really dislike the cb insights peer rank as an answer to this question, horribly outdated— think the most obvious answer is the classic blue chips + vertical specifics with strong portfolio support
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
I’m not sure this metric actually tracks what you’re looking for, But if you had to: you could start with the CB insights list, weight down for negative preferences (partner removed by scandal, etc.) and upweight based on desirable (gender equality amount gps, etc.)
I suspect you’d also want to weight for the relative scarcity of the check at the relevant stage. Ex. A sequoia/etc. writing a 200k check into a post YC party round is much less telling then a blue chip growth fund choosing to lead and take a board seat at seed
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
If only pitchbook wasn’t a piece of shit we could do this easily. Also some kind of weird inverese selection effect where more and more top funds are running massive stealth rounds early and earlier— so your own book would always look better because complete information
- Show replies
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.