附近上门

Using data and projections from 附近上门, this report from 附近上门 News dives deep into the state of the global venture capital ecosystem. Here, we want to assess investment and liquidity: Money In versus Money Out.

Subscribe to the 附近上门 Daily

In the Money In section, we will cover 附近上门鈥檚 projections of how鈥攁nd how much鈥攖he global venture capital ecosystem invested in Q3 2019. We鈥檒l then evaluate how that result compares to both Q2 2019 and Q3 2018, giving us perspective on sequential quarter and year-over-year performance.

In the Money Out section, we鈥檒l review acquisition statistics and highlight other notable liquidity events, including the thawing market for technology IPOs.

To help you digest this report, each section will contain a bullish and bearish key finding. Without further ado, let鈥檚 dive in.

Money In

• Bullish key finding: Venture capital deal volume hit an all-time high, according to 附近上门 projections. This growth was largely driven by a large uptick in seed-stage deals, as well as ongoing development and maturation of international startup markets.
• Bearish key finding: Continued declines in China鈥檚 VC market led to a plateau in VC dollar volume growth worldwide. Additionally, projections indicate declines in early-stage deal volume, which may presage problems for later-stage investors years down the road.

Global Funding Activity: A View From Cruising Altitude

附近上门 projects that, worldwide, $75.6 billion was invested across 9,100 venture capital deals in Q3 2019.

Spurred by a spurt of seed-stage activity, worldwide venture deal volume is projected to reach new post-Dot Com heights. However, venture dollar volume, which has been primarily driven by very large, very late-stage rounds, remains below all-time highs (a projected $87.4 billion in Q2 2018) and appears to have flattened out over the past several quarters as the most cash-hungry unicorns graduate to public markets.

The number of venture deals and the total dollar amount invested in those deals are very different numbers. You can think of deal volume as the velocity of the global venture market. And, similarly, you can think of dollars invested as the weight of those global venture deals.

Deal volume is growing faster outside North America. In Q3 2019, U.S. and Canadian companies netted 39.2 percent of venture deal volume across all stages, according to 附近上门 data and projections. That鈥檚 compared to 43 percent in Q3 2018. Although the shift is small, it results from a fairly consistent trend.

In this respect, the center of venture capital gravity is shifting away from the U.S. and Canada. However, with respect to dollar volume, North American companies are gaining ground. North American startups raised 47.8 percent of worldwide venture dollar volume in Q3 2019, up markedly from the 43 percent proportional share U.S. and Canadian startups called down in Q3 2018.

The principal driver of this trend is the ongoing decline of China鈥檚 venture capital market, mirroring deteriorating economic conditions in that country. Regardless of the cause, the United States and Canada are taking on a greater share of global venture dollars, even as their deal share slips.

China鈥檚 diminished position in the global VC market is highlighted in 附近上门 News鈥檚 recent analysis of what we call 鈥�supergiant rounds.鈥� These VC deals of $100 million or more account for 45.1 percent of known venture dollar volume transacted in 2019. Supergiant deals, almost by definition, have an outsized influence on dollar volume totals, and when a country鈥檚 share of supergiant rounds declines, so does its contribution to the market as a whole. 附近上门 News found that, in Q3 2019, Chinese startups raised 20 supergiant rounds according to 附近上门 data, down from a high of 50 such deals in Q3 2018.

With this high-level overview out of the way, let鈥檚 dig into some more of the headline numbers.

Pace of Dealmaking

附近上门 projects that global venture deal volume hit a new all-time high in Q3 2019.

Global venture deal volume grew by over 9.3 percent from last quarter, the largest projected quarter-over-quarter growth rate in over a year. Relative to the same quarter in 2018, global deal volume is up nearly 9.9 percent.

Deal volume growth is a global phenomenon. North America accounted for approximately 39.1 percent of total projected deal volume last quarter, down slightly from 43 percent of total deal volume in Q3 2018.

