5 Comments
User's avatar
Elaine Barsoom's avatar

The line about methodologies being "designed to minimise surprise rather than uncover unexpected truths" is such a sharp way to put it. It explains why every one of these lists ends up with the same five names near the top no matter who compiles it. Do you think a ranking like this could ever work without full LP-level transparency, or is that just structurally impossible given how much the industry likes its opacity?

Patrick Ryan's avatar

I think the opacity suits a lot of ppl, but over time the scaleup and consolidation of highly digitised back office service providers like Odin will mean that extremely granular longitudinal performance data (to drive much more accurate rankings) will be _available_ - the question of how accessible it will be is a different one though!

Patrick Ryan's avatar

PS not the author of this article - my colleague Dan is!

Braden Buchanan's avatar

The irony of venture capital is that an industry obsessed with "bold, non-conformist thinking" spends far more mental energy than it cares to admit obsessing over these "lists".

Thanks for including a link to Strebulaev-Jackson Venture Ranking article. I will read through that one next.

Rohit Malhotra's avatar

Thanks for sharing