Pear wants to empower up-and-coming VCs with its new emerging managers in residence program

Image Credits: Pear VC

When seed-focused Pear VC raised a $432 million fund last year, the firm co-founder Pejman Nozad said that it meant his firm had reached its “own product-market-fit.” That fourth fund was nearly three times larger than its previous $160 million fund.

The 11-year-old firm wants to help emerging venture funds follow in Pear’s footsteps. On Wednesday, Pear announced the Pear Emerging Manager in Residence program, which brings three up-and-coming pre-seed and seed venture funds into Pear’s offices for collaboration, such as deal flow sharing and due diligence. 

Pear will also write a $250,000 check to invest in these managers’ funds, facilitate LP introductions and grant them early access to companies in Pear’s accelerator. The latter is a privilege typically reserved for partners at top firms like NEA, Lux Capital, and Sequoia Capital.

The firm’s emerging manager program was conceived by Pear partner Kathleen Estreich, who previously ran her own emerging firm, MKT1 Capital. Instead of raising her second fund, which would have been a very difficult endeavor in this funding environment, Estreich joined Pear a few months ago.

Prior to joining, Estreich spoke to Pear’s founders, Pejman Nozad and Mar Hershenson, about the importance of operators-turned-fund managers in the VC ecosystem. Estreich’s idea resonated with Nozad and Hershenson, and the idea of a residency program, run by Estreich, was born.

“We picked three emerging managers and gave them full access to what we do,” Nozad said. “We invested in their funds. They see our deal flow and how we evaluate deals. We give them an office, and we help them fundraise.”

To be sure, Pear is not the only VC firm that engages with emerging managers. Firms like Bain Capital Ventures have a dedicated fund-of-funds for investing in new venture funds.

Unlike BCV, Pear is investing directly out of its latest fund, Estreich told TechCrunch. “We’re making them almost an extension of Pear,” she said, “I also think seeing what the next stages of a venture fund looks like will help them get there faster.”

Pear’s emerging manager program’s inaugural members include Sarah Smith of the Sarah Smith Fund, John Gleeson at Success Venture Partners, and David Ongo Ongchoco and Adarsh Bhatt of Comma Capital.   

Estreich said these funds were chosen for their unique value-add to the early-stage ecosystem. For instance, Gleeson runs the biggest customer success meetup in the country, Comma Capital has a strong community of mid-career engineers at top tech companies, and Pear could learn from Smith about her unique approach to engaging with founders.

Estreich said that the Pear Emerging Manager in Residence program will run for a year and will welcome three new VCs into its offices in about 12 months. 

More ex-military officials are becoming VCs as defense tech investment reached $35B

F-22 fighter jet

Image Credits: Getty Images North America / Getty Images

The distance between Silicon Valley and the Pentagon just keeps getting smaller. As venture capitalists continue to pour money into defense tech startups, they’re turning to a new hiring pool: veterans and ex-Department of Defense officials.  

Andreessen Horowitz hired Matt Shortal, an ex-fighter jet pilot, as its chief of staff; Lux Capital brought on Tony Thomas, former head of U.S. Special Operations Command, as an adviser; and Shield Capital’s managing partner Raj Shah served in the Air Force. 

Hiring ex-military personnel can be a major advantage for firms, giving them “an understanding of what problems are actually on the battlefield,” instead of just “sitting in Silicon Valley and theorizing,” Ali Javaheri, PitchBook’s emerging tech analyst, told TechCrunch.

The boon in ex-military hiring comes alongside the continued defense tech investment craze. Silicon Valley pumped almost $35 billion into defense tech startups in 2023, and over $9 billion so far this year, according to a report released last week by PitchBook. This trend is anchored by some blockbuster fundraises. Shield AI, which produces an AI-powered drone pilot system, raised $500 million last year, and Anduril, Palmer Luckey’s defense tech startup, reportedly secured a fresh $1.5 billion in funding last month. Although funding into the sector has slowed this year, Javaheri said it’s still shown “resilience” in the context of a brutal overall fundraising environment. 

But the sector is not all roses. Javaheri described the Department of Defense acquisition process as “cumbersome,” sometimes taking years for startups to secure any contract. That’s time startups have to financially weather with little to show investors for their efforts. 

Venture firms that can offer startups the connections of ex-military personnel have a major leg up in competitive deals. “You get their network where they can talk to a program officer who’s ultimately in charge of the budget line of a specific military office,” Javaheri said. “The military is a very network-driven sort of organization.” 

For ex-military, they get entrance into a second, lucrative career with cutting-edge technology. “A few years back you would have gone to be executive vice president at Lockheed Martin — totally not sexy,” Chris O’Donnell, a former Navy SEAL and director of Franklin Venture Partners, told The New York Times.  

But the time for landing a cushy post-military venture job might be running out. The sector has hardly any exits to speak of, besides Palantir’s public offering in 2020 or Anduril’s recent buying spree, in which it snatched up engineering company Blue Force and rocket motor maker Adranos. 

