
โWe need to rewrite our early DPI blogpost.โ
Two years ago, Dave and I sat down less than five blocks away from where we were sitting when those words escaped the clutches of Daveโs mindscape. That piece has since been cited a number of times from fund managers Iโve come across. And sometimes, even LPs. While each part of that piece was written to be evergreen knowledge, what we want to do is to add nuance to that framework, along with examples of how we might see the internal conflict of early distributions and long-term thinking manifest.
In effect, and the premise for this blogpost, youโre in Year 7 of the fund. Youโre now raising Fund III. What do you need to do?
The urgency to sell at Year 7 is relatively low. Although booking some amount of DPI may motivate LPs to re-up or invest in Fund III. The urgency to sell at Year 12 is much higher. So, what happens between Years 7 and 12? If you do sell, do you sell to the market or to yourself via a continuation vehicle?
For starters:
- Knowing when to sell WHEN you have the chance to sell is crucial. The window of opportunity only lasts so long.
- Consider selling some percentage of your winners on the way up to diversify, but be careful not to sacrifice too much potential future DPI. Yes, this is something weโll elaborate more on with examples of what exactly we mean.
Optimize selling price efficiency
At the moment the next round is being put together, you have no discount to the current round price. The longer you wait to transact, the more doubt settles in from outsiders, the deeper the discount as time goes on. And so, if you have the chance to sell, sell into the (oversubscribed) primary rounds in order to optimize for price efficiency. Unless maybe, youโre selling SpaceX, OpenAI, Anthropic, Anduril, Ramp, just to name a few. There is a BIG tradeoff in TVPI (versus future DPI) when selling a fast-growing asset early (assuming it keeps its pace of growth). There is also a BIG risk to holding on to a large unrealized gain if the company stumbles or the market crashes.
We live in a world now that multi-stage venture funds have become asset management shops. Their primary goal will be to own as much of an outlier company as possible to maximize their potential for returns. As such, they will choose, at times, to buy out earlier shareholdersโ equity.
To sell your secondaries, you have a very small window of opportunity to sell. Realistically, you have one to two quarters to sell where you can probably get a fair market value of 90 cents to the dollar of the last round valuation. Ideally, you sell into the next round at the price the next round values the company. As Hunter Walk once wrote, โoptimally the secondary sales will always occur with the support/blessing of the founders; to favored investors already on the cap table (or whom the founders want on the cap table); without setting a price (higher or lower than last mark) which would be inconsistent with the companyโs own fundraising strategy; and a partially exited investor should still provide support to the company ongoing.โ If you wait a year, some people start questioning the data. If you wait 2 years, youโre looking at a much steeper discount. And if itโs not a โMag 10โ of the private marketsโfor instance, Stripe, SpaceX, Anduril, just to name a few, where there is no discountโyouโre likely looking at 30-60% discounts. As Hunter Walk, in the same piece, quotes a friend, โโI think friendly secondaries are easy, everything else feels new.โโ As such, Dave and I are here to talk through what feels โnew.โ
So, how do you know how much to sell?
First of all, lemons ripen early. In Years 1-5, youโre going to see slow IRR growth. Most of that will be impacted by businesses that fall by the wayside in the early years. In Years 5-10, IRR accelerates, assuming you have winners in your portfolio. And in the latter years, Years 10 onward, IRR once again slows.
Before we get too deep, letโs address some elephants in the room.
Why are we starting the dialogue around secondaries at Year 5? Five things. Year 5, 5 things. Get it? Hah. Iโm going to see myself out later.
One, most investment recycling periods are in the first four years of the fund. So, any non-meaningful DPI is recycled back into the fund to make new investments. While this may not always happen, it usually is a term that sits in the limited partner agreement (LPA).