Projected VC Dollar Volume

附近上门 projects that dollar volume is basically flat, and only slightly higher, compared to the sequentially preceding quarter. This being said, dollar volume is down on an annual basis. 附近上门 data projects a $2.8 billion gap in overall funding between Q3 2019 and Q3 2018.

However, as we鈥檝e seen in the past, part of this gap is attributable to outsized rounds, which, as outliers, can skew the numbers by a significant margin. For example, the top ten largest startup funding rounds of Q3 2018鈥攊ncluding a , a closed by Chinese state-backed media company CMC Inc, and $1 billion funding rounds raised by the likes of , , , and 鈥攔aised over $10.2 billion collectively.

By comparison, the ten largest rounds from the past quarter netted those companies about $7.3 billion in venture funding. Apart from funding rounds raised by I and , there were no other rounds of $1 billion or more, compared to six in Q3 2018.

The decline in dollar volume can be in part attributed to the change in the size of the largest rounds recorded in the quarter, compared to its year-ago counterpart.

Most Active Lead Investors

In the case of most venture deals, there鈥檚 a 鈥渓ead鈥� investor. Typically, lead investors initiate and run due diligence, syndicate the deal to other firms, and usually write the biggest check of the round. Lead investors often take seats on the company鈥檚 board of directors, where they can exert governance and control functions necessary to ensure the best financial outcome for their limited partners.

附近上门鈥檚 funding round data typically lists the set of investors involved in a given venture deal. It usually (though not always) specifies which among the listed investors led the round. In the chart below, we chart the investors which participated in the most early- and late-stage deals in Q3 2019. Keep in mind that these counts are subject to change as additional funding round data is added to 附近上门 over time.

Stage-By-Stage Analysis of Q3 2019 VC Funding Trends

In this section, we鈥檒l start close to the entrepreneurial metal by looking at seed-stage deals. From there we鈥檒l climb our way up the capital stack, skittering across the alphabet soup of Series As, Series Bs, Series Cs, etc., from seed to very late-stage venture.

Angel And Seed-Stage Deals

Q3 2019 brought a veritable explosion in angel and seed-stage dealing.

附近上门 projects that $4.44 billion was invested across 5,875 angel and seed-stage deals. (More information about the types of rounds included in this stage can be found in the Methodology section at the end.)

Seed-stage startups are sprouting up (and raising capital) like it鈥檚 going out of style. According to 附近上门 projections, deal volume is up a massive 18.5 percent since last quarter and 17.6 percent since Q3 2018. Dollar volume is up by similarly large margins鈥攇rowing by 24.2 percent quarter-over-quarter and 7.7 percent year-over-year. For any early-stage investors worried about future deal-flow pipeline issues, this growth should be heartening.

On the one hand, angel and seed-stage deals are a big part of the global venture landscape, accounting for nearly 65 percent of deal volume in Q3 2019. However, because these deals are quite small (typically less than $5 million, though there鈥檚 an uptick in super-sized seed deals) they accounted for just 5.9 percent of total venture dollar volume鈥攁 virtual rounding error as far as that metric is concerned.

Angel and seed-stage venture exhibits the pattern of geographic divergence that鈥檚 present in the market as a whole. U.S. and Canadian startups accounted for 43 percent of worldwide angel and seed-stage dollar volume in Q3 2019, up from 34.7 percent of global totals in Q3 2018. Simultaneously, North America鈥檚 share of global deal volume is on the decline: from 40.8 percent in Q3 2018 down to 37.7 percent in Q3 2019.

Angel and seed-stage deals are also growing worldwide. The average seed deal in Q3 2019 is 7.1 percent larger than Q2 2019 and 15.4 percent larger than in Q3 2018. Although quarter-over-quarter change in the average deal size is likely attributable to outsized outlier rounds, changes in median deal size鈥攖he center value in the distribution鈥攑oint to broader population-scale changes. Seed-stage deals really are getting larger.