Even if the tech IPO window wasn’t closed at the moment, Javaheri doesn’t see many IPOs in the future. He advises VCs to view their investments as possible acquisition targets, probably from the very same unsexy companies that these former military folks are currently eschewing. 

“There’s a good chance that the existing defense contractors will gobble up some of the smaller companies,” he said. 

But for the time being, the defense tech hype is still going strong — and veterans and DOD officials can cap off their careers with a well-funded landing pad. 

For those who know the history of Silicon Valley, this is a coming home of sorts for the tech industry. The Valley’s tech industry began at the intersection of university research and DoD tech spending, as the area has always been home to a variety of military operations. Indeed, San Francisco’s Presidio area now hosts a number of VC offices, like defense tech backer Founders Fund.

“Silicon Valley has returned to its roots and is working closely with the Pentagon in this increasingly tense and competitive geopolitical environment,” Javaheri said.

Over 100 VCs pledge support for Kamala Harris

Kamala Harris

Image Credits: Drew Hallowell / Getty Images, Maggie Stamets / Cody Corrall / TechCrunch

More than 100 VCs, including Reid Hoffman, Vinod Khosla and Mark Cuban have pledged to vote for Vice President Kamala Harris in the upcoming U.S. presidential election.

Mobilizing under the group VCsForKamala, the VCs are also soliciting donations for Harris’ campaign. But the organizers say the effort isn’t meant to align with any one political party.

According to the group’s website, signing on is a commitment to “strong, trustworthy institutions.”

“We believe that strong, trustworthy institutions are a feature, not a bug, and that our industry — and every other industry — would collapse without them,” a statement on the VCsForKamala site reads. “That is what’s at stake in this election. Everything else, we can solve through constructive dialogue with political leaders and institutions willing to talk to us.”

VCsForKamala, along with recent open-letter tech worker campaigns like Tech for Kamala, aim to push back against the notion that Silicon Valley has largely embraced ormer President Donald J. Trump.

Over the past few weeks, Tesla and X head Elon Musk and investors Marc Andreessen, Ben Horowitz and David Sacks have endorsed Trump, the Republican presidential nominee. Musk created a new pro-Trump super PAC, and Sacks spoke at the Republican National Convention. The billionaire Winklevoss twins, founders of cryptocurrency company Gemini, also donated to Trump’s campaign (in bitcoin).

Trump’s Silicon Valley base argues that the Republican party — and Trump himself — are generally more favorable to the startup ecosystem. Andreessen and Horowitz have said that they believe, for example, that President Joe Biden and his administration have stifled tech businesses through overregulation and potentially needless taxation, and that their policies threaten to slow gains in the AI and crypto spaces.

Harris has held varying positions on tech regulation as California’s attorney general, in the U.S. Senate, and as VP. In 2019, as a state senator, she advocated for a breakup of Meta (then Facebook). And last year, she hosted four tech CEOs — Sam Altman, Dario Amodei, Satya Nadella and Sundar Pichai — at the White House “to share concerns about the risks associated with AI.”

Harris has at different times in her career drawn praise and financial support from tech leaders such as Box CEO Aaron Levi, Marc Benioff, Sheryl Sandberg and Jony Ive. Hoffman, Laurene Powell Jobs and venture capitalist John Doerr are among those who backed Harris’ last presidential bid that ended in December 2019, when she dropped out of the race to endorse Biden.

Harris and her allies, looking to muster support among Silicon Valley elite who haven’t cast their lot, have launched a blitz of behind-the-scene lobbying campaigns. According to The New York Times, Harris is planning a fundraising trip in the San Francisco Bay Area as soon as next month.

This has proven to be a winning strategy so far. Per NBC, Harris is on track to raise over $100 million from tech donors, including Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings, across her campaign, PACs and so-called “dark money” groups.

Kamala Harris

Over 100 VCs pledge support for Kamala Harris

Kamala Harris

Image Credits: Drew Hallowell / Getty Images, Maggie Stamets / Cody Corrall / TechCrunch

More than 100 VCs, including Reid Hoffman, Vinod Khosla and Mark Cuban have pledged to vote for Vice President Kamala Harris in the upcoming U.S. presidential election.

Mobilizing under the group VCsForKamala, the VCs are also soliciting donations for Harris’ campaign. But the organizers say the effort isn’t meant to align with any one political party.

According to the group’s website, signing on is a commitment to “strong, trustworthy institutions.”

“We believe that strong, trustworthy institutions are a feature, not a bug, and that our industry — and every other industry — would collapse without them,” a statement on the VCsForKamala site reads. “That is what’s at stake in this election. Everything else, we can solve through constructive dialogue with political leaders and institutions willing to talk to us.”

VCsForKamala, along with recent open-letter tech worker campaigns like Tech for Kamala, aim to push back against the notion that Silicon Valley has largely embraced ormer President Donald J. Trump.

Over the past few weeks, Tesla and X head Elon Musk and investors Marc Andreessen, Ben Horowitz and David Sacks have endorsed Trump, the Republican presidential nominee. Musk created a new pro-Trump super PAC, and Sacks spoke at the Republican National Convention. The billionaire Winklevoss twins, founders of cryptocurrency company Gemini, also donated to Trump’s campaign (in bitcoin).