Two, most investments have not had time to mature. Imagine if you invested in a company in Year 1 of the fund. Five years in, this company is likely to have gone through two rounds of additional funding. If you come in at the pre-seed, the company is now at either a Series A or about to raise a Series B, assuming most companies raise every 18-24 months. If you were to sell now, before the company has had a chance to really grow, youโre losing out on the vast majority of your venture returns. And especially so, if youโve invested in a company in Year 3 of the fund, you really didnโt give the company time to mature.
Three, by Year 5, but really Year 7, ventureโs older sibling, private equity, should have had distribution opportunities. And even if weโre different asset classes by a long margin, allocators will, even subconsciously, begin to look towards their venture portfolio expecting some element of realized returns.
Four, QSBS grants you full tax benefits at Year 5. And yes, you do get some benefits with new regulation sooner by Year 3. But if youโre investing in venture and hoping to get to liquidity by Year 3, youโre in the wrong asset class.
Five, you will likely need to show (some) DPI in Fund I, in order to raise Fund III or IV. Itโll show that youโre not only a great investor, but also a great fund manager.
Outside of our general rule of thumb in our writeup two years ago, letโs break down a few scenarios. The obvious. The non-obvious. And the painful.
- The obvious. Your fund is doing well. Youโre north of 5X between Years 7 and 10. You have a clear outlier. Maybe a few.
- The non-obvious. Your fund is doing okay. This is the middle of the road case. Youโre at 3-5X in Years 7-10.
- Then, the painful. Youโre not doing well. Even in Year 7, you havenโt crested 3X. And really, you might have a 1.5-2X fund, if youโre lucky. 1X or less if you arenโt. But your job as a fund manager isnโt over. You are still a professional money manager.
In each of the three scenarios, what do you do?
Itโs helpful to frame the above scenarios through four questions:
- How much do you sell?
- When do you sell it?
- What is the pricing efficiency of those assets?
- And what is the ultimate upside tradeoff?
The obvious (5X+ TVPI)
Here, itโs almost always worth booking in some distributions to make your LPs whole again. Potentially, and then some. At the end of the day, our job as investors is toโto borrow a line from Jerry Colonnaโs Rebootโโbuy low, sell high.โ Not โbuy lowest, sell highest.โ As such, you should sell some percentage of your big winners to lock in some meaningful DPI. Selling at least 0.5X DPI at Year 7 is meaningful. Selling 1-2X DPI at Year 10 is meaningful. As you might notice, the function of time impacts what โmeaningfulโ means. The biggest question you may have when you have solid fund performance is: How much should you sell knowing that in doing so, it might meaningfully cap your upside? Or if you should even sell at all?
Screendoorโs Jamie Rhode once said, โIf youโre compounding at 25% for 12 years, that turns into a 14.9X. If youโre compounding at 14%, thatโs a 5. And the public market which is 11% gets you a 3.5X. […] If the asset is compounding at a venture-like CAGR, donโt sell out early because youโre missing out on a huge part of that ultimate multiple. For us, weโre taxable investors. I have to go pay taxes on that asset you sold out of early and go find another asset compounding at 25%.โ Taking it a step further, assuming 12-year fund cycles, and 25% IRR, โthe last 20% of time produces 46% of that return.โ Sheโs right. Thatโs the math. And thatโs your trade off.
But for a second, we want you to consider selling some. Not all, just some. A couple other assumptions to consider before we get math-y:
- 20% of your portfolio are home runs. And by Year 5 of your fund, theyโre growing 30% year-over-year (YoY). And because they are great companies, growth doesnโt dip below 20%, even by Year 15.
- For home runs, weโre also assuming you sell into the upcoming fundraising round. In other words, perfect selling price efficiency. Obviously, your mileage, in practice, may vary.
- 30% of your portfolio are doubles, growing at 15% YoY. And growth doesnโt fall below 10%, even by Year 15.
- For doubles, just because theyโre less well-known companies, weโre assuming youโre selling on a 50% discount to the last round valuation (LRV).
- 20% of your portfolio are singles, growing at 7% YoY. Growth flatlines.
- For singles, even less desirable, weโre assuming youโre selling on an 80% discount to LRV.
- The rest (30%) are donuts. Tax writeoffs.
- For every home run and double, their growth decays by 5% every year.
- Weโre assuming 15-year fund terms.
Example 1:
Say you have a $25M fund, and at Year 10, you choose to sell 50% of the initial fund size ($12.5M). If you didnโt sell at Year 10, by Year 15, youโd have a 5.7X fund. But if you did sell at Year 10, youโd have a 3.8X fund. To most LPs, still not a bad fund.