Early-Stage Deals

Early-stage deals are the bread and butter of venture data. 附近上门 projects that $27.63 billion was invested across 2,572 early-stage deals in Q3 2019.

Including Series A and Series B rounds, plus transactions from a selection of other round types, the global venture market can attribute roughly 28.3 percent of its deal volume and roughly 36.8 percent of dollar volume to early-stage startups.

It appears as though early stage is one in which more money is chasing fewer deals over time. Early-stage deal volume declined quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year, whereas dollar inflows continued to grow. Early-stage venture dollar volume is up 2.8 percent quarterly and 7 percent annually, according to 附近上门 projections.

Considering the ballooning seed-stage market, this is an interesting phenomenon, but one that may reverse course as seed-stage companies mature and, presumably, will start seeking additional funding. If this dynamic does not change over the next several quarters, the early-stage crunch of yesteryear will return in full force.

The same pattern of geographic divergence exists amidst early-stage investments as with their earlier counterparts. U.S. and Canadian startups accounted for 36.6 percent of worldwide early-stage dollar volume in Q3 2018, which grew to 41.3 percent in the just-ended quarter. And again, the geographic distribution of deal volume is trending the other direction. North American startups accounted for just 40.1 percent of worldwide early-stage deal volume in Q3 2019, compared to a marginally more robust 44.9 percent back in Q3 2018.

In the case of early-stage deals, we see similarly robust round size growth.

Quarter over quarter, the average early-stage round grew by 5.9 percent. Compared to the same period last year, Q3 2019鈥檚 average early-stage round grew by 10.2 percent. Significant growth in median round size, particularly on a year-to-year basis, largely rules out outliers as the sole driver behind changes in these metrics: as seed rounds grow, so do early-stage deals.

Late-Stage & Technology Growth Deals

附近上门 projects that, combined, $43.37 billion was invested across 653 late-stage and technology growth deals in Q3 2019.

Late-stage and technology growth deals are fewer in number than early-stage deals but much larger in size. Late-stage deals鈥擲eries C, Series D, and beyond, plus a high-dollar subset of other equity funding types鈥攁nd private equity deals raised by previously venture-backed companies (which 附近上门 calls 鈥渢echnology growth鈥� rounds) account for just 7.2 percent of deal volume, but 57.4 percent of total dollar volume.

Since technology growth deals are relatively few and far between (a projected 44 deals representing just over $2.5 billion) we鈥檒l focus here on traditional late-stage deal and dollar volume.

Late-stage deal and dollar volume is up on both a quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year basis. 附近上门 projections indicate that deal volume is up 5.4 percent relative to Q2 2019, and grew by an even more robust 9.3 percent compared to Q3 2018. In dollar volume terms, the differences between quarterly and annual growth are more stark: dollar volume grew QoQ by roughly 12.4 percent, but is up just 3 percent relative to the third quarter of last year. It should be noted that, between Q2 2018 and Q3 2018, there was the largest quarterly decline in late-stage dollar volume, worldwide, in several years. In other words, the late-stage market is in something of a holding pattern.

This holding pattern becomes more apparent when looking at how late-stage round size has changed over the past several quarters.

Average late-stage deal size in Q3 2019 is up 8.3 on a sequential quarterly basis, but grew by only 2.5 percent compared to the same time last year. Again, when dealing with smaller sample sizes with high variance, outliers can skew averages by a significant margin. Median deal size is the metric which shows that late-stage venture is a market gone sideways. Median late-stage deal size is unchanged on a quarterly basis, and up just 3 percent relative to the same period last year.

Even at these latest stages of the venture lifecycle, a similar pattern of geographic distribution of deal and dollar volume is present to what we saw at seed and early-stage.