Trump’s Silicon Valley base argues that the Republican party — and Trump himself — are generally more favorable to the startup ecosystem. Andreessen and Horowitz have said that they believe, for example, that President Joe Biden and his administration have stifled tech businesses through overregulation and potentially needless taxation, and that their policies threaten to slow gains in the AI and crypto spaces.

Harris has held varying positions on tech regulation as California’s attorney general, in the U.S. Senate, and as VP. In 2019, as a state senator, she advocated for a breakup of Meta (then Facebook). And last year, she hosted four tech CEOs — Sam Altman, Dario Amodei, Satya Nadella and Sundar Pichai — at the White House “to share concerns about the risks associated with AI.”

Harris has at different times in her career drawn praise and financial support from tech leaders such as Box CEO Aaron Levi, Marc Benioff, Sheryl Sandberg and Jony Ive. Hoffman, Laurene Powell Jobs and venture capitalist John Doerr are among those who backed Harris’ last presidential bid that ended in December 2019, when she dropped out of the race to endorse Biden.

Harris and her allies, looking to muster support among Silicon Valley elite who haven’t cast their lot, have launched a blitz of behind-the-scene lobbying campaigns. According to The New York Times, Harris is planning a fundraising trip in the San Francisco Bay Area as soon as next month.

This has proven to be a winning strategy so far. Per NBC, Harris is on track to raise over $100 million from tech donors, including Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings, across her campaign, PACs and so-called “dark money” groups.

More ex-military officials are becoming VCs as defense tech investment reached $35B

F-22 fighter jet

Image Credits: Getty Images North America / Getty Images

The distance between Silicon Valley and the Pentagon just keeps getting smaller. As venture capitalists continue to pour money into defense tech startups, they’re turning to a new hiring pool: veterans and ex-Department of Defense officials.  

Andreessen Horowitz hired Matt Shortal, an ex-fighter jet pilot, as its chief of staff; Lux Capital brought on Tony Thomas, former head of U.S. Special Operations Command, as an adviser; and Shield Capital’s managing partner Raj Shah served in the Air Force. 

Hiring ex-military personnel can be a major advantage for firms, giving them “an understanding of what problems are actually on the battlefield,” instead of just “sitting in Silicon Valley and theorizing,” Ali Javaheri, PitchBook’s emerging tech analyst, told TechCrunch.

The boon in ex-military hiring comes alongside the continued defense tech investment craze. Silicon Valley pumped almost $35 billion into defense tech startups in 2023, and over $9 billion so far this year, according to a report released last week by PitchBook. This trend is anchored by some blockbuster fundraises. Shield AI, which produces an AI-powered drone pilot system, raised $500 million last year, and Anduril, Palmer Luckey’s defense tech startup, reportedly secured a fresh $1.5 billion in funding last month. Although funding into the sector has slowed this year, Javaheri said it’s still shown “resilience” in the context of a brutal overall fundraising environment. 

But the sector is not all roses. Javaheri described the Department of Defense acquisition process as “cumbersome,” sometimes taking years for startups to secure any contract. That’s time startups have to financially weather with little to show investors for their efforts. 

Venture firms that can offer startups the connections of ex-military personnel have a major leg up in competitive deals. “You get their network where they can talk to a program officer who’s ultimately in charge of the budget line of a specific military office,” Javaheri said. “The military is a very network-driven sort of organization.” 

For ex-military, they get entrance into a second, lucrative career with cutting-edge technology. “A few years back you would have gone to be executive vice president at Lockheed Martin — totally not sexy,” Chris O’Donnell, a former Navy SEAL and director of Franklin Venture Partners, told The New York Times.  

But the time for landing a cushy post-military venture job might be running out. The sector has hardly any exits to speak of, besides Palantir’s public offering in 2020 or Anduril’s recent buying spree, in which it snatched up engineering company Blue Force and rocket motor maker Adranos. 

Even if the tech IPO window wasn’t closed at the moment, Javaheri doesn’t see many IPOs in the future. He advises VCs to view their investments as possible acquisition targets, probably from the very same unsexy companies that these former military folks are currently eschewing. 

“There’s a good chance that the existing defense contractors will gobble up some of the smaller companies,” he said. 

But for the time being, the defense tech hype is still going strong — and veterans and DOD officials can cap off their careers with a well-funded landing pad. 

For those who know the history of Silicon Valley, this is a coming home of sorts for the tech industry. The Valley’s tech industry began at the intersection of university research and DoD tech spending, as the area has always been home to a variety of military operations. Indeed, San Francisco’s Presidio area now hosts a number of VC offices, like defense tech backer Founders Fund.