The next few examples are testing the limits of outperformance and early distributions. Purely for the curious soul. For those, looking for what to do in the non-obvious case, you can jump to this section.
Example 2:
Now, letโs say, in an optimistic case, your home runsโstill 20% of your portfolioโare growing at 50% YoY in Year 5. All else equal. If you didnโt sell at Year 10, by Year 15, youโd have a 11.6X fund. If you did sell at Year 10, by Year 15, youโd have a 9.3X. In both cases, and even when you do sell $12.5M of your portfolio at Year 10, you still have an incredible fund. And not a single LP will fault you for selling early.

Example 3:
Now, letโs assume your home runs are still growing at 50% YoY at Year 5, but only 10% of your portfolio are home runs and 40% are strikeouts. All else equal. If you sell $12.5M at Year 10, at the end of your fundโs lifetime, youโre at 4.8X. Versus, if you didnโt, 6.6X.

Hell, letโs say youโre not sure at Year 10, so you only sell a quarter of your initial fund size ($6.25M). All else equal to the third example. If you did sell, 5.6X. If you didnโt, 7.4X.

Example 4:
Now letโs stretch the model a little. And play make believe. Letโs take all the assumptions in Example 1, but the only difference is your home runs are growing at 100% YoY by Year 5.
If you sell at Year 10, by fund term, youโre at 108.8X. If you donโt sell at Year 10, you have 110.7X.

And as we play with the model some more, we start to see that assuming the above circumstances and decisions, selling anything at most 1X your initial fund size at Year 10, at Year 15, you lose somewhere between 2X and 3X DPI.
If you sell three times your fund size, assuming you can by Year 10, you lose at most around 5X of your ultimate DPI at Year 15. If you sell five times your initial fund size (again, assuming the odds are in your favor), you lose at most 7X of your final DPI by Year 15.
Now, weโd like to point out that Examples 2, 3, and 4 are merely intellectual exercises. As we mentioned in our first blogpost on this topic, if your best assets are compounding at a rate higher than your target IRR (say for venture, thatโs 25%), you should be holding. Even a company growing 50% YoY at Year 5, assuming 5% decay in growth per year, will still be growing at 39% in Year 10, which is greater than 25%. That said, if a single asset accounts for 50-80% of your portfolioโs value, do consider concentration risk. And selling 20-30% of that individual asset may make sense to book in distributions, even if the terms may not look the best (i.e. on a discount greater than feels right).
Remember what we said earlier? To re-underscore that point, itโs worth saying it again. There is a BIG tradeoff in TVPI (versus future DPI) when selling a fast-growing asset early (assuming it keeps its pace of growth). There is also a BIG risk to holding on to a large unrealized gain if the company stumbles or the market crashes.
If youโd like to simulate your own secondary sales, weโll include the model at the very bottom of this post.
The non-obvious (3-5X TVPI)
This is tricky territory. Because by Year 7-10, and if youโre here, you donโt have any clear outliers (where it might make more sense to hold as the assets are compounding faster than your projected IRR), but you donโt have a bad fund. In fact, many LPs might even call yours a win, depending on the vintage and public market equivalents. So the question becomes how much DPI is worth selling before fund term to make your LPs whole, and how much should you be capping your upside. How much of your TVPI should you be selling for your DPI knowing that you can only sell on a discount?
Weโre back in Example 1 that we brought up earlier, especially if you have a single asset that accounts for 50-80% of the overall portfolio value. Here if the companies are collectively growing faster than your target IRRโsay 25% on a revenue growth perspective, hold your positions. If your companies are growing slower than your target IRR and are valued greater than 1.5X public market comparables, you should consider selling 20-30% of your positions to book meaningful distributions.
The painful (1-3X TVPI)
Youโve got a dud. No two ways about it. Youโre really looking at a 1.5X net fund. Maybe a 1X. And mind we remind you, itโs Years 7-10. Itโs either you sell or you ride out the lie you have to tell LPs. LPs will almost always prefer the former. And for the latter, letโs be real โ hope is not a (liquidity) strategy. And if put less charitably, check this Tina Fey and Amy Poehler video out. I donโt have the heart to put whatโs alluded to in writing, but the video encapsulates, while humorously framed, the situation youโre in. Youโre going to have to try to sell your positions on heavy discounts.
In closing
If you made it thus far, first off, youโre a nerd. We respect that. We are too. And second off, youโre probably looking for the model we used. If so, here you go.
We also do cover how this blogpost came to be in the first ever episode of the [trading places] podcast. And if you’re interested in the topic of secondaries, the [trading places] podcast might be your new guilty pleasure.
Photo by Tucker Monticelli on Unsplash
Shoutout to Dave for the many iterations of this blogpost and building the model in which this blogpost is based around!
Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!
The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.



