Starting a Fund vs. Starting a Company
What are some pros and cons of each and why? And as the self-deprecating PE associates I know we all are, I’m hoping this thread stays away from siding vehemently on the side of the latter, or acting like starting a company is obviously a much better option. Because let’s be real, it involves a lot of heartbreak and (potentially total) failure. Would appreciate some thoughts.
Fund economics require significant AUM especially for a first time fund / strategy regardless of strategy. Therefore, without a track record or significant connections on the LP side, starting a fund is incredibly difficult. Most people who launch funds do so as part of an established firm using their seed capital and brand name to help fundraising. Businesses can be started and successful without any track record or network (wouldn't hurt though) although the upside is less likely to materialise.
The way I see it is if you have the proper prerequisites to launch a fund already, this is better risk adjusted way to earn material upside. Otherwise, starting a business and being entrepreneurial is a better option.
The founders I know in the fund field had an exit from their previous startup, a liquidity event. They needed this capital to start the fund, otherwise you'd need capital from someone else. Which is tricky.
Voluptas error voluptatum perferendis eveniet corporis nisi eum quis. Mollitia aliquid iste voluptatibus aut. Corrupti officia voluptatem mollitia voluptate velit qui. Sit magni quia id et eaque modi. Voluptatem ex expedita vel consectetur velit et ipsum. Et quibusdam provident sunt corporis pariatur a autem. Unde sunt officiis voluptate cumque eveniet omnis.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...