“Silicon Valley has returned to its roots and is working closely with the Pentagon in this increasingly tense and competitive geopolitical environment,” Javaheri said.

exits, exit activity, startups, venture capital

VCs anticipate more exits in 2024

exits, exit activity, startups, venture capital

Image Credits: phototechno / Getty Images

It’s been a rough few years for startups looking to exit, but companies, especially late-stage startups, can’t stay private forever. When the exit market didn’t open back up in 2023, as many hoped after a very quiet 2022, investors and founders alike decided that 2024 was the year that the exit market would defrost. Now that 2024 is here, do they still think that?

TechCrunch+ recently surveyed more than 40 investors to get their predictions on a variety of topics heading into 2024, including what they thought the state of the exit market will look like. The vast majority of investors responded that they think exit volume will be higher in 2024 than in 2023 and 2022, but there wasn’t consensus on what those exits would look like.

Some investors are more optimistic about M&A in 2024, while others think we will see a rebound in the IPO market. While most respondents answered this survey before the Adobe-Figma deal dissolved, many VCs acknowledged that startups looking to pursue that route this year will have to be conscious of the current regulatory environment anyway.

M&A

Don Butler, managing director of Thomvest Ventures, said that he thinks the pace of M&A will increase this year. The emphasis on better business fundamentals and economics in the startup realm over the past few years has resulted in a number of startups that have found the sweet spot of reporting solid growth trajectories on top of solid business economics.

“We think that [those factors] will present strategic acquirers with a compelling set of targets, as these businesses will be both at scale (and thus having proven product-market fit) with positive operating cash flow,” he said.

Investors also think M&A will accelerate because the folks who are typically doing the acquiring — public companies, legacy corporations and private equity firms — are well capitalized to buy. Many will be looking for smaller startups that could serve as bolt-on or tuck-in acquisitions for themselves or their portfolio companies.

“You can see this on full display with the acquisitions being made by Broadcom, Intel, Nvidia, AMD and others, who are deploying their R&D budgets by buying already developed companies for billions of dollars,” said Michael Marks, founding managing partner at Celesta Capital.

Sarah Sclarsic, founding partner at Voyager Ventures, said M&A will also likely be up in 2024 because companies will need to exit, and it’s less certain that they will be able to IPO. Some will turn to M&A because it will not only be their best option, but also possibly their only one.

“We expect M&A where there is strong interest and mutual benefit from both parties — and the government is not well positioned to make an antitrust case — will continue to yield good outcomes for startups and their investors,” Sclarsic said. “And, if the IPO market doesn’t open up, more startups may choose this path, resulting in some mega-deals in M&A.”

IPOs

Many investors think that IPOs will start to return to regularity in 2024 as well. No one thinks public listings will return to 2020 or 2021 levels, but VCs are less clear on when the resurgence of IPOs may occur and what that might look like.

Some investors, like the OMERS Ventures team, think that we’ll start to see a handful of IPOs right away in 2024 but there won’t be a stable stream of activity until later in the year. “There are numerous high-quality companies chomping at the bit to go public and generate liquidity for employees and shareholders,” said Jon Lehr, general partner and co-founder at Work-Bench. “Hopefully by Q2, we’ll see many pave the IPO path for others to follow suit in the back half of 2024.”

Many predict that the second half of 2024 will be where things start to get more active. Investors, including George Easley, a principal at Outsiders Fund, think that we will see a strong pipeline of IPOs in the latter half of the year. But others, like Andrew Van Nest, a managing partner at Exceptional Capital, think that IPOs won’t fully come back until 2025.

But others think we’ll see some of both. “We don’t see the environment changing meaningfully until late in the second half [of 2024],” said Larry Aschebrook, a managing partner at G Squared. “The companies that list earlier in the year are likely to price lower, even at a discount to their last round. With valuations still restrained, the companies that can wait to grow into their valuations will — even into 2025. We expect the IPO window to reopen fully in Q4, setting the stage for a robust IPO year in 2025.”

Potential wrenches

The biggest question that seems to remain is exactly when in 2024 exit activity will begin to pick back up. While VCs aren’t sure of the timing, they do know the overarching factors that will play a large role in determining that timeline.

One of those is interest rates. After years of hiking interest rates, the U.S. Federal Reserve will likely begin to start cutting them back down some point this year. Lowering interest rates would make capital less expensive than it was in 2023 and thus help ease some of the restraints on the market. Lower rates could also make holding cash less attractive and help bolster stock market prices more generally, both of which could help IPOs perform well.

On the other hand, 2024 is an election year in the United States, which has traditionally thrown the public markets and IPO timelines off, regardless of other economic trends. “Now that inflation has cooled, and the Fed has signaled a pause on interest rate hikes, I do think the IPO window can open again sometime in 2024,” said Leslie Feinzaig, founder and general partner at Graham & Walker. “On the flipside, there’s big geopolitical forces shaking up markets: two wars, supply chain interruptions, and a very unpredictable election year in the U.S. So it’s really anybody’s guess if the public markets are steady enough to support a real window.”

It’s also worth thinking about what a 2024 exit environment could actually look like. While liquidity is good, many exits will likely be by force over choice and not necessarily at the prices that companies or their investors were hoping for originally. Butler said that many of these exits next year will likely also be due to company shutdowns as opposed to $5 billion IPOs.

