting harder. While the big guys stick to safe bets, as emerging managers we dig into niches, find overlooked founders, and chase moonshots. We must be creative, flexible, and aggressive because we play without a safety net. That hunger often leads to spotting opportunities the mega funds miss, keeping the spirit of venture alive. Downturns? They’re a crucible for us as emerging managers. With valuations down and competition clearing out, we can shine. Historically, some of today’s most iconic venture firms were forged in the fires of a downturn because they had the guts to invest when others didn’t. For LPs, it’s about guts too. Sure, follow the herd into the largest players, but if you want asymmetric returns, emerging managers have the upside. You just have to take the risk. The future of venture is a two-speed game. On one side, mega funds—stable, rich, and playing it safe. On the other, emerging managers—scrappy, driven, taking risks that move the needle. The smartest LPs will do both: park capital with the big dogs for steady returns and also back emerging managers with fresh perspectives. Because if VC turns into a sanitized, predictable machine run by a few firms, we all lose. Innovation dies, entrepreneurship becomes a monopoly, and venture’s whole purpose evaporates. The dream of democratizing innovation is under threat, but it doesn’t have to die. Venture’s future depends on supporting both mega funds and bold emerging managers still willing to take risks. We all need to keep pushing boundaries and reminding ourselves why venture capital was exciting in the first place. It always takes a village. Together, we rise!

View profile for David Clark, graphic

CIO at VenCap International plc

What should investors expect from the VC industry over the next 3-5 years when it comes to exits and performance? Rick Zullo, on X, has argued that there will be a greater divergence between VC funds, with the most successful ones producing even stronger performance, while the median fund return will reduce. I would agree with this as we are likely to see fewer, but typically larger, exits. It will become more important than ever to have meaningful exposure to the small number of winners that drive VC performance. We saw this divergence in VC fund performance very clearly after the 2008/09 financial crisis. As you can see from the chart below, it was the top-tier, established managers who make up our Core Manager cohort that massively outperformed as the market recovered. We have identified three key factors that we believe materially contributed to this outperformance: 1. Quality of portfolio companies. We know that VC is a power law asset class, but the distribution of returns is even more concentrated after a correction. The number of successful exits falls significantly and the small number of VCs able to back these companies will materially outperform. We usually see the best companies actually improve their competitive positioning during a correction. They become more capital efficient, increase market share and benefit from many of their competitors being unable to survive. 2. Availability of capital. In a downturn, even the very best companies will usually need to raise additional capital. As a VC, if you don't have the capital to support these companies and protect your ownership, then you are in trouble. The best VCs can still raise new funds even in the worst of markets and will have the capital to ensure their best companies survive. 3. Willingness to continue to invest during the most challenging periods. The best managers have the experience of managing through prior downturns as well as the confidence (and the capital) to take advantage of the opportunities that a correction creates. This means that they can double down on their best companies, often at attractive valuations, and also access market leaders they may have missed in prior rounds. We have seen a major flight to quality from LPs to date in 2024, with a small number of VCs responsible for the vast majority of capital raised. Unfortunately, this is shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. Venture capital is a cyclical asset class - corrections are a feature, not a bug. This means that LPs need to construct a portfolio that not only captures the upside as the market rises, but is also resilient during a downturn.

  • No alternative text description for this image
Puneet Gupta, D.Sc.

Managing Director & CEO, Board Director; Chief Technology Officer (Joint President, ex-Adani), GMP at Harvard Business School

1mo

Insightful

Like
Reply
Dushyant Verma

CEO at SmartViz, AI Powered Visual Inspection, On a mission to enable AI-Powered Solutions for Manufacturing | Ex-Expedia | Ex-MakeMyTrip

1mo

Thanks for sharing Leesa S.This is Insightful!

Like
Reply
See more comments

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore topics