When it comes to dollar volume, North American companies are gaining on peers located in the rest of the world. U.S. and Canadian startups accounted for 47.8 of late-stage and tech growth dollar volume in Q3 2019, up from 43 percent the year before. That said, deal volume is growing more quickly elsewhere. North American startups made up 39.1 percent of late-stage and tech growth deal volume this past quarter, compared to 43 percent in Q3 2018.

Money Out

• Bullish key finding. Software companies are seeing strong exits through IPOs.
• Bearish key finding. Certain well-funded unicorns stumbled while working to provide liquidity to their shareholders.

A Quick Overview Of Liquidity

Startup equity is an illiquid asset, meaning that there isn鈥檛 really an open market for private company shares. Founders, employees, and investors often hold startup stock for long periods of time, but to realize their capital gains, stakeholders need to 鈥渆xit鈥� their positions. Unlike publicly-traded stocks, which can be bought and sold more or less instantaneously on an open exchange, private company shareholders rely on two primary paths to liquidity: a merger or acquisition (M&A) or an initial public offering (IPO).

There is a third path: selling shares in a . However, since private companies aren鈥檛 typically required to disclose these internal sales to the public and most of the major secondary market brokers are pretty secretive about their clientele and dealmaking, there just isn鈥檛 enough available information to comment on broader trends in the secondary market. This being said, as companies continue to prolong their time to exit by way of IPO or M&A, early stakeholders are more likely to lobby for this alternative path to liquidity.

Below we’ll look at traditional startup liquidity methods, M&A and IPOs.

Venture-Backed Acquisitions

Q3 2019 venture-backed M&A deal volume clocked in at 326 reported transactions, down 14.2 percent. This marks the largest QoQ M&A deal volume decline in at least three years. Dollar volume is quite variable from quarter to quarter, so we don鈥檛 place much analytical weight on that measure, but it鈥檚 worth noting that there weren鈥檛 many high-dollar deals in Q3 either.

Over the past several quarters, 附近上门 News has documented the persistent general downtrend in reported venture-backed M&A. Though some quarters see more deals than others, the general pattern is one step forward and two steps back.

Initial Public Offerings

The second path to exit is through an initial public offering.

Throughout their private-company existence, startups have fairly limited options when it comes to the types of investors they鈥檙e able to raise from. Because startup equity is a fairly risky asset class, most jurisdictions limit access to 鈥渟ophisticated鈥� investors. Which is to say, mostly wealthy folks.

To raise money from the general public, companies typically undergo a period of intense regulatory scrutiny to ensure that the company is nominally doing what it says it鈥檚 doing and that its financials are up-to-date and reasonably transparent. Though newly-public companies still present plenty of risk, once regulators deem them safe enough for public consumption, startups are able to raise money on the open market. As part of this process, common and preferred shares in the previously private company become publicly-traded securities, giving early stakeholders the option to either hold their position or liquidate it for cash, following the customary lock-up period.

Q3 2019 presented something of a turning point in the IPO market. Companies with robust fundamentals and a narrative which suggests continued growth did fairly well. Others, with 鈥渧isionary鈥� founders and specious claims about 鈥渆levating consciousness鈥� and 鈥渟elling happiness鈥� didn鈥檛 fare so well.

Here we see a real stratification in the IPO market. On the one hand, technology companies with strong economics, a profitable business (or a clear path to profitability), reasonable prospects for growth, and a stable management team have done fairly well when raising from public markets. , for example, priced its IPO at $27 and opened at $40.35 in its first trades as a public company. At time of writing, its shares trade at $37.

For companies with more faith-based valuations, not so much. is definitely the most conspicuous flop of the quarter, but other ventures with lofty private market valuations also stumbled out of the gate. Interactive fitness firm and its underwriters set an IPO share price of $29, but its shares closed out day one of public-market trading at $25.76. At time of writing, Peloton shares trade below $24.

Lackluster IPOs (and failures to launch) in Q3 affect the future IPO pipeline. Postmates CEO Bastian Lehmann said his company will delay its public market debut, citing 鈥渃hoppy鈥� market conditions.