Investors said that LPs weren’t hounding them for liquidity, but that’s good for the market. And while the investors that we talked with aren’t sure what the exit market will look like in 2024, they seem pretty sure that it will be more active than 2023.

“I think we’re going to see some strong IPOs and acquisitions as the Fed cuts rates again this year,” said Paige Doherty, founding partner at Behind Genius Ventures. “I’m excited to see the companies that arise as early employees get liquidity and can both start companies and angel invest. Especially given the recent push toward profitability, I think there’s going to be some really strong exits.”

exits, exit activity, startups, venture capital

VCs anticipate more exits in 2024

exits, exit activity, startups, venture capital

Image Credits: phototechno / Getty Images

It’s been a rough few years for startups looking to exit, but companies, especially late-stage startups, can’t stay private forever. When the exit market didn’t open back up in 2023, as many hoped after a very quiet 2022, investors and founders alike decided that 2024 was the year that the exit market would defrost. Now that 2024 is here, do they still think that?

TechCrunch+ recently surveyed more than 40 investors to get their predictions on a variety of topics heading into 2024, including what they thought the state of the exit market will look like. The vast majority of investors responded that they think exit volume will be higher in 2024 than in 2023 and 2022, but there wasn’t consensus on what those exits would look like.

Some investors are more optimistic about M&A in 2024, while others think we will see a rebound in the IPO market. While most respondents answered this survey before the Adobe-Figma deal dissolved, many VCs acknowledged that startups looking to pursue that route this year will have to be conscious of the current regulatory environment anyway.

M&A

Don Butler, managing director of Thomvest Ventures, said that he thinks the pace of M&A will increase this year. The emphasis on better business fundamentals and economics in the startup realm over the past few years has resulted in a number of startups that have found the sweet spot of reporting solid growth trajectories on top of solid business economics.

“We think that [those factors] will present strategic acquirers with a compelling set of targets, as these businesses will be both at scale (and thus having proven product-market fit) with positive operating cash flow,” he said.

Investors also think M&A will accelerate because the folks who are typically doing the acquiring — public companies, legacy corporations and private equity firms — are well capitalized to buy. Many will be looking for smaller startups that could serve as bolt-on or tuck-in acquisitions for themselves or their portfolio companies.

“You can see this on full display with the acquisitions being made by Broadcom, Intel, Nvidia, AMD and others, who are deploying their R&D budgets by buying already developed companies for billions of dollars,” said Michael Marks, founding managing partner at Celesta Capital.

Sarah Sclarsic, founding partner at Voyager Ventures, said M&A will also likely be up in 2024 because companies will need to exit, and it’s less certain that they will be able to IPO. Some will turn to M&A because it will not only be their best option, but also possibly their only one.

“We expect M&A where there is strong interest and mutual benefit from both parties — and the government is not well positioned to make an antitrust case — will continue to yield good outcomes for startups and their investors,” Sclarsic said. “And, if the IPO market doesn’t open up, more startups may choose this path, resulting in some mega-deals in M&A.”

IPOs

Many investors think that IPOs will start to return to regularity in 2024 as well. No one thinks public listings will return to 2020 or 2021 levels, but VCs are less clear on when the resurgence of IPOs may occur and what that might look like.

Some investors, like the OMERS Ventures team, think that we’ll start to see a handful of IPOs right away in 2024 but there won’t be a stable stream of activity until later in the year. “There are numerous high-quality companies chomping at the bit to go public and generate liquidity for employees and shareholders,” said Jon Lehr, general partner and co-founder at Work-Bench. “Hopefully by Q2, we’ll see many pave the IPO path for others to follow suit in the back half of 2024.”

Many predict that the second half of 2024 will be where things start to get more active. Investors, including George Easley, a principal at Outsiders Fund, think that we will see a strong pipeline of IPOs in the latter half of the year. But others, like Andrew Van Nest, a managing partner at Exceptional Capital, think that IPOs won’t fully come back until 2025.

But others think we’ll see some of both. “We don’t see the environment changing meaningfully until late in the second half [of 2024],” said Larry Aschebrook, a managing partner at G Squared. “The companies that list earlier in the year are likely to price lower, even at a discount to their last round. With valuations still restrained, the companies that can wait to grow into their valuations will — even into 2025. We expect the IPO window to reopen fully in Q4, setting the stage for a robust IPO year in 2025.”

Potential wrenches

The biggest question that seems to remain is exactly when in 2024 exit activity will begin to pick back up. While VCs aren’t sure of the timing, they do know the overarching factors that will play a large role in determining that timeline.

One of those is interest rates. After years of hiking interest rates, the U.S. Federal Reserve will likely begin to start cutting them back down some point this year. Lowering interest rates would make capital less expensive than it was in 2023 and thus help ease some of the restraints on the market. Lower rates could also make holding cash less attractive and help bolster stock market prices more generally, both of which could help IPOs perform well.

On the other hand, 2024 is an election year in the United States, which has traditionally thrown the public markets and IPO timelines off, regardless of other economic trends. “Now that inflation has cooled, and the Fed has signaled a pause on interest rate hikes, I do think the IPO window can open again sometime in 2024,” said Leslie Feinzaig, founder and general partner at Graham & Walker. “On the flipside, there’s big geopolitical forces shaking up markets: two wars, supply chain interruptions, and a very unpredictable election year in the U.S. So it’s really anybody’s guess if the public markets are steady enough to support a real window.”

It’s also worth thinking about what a 2024 exit environment could actually look like. While liquidity is good, many exits will likely be by force over choice and not necessarily at the prices that companies or their investors were hoping for originally. Butler said that many of these exits next year will likely also be due to company shutdowns as opposed to $5 billion IPOs.

Investors said that LPs weren’t hounding them for liquidity, but that’s good for the market. And while the investors that we talked with aren’t sure what the exit market will look like in 2024, they seem pretty sure that it will be more active than 2023.

“I think we’re going to see some strong IPOs and acquisitions as the Fed cuts rates again this year,” said Paige Doherty, founding partner at Behind Genius Ventures. “I’m excited to see the companies that arise as early employees get liquidity and can both start companies and angel invest. Especially given the recent push toward profitability, I think there’s going to be some really strong exits.”

Man's hand in black and white placing block on largest stack of 5 growing stacks of yellow and red tinted blocks

VCs are not done betting on fintech

Man's hand in black and white placing block on largest stack of 5 growing stacks of yellow and red tinted blocks

Image Credits: PM Images / Getty Images

Fintech has been in the dumps for a while now, and with companies like Brex once again cutting staff as they try to rein in costs, you’d be forgiven for assuming that the market for financial technology products is struggling.

Well, not really.

Brex might not be having a good couple of quarters, but there’s sufficient positive news from the world of fintech to offset all the negativity around the sector. Bilt Rewards’ new massive round is a good example of the other side of the coin: The rewards-focused startup just raised nine figures at a significantly higher unicorn valuation.


The Exchange explores startups, markets and money.

Read it every morning on TechCrunch+ or get The Exchange newsletter every Saturday.


Elsewhere, BNPL giant Klarna has been busy retooling its business for more profit and continued growth. So, yeah, while there has been a stark lack of fintech companies going public recently, capital is flowing into the sector because venture investors are still cautiously optimistic about it.

So, which startups are drawing the most praise from investors? We can answer that question relatively easily today thanks to a new list compiled by GGV US that highlights 50 fintech startups venture capitalists think are hot stuff. We also spoke to GGV managing partner Hans Tung about what he’s seeing in the sector today.

We’ll dig into the subsectors shortly, but if you want to cut to the chase: Lending, treasury management, and the CFO stack are pieces of the fintech puzzle well worth researching.

The problem with (2021) fintech

Before we dig into the good news, let’s talk narratives. Why does fintech look like it’s stuck in first gear today? A good portion of the current angst likely arises from a number of generally strong startups that raised too much at very high valuations several years ago. Those massive fundraises often led to overhiring and equity prices that don’t align with today’s norms.

Subscribe to TechCrunch+

Brex is a success story. It has managed to build a business that is reportedly closer to $300 million in annual revenue than $200 million, all while staying private. It’s an accomplishment! Yet, it’s being forced to cut staff to extend its runway. That’s the capital inflow part of the fintech equation we often hear about these days. The issue with capital outflow is related, since inflows were priced according to 2021 norms. Now a valuable company like Brex is sitting on a price that it can’t defend.

In fewer words: Some fintech winners look like they’re struggling today due to what happened in the past few years. But that doesn’t mean the future won’t be a bit brighter for other fintechs.

GGV makes a good case for fintech. In a presentation that TechCrunch+ viewed, the venture firm argued that with total gross profit of about $6.5 trillion (2021 data), the financial services market is (still) ripe for disruption. The same chart shows that financial services companies have better gross profits than healthcare ($4.8 trillion) or e-commerce ($1.5 trillion). It is clear from this that financial services companies are raking in lots of gross profit, but when it comes to market cap, fintech companies are worth a single-digit percentage of the broader financial services sector, the presentation argued.

Those data points are bullish, because while it’s useful to gauge a market’s size by revenue, doing so can be misleading. What we really care about is how much business that revenue can support, which hinges greatly on gross margins and, therefore, gross profits. Tung told TechCrunch+ that looking at gross profit instead of revenues helps normalize corporate profiles — allowing for more useful comparisons — and it’s a good way to compare fintech’s potential to that of other sectors, and different companies inside fintech itself.

So with lots of incumbent gross profit to attack and so much market cap to earn, fintech has a lot of ceiling above it. So which fintech groups are standing tall today?

The next hot spots

The list of trending categories in the GGV list is as interesting as the names of the shortlisted companies, if not more. Some of these companies are pretty obvious candidates, so pardon us if we don’t spend too much time discussing the rise of AI in finserv, but a few sectors caught us off guard, indicating that there’s hope and opportunities for fintech in this post-ZIRP world, too.

Two of these categories best reflect the new climate we are in: lending, and treasury/deposits, which refers to “solutions that offer high-interest banking accounts to businesses in a high-interest rate environment, enabling companies to put idle cash to work.”

The Silicon Valley Bank collapse gave companies good reason to think twice about where they store their cash, but we think higher interest rates are likely giving businesses a strong incentive to act sooner than later. Some fintechs are stepping up to the task.

It will be interesting to see if this trend crystalizes into companies focused on this particular space. For instance, Zamp Finance (not on the Fintech 50 list) makes it easier for businesses to invest in U.S. Treasury bills and to manage their cash. But such a service could also be an add-on to existing offerings, such as banking.

Incidentally, we’re seeing a similar trend at the B2C level, with Robinhood starting to pay pretty aggressive yields on uninvested cash. But in B2B, CFOs can put their money to work themselves, so the main benefit to an enterprise may be to make the CFO Office’s work easier.

That connects to another trend that GGV noted: the rise of the CFO stack. GGV seems particularly enamored by this trend and predicts that it is “time for the next-gen SAP, NetSuite, Salesforce of Finance.” The firm expects that AI could be the catalyst to truly bring this trend to life.

That said, companies have made money by empowering CFOs for a long time. Still, the fact is, companies in this particular niche are fairly capital-light businesses that should enjoy the tailwinds of the current environment, just like their counterparts that are building financial infrastructure — another sector GGV identified as a hot category.

Geographical hubs

Tung noted that 80% of the companies on the list are based in New York or the Bay Area, which surprised us a bit since venture activity in the U.S. has been fairly more distributed around the country in recent years. But Tung explained that the concentration of technical talent and proximity to financial services companies really matters in fintech, which has led to two major fintech hubs — at least in the U.S.

Still, we’re hoping that given the scope of finserv, a few more metro areas will rise up as fintech hubs in the coming years. There’s certainly enough space for more winners.

firearms, guns, Biofire

Deal Dive: VCs are no longer gunshy about firearm startups

firearms, guns, Biofire

Image Credits: LongHa2006 / Getty Images

Kai Kloepfer started biometric “smart” gun startup Biofire as a science fair project after the Aurora, Colorado, mass shooting in 2012 brought the U.S.’s gun violence problem close to home. Kloepfer began thinking of ways to solve the problem using what he knows: technology.

Twelve years later, that project has turned into Biofire, a firearms company that makes weapons that use fingerprints and facial recognition technology to unlock only for their owners and registered users. When the gun leaves a registered user’s hands, it automatically relocks, Kloepfer told TechCrunch+. This is all done on a closed-loop system meant to keep it secure and prevent potential hacking.

Biofire’s system is designed to prevent firearms from falling into unintended hands. Kloepfer knows that Biofire can’t solve the gun violence epidemic, but he feels that it can make a difference, especially for children. Firearms are now the leading cause of death for children in the U.S., with 29% being suicide and 3.5% being accidental, which are things Biofire could help prevent.

“It lends well to a technology solution,” Kloepfer said. “It’s not criminals committing crimes; it’s well-meaning gun owners making mistakes. It is not an intention thing, and it’s not a lack of training. Everybody makes mistakes. Maybe a mistake is not the end of the world, but a mistake here can be lethal.”

I personally am not interested in guns, nor do I think untrained civilians should keep non-hunting-related firearms in their homes, but this company is still interesting to me because it’s the first firearm company that has gotten institutional VC backing. Biofire said it raised a $7 million Series A extension round this week from investors, including Founders Fund, CAZ Investments, Valhalla Ventures and Liquid 2 Ventures.

Most VCs can’t back categories like this due to agreements and vice clauses with their LPs that prevent them from investing in businesses with a high level of risk, or in certain categories like weapons. Kloepfer said he did struggle to raise institutional funding in the company’s first few rounds and mainly was backed by angel investors, but the funding landscape has since changed in Biofire’s favor.

“The pool of venture funds, especially back in 2019, that were investing into deep tech hardware businesses and deep tech firearm businesses was very small,” Kloepfer said. “[The latest round] is entirely institutional investors. That is a sign that there have been macro shifts in the venture community.”

While Kloepfer acknowledges that his company isn’t the first startup to try to build a smarter gun, he points out that Biofire is the first to break through that funding roadblock. He said the change of mindset is largely due to the rise in VCs backing defense tech startups.

This makes sense. When the defense tech sector started seeing venture interest, it was almost equally puzzling. But at the end of the day, investors follow the money, and defense tech has grown into a category with numerous success stories such as Palantir Technologies and Anduril. LPs got more comfortable, too, once they saw the potential returns. The same could happen here.

Rohan Pujara, a general partner at Valhalla Ventures, said it’s smart for venture investors to move into categories like this. For one, because some firms won’t invest in such companies, there is less competition for deals, which also allows startups in the category to build stronger moats for themselves. He added that Biofire is innovation at its core in a category where people want safer options, but large incumbents dominate the market and they don’t need to innovate if they don’t want to.

“We should never block off entire categories from innovation,” Pujara said. “There is a host of areas that are really interesting and need innovation and are [ripe] for innovation because incumbents don’t really care about their customers. These areas might be in a traditional VC vice clause, [but] we want to support these businesses and think there is a lot of progress to be made.”

This thesis made me think of Vice Ventures, which was one of the pioneer venture funds backing sectors like cannabis, alcohol and sex tech. Investing in companies that fall into categories many firms avoid means there is less competition for the best deals.

Though I firmly don’t think that anyone needs a non-hunting firearm in their home, we aren’t heading toward a gunless future anytime soon in the U.S., if we ever get there at all. Better solutions to fix even part of the current gun violence problem in any way seems at least like a step in the right direction.

IPOs, secondaries, venture capital

VCs will get liquidity in 2024 from the secondary market, not IPOs

IPOs, secondaries, venture capital

Image Credits: Getty Images

If you asked a bunch of VCs at the end of 2023 if the IPO market would finally open again in 2024, most of them would have said yes. We know because TechCrunch surveyed more than 40 of them in December and that’s what they said.

Yet, there are two weeks left in Q1, still no completed major IPOs, and very few in the works. Reddit is the only big-time IPO far enough along to be priced. Otherwise, there is just speculation on who might go public, with very few public SEC documents. For instance, there’s Shein, which reportedly filed a confidential S-1 last fall, or car rental marketplace Turo, which is still waiting on the sidelines after filing its initial S-1 in 2022.

It’s unclear if the markets will open again later this year even if Reddit’s offering is a hit. Secondary investors recently told TechCrunch that while Reddit could drum up some additional activity, it won’t likely be the opening of the IPO floodgates investors were hoping for. Plus, some of biggest names that were expected to go public this year — Databricks, Stripe and Plaid — have either directly said they won’t IPO in 2024 or have held funding events that imply they aren’t going out anytime soon.

While a lot of investors want IPOs to open back up in 2024, the market conditions aren’t ideal. Interest rates are still high, making money expensive and pulling investors away from equity into bonds; valuations are still depressed from their highs of 2021 with later-stage venture investors looking at gaining little — or even losing money — if their startups were to go public now.

But the prospects of getting liquidity in 2024 are not all doom and gloom if IPOs don’t return. Investors can, and have increasingly been turning to secondary marketplaces where private companies can authorize their shareholders to sell a limited amount of stock to approved investors. This is not a public sale. Stockholders can’t sell whenever to whomever. But in 2024, it’s become an often preferable substitute.

Transactions on secondaries rose from $35 billion in 2017 to $105 billion in 2021 and are expected to total $138 billion for 2023 when year-end tallies are available, according to data from Industry Ventures.

Secondary markets — the best of both worlds

Alan Vaksman, founding partner at Launchbay Capital, said that the secondaries market allows companies to get the best of both worlds. Startups are able to appease their investors looking for liquidity by allowing them to sell all or some of their company’s equity, without having to hold a premature exit event.

“It releases that pressure for liquidity for some of the investors,” Vaksman said. “You created liquidity for the ones you wanted to, you didn’t upset your late-stage investors and you are taking your time to grow. The secondary market allows for that now.”

Stripe’s recent secondary sale is a clear example of this. In February, Stripe announced it had come to an agreement with its investors to provide liquidity to its employees in a sale that valued the company at $65 billion. While that is down from the $95 billion valuation the company garnered in 2021, it’s a huge bump from their last primary round that valued the fintech at $50 billion last year.

This secondary sale shows that investors are willing to keep building Stripe’s valuation back up toward its 2021 high and that it’s easy for employees to get cash for some of their stock prior to an IPO event. So why would Stripe want to go public in 2024 before its valuation fully recovered?

Secondary markets have always been aimed at employees. What’s newer is that VC funds and LPs have begun to lean on them. Nate Leung, a partner at Sapphire Partners, said that firms can choose to offload some shares to free up some cash, while keeping some of their stake. But firms can also use them to buy stock and increase their stakes in promising startups.

Leung said that Sapphire deployed roughly $200 million into the secondary market in 2023 and expects to deploy the same if not more into secondary stakes in 2024.

Shasta Ventures reportedly hired Jefferies Financial for a “strip sale” Bloomberg reported, meaning it was searching for secondary buyers for a selection of its portfolio holdings. The report didn’t include which startups it’s looking to sell but its portfolio includes companies like Canva, which Shasta backed in its 2013 seed round and is now worth an estimated $40 billion according to secondary data platform Caplight.

The IPO market won’t stay frozen forever. But given the maturation of the secondary market, it doesn’t need to thaw before the market is really ready.

The secondary market “is playing a huge role,” Leung said regarding companies waiting to go public. “You can achieve lots of your original goals for both employee and investor liquidity, and the LPs, by fully selling or structuring secondaries deals. [LPs] are not pressuring the GPs to push out their assets, which reduces the demand for the public market.”

This article has been updated to reflect that Nate Leung works from Sapphire Partners, the LP arm of Sapphire Ventures. The amount the firm has invested was also updated.