Additionally, the IPO process itself is being called into question. An effort led by general partner advocates founders on open-market exchanges. This could work for profitable companies like Airbnb, which don鈥檛 really need the additional working capital underwriters provide.

With WeWork鈥檚 IPO shelved seemingly indefinitely, Airbnb slated to go public (whether by direct listing or through a traditional IPO) in 2020, and Postmates delayed until further notice, Q4鈥檚 IPO calendar might look a little sparse.

Conclusion

The current bull run for startups might be getting a little long in the tooth.

The fates of some of most lavishly-funded ventures from this past cycle were largely decided this year, and the outcomes weren鈥檛 always great. The introspection brought by humdrum debuts by the likes of Uber, Lyft, Slack, Peloton, and others (including WeWork鈥檚 non-debut) prompted a moment of introspection for some tech investors. What, exactly, is a tech company in a time where basically everything a business does these days is mediated through a website or mobile app? What kind of margins merit tech company valuations? How does one balance the wishes and whims of founders with the long-term well-being of the company as a whole, when more than just personal cash is at stake?

If, in the long run, the market that鈥檚 consistently coming up a little light these days, then the scales might start tipping in the other direction: toward diminished founder power; toward more muted valuations; toward more scrutiny of claims that a 鈥渢ech company鈥� is actually a tech company; toward, ultimately, more discipline. Because investor largesse has gotten the market鈥攚hat?鈥攆lat-lined public offerings, heaps of cash torched in protracted wars of attrition with similarly-funded competitors, employees who are underwater on their options, and a staggering amount of faith placed on founders spouting woo about changing the world. The first rule of changing the world is that you don鈥檛 talk about changing the world.

With any luck, it is the culture of disruption that will itself be disrupted by a new way of doing business, just like would suggest.

It鈥檚 for this reason that the spike in seed-stage venture is, ultimately, heartening. Whether these founders and their backers are taking a leap into new ventures just as the bottom threatens to fall out from under global political and economic order remains to be seen. But assuming we dodge economic calamity, hopefully the excesses revealed by last quarter leave a mark in the market鈥檚 collective memory.

Tech may be new-fangled, but the principles of business never change. Try to make more money than you spend. Provide a quality product or service, consistently. Grow at a pace you can afford. And do your best to ensure that everyone comes out a little better off than they went in. That鈥檚 not what鈥檚 happening everywhere in startup-land, but it doesn鈥檛 have to be the same going forward

鲍辫诲补迟别:听The section documenting dollar volume totals has been updated to correct a numerical error in the original report.

Methodology

The data contained in this report comes directly from 附近上门, and in two varieties: projected data and reported data.

附近上门 uses projections for global and U.S. trend analysis. Projections are based on historical patterns in late reporting, which are most pronounced at the earliest stages of venture activity. Using projected data helps prevent undercounting or reporting skewed trends that only correct over time. All projected values are noted accordingly.

Certain metrics, like mean and median reported round sizes, were generated using only reported data. Unlike with projected data, 附近上门 calculates these kinds of metrics based only on the data it currently has. Just like with projected data, reported data will be properly indicated.

Please note that all funding values are given in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted. 附近上门 converts foreign currencies to US dollars at the prevailing spot rate from the date funding rounds, acquisitions, IPOs, and other financial events as reported. Even if those events were added to 附近上门 long after the event was announced, foreign currency transactions are converted at the historic spot price.

Glossary of Funding Terms

• Seed/Angel include financings that are classified as a seed or angel, including accelerator fundings and equity crowdfunding below $5 million.
• Early stage venture include financings that are classified as a Series A or B, venture rounds without a designated series that are below $15M, and equity crowdfunding above $5 million.
• Late stage venture include financings that are classified as a Series C+ and venture rounds greater than $15M.
• Technology Growth include private equity investments with participation from venture investors.

Illustration: