Venture Debt in 2022 = adverse selection risk?
Testing a hypothesis here. I think we'll see carnage in VC, particularly in older vintage funds. A lot of startups won't be able to raise equity rounds and will die. Granted, there's still a lot of dry powder to be allocated. But in general VCs and non-traditional investors are more selective.
Enter Venture Debt funds as non-dilutive alternative to equity. I've heard from the street that deal flow is booming and fundraising is going better than VC. Sounds amazing, but what if the startups who need that funding are the worst capitalized ones i.e. adverse selection risk?
A big part of VD returns come from the equity kicker triggered in events like M&A, equity rounds etc. which can bump returns to >20% IRR. But if they don't materialize then you're just taking venture risk for 10-15% IRR or less.
Am I missing something? Thanks in advance for your contributions
This is right, but a bit late to the game - this is already occurring where venture lenders and HF's that are doing structured capital solutions to SaaS businesses are already an alternative to traditional VC or further equity dilution.
Like the other commenter said - structured capital as an alternative to typical equity raises are more commonplace now for early stage businesses that don't want to raise down-rounds.
The adverse selection problem we're seeing in the market at the moment primarily applies to investing in equity. If you're a not a capital efficient company with great metrics, you're neither getting access to equity financing nor venture debt. On the other hand, if you're a great startup you probably don't want equity financing right now, but you'll have good access to structured credit and avoid dilution🪜
Nothing wrong with structured equity in VC but pure debt in the 10-14% PIK range is too low of a return profile for VC, even with warrants and a low LTV. I've seen some Venture Debt funds provide 10% LTVs to companies for a fixed 10-12% PIKloan over 2 years with no minimum MoC or prepay penalty. Lots of VC collateral now isn't that heathly so a 10% LTV could look more like 50% if you truly mark to market. I am currently buying equity in VC (direct secondaries) for 10-25% of last round so why would I want to take a 10% LTV to have capped returns and all the risk? I think it's a bullshit strategy.
Heard SVB dominates this space.
Not really. Svb provide revolvers and small term loans backed by ARR. There are bigger players.
Speaking of loans backed by ARR, what do you think about revenue-based financing? Any thoughts on which business model makes more sense (marketplace like Pipe vs. company investing its own capital like Wayflyer)?
Who would those be?
What are your thoughts on VD versus structured equity? The latter seems less controversial and maybe has more career stability.
Recusandae laboriosam quas temporibus. Rerum qui quod eos quibusdam at et cupiditate. Odio consequuntur autem ut quis tempora nemo fugiat quis.
Aliquam qui sequi delectus eaque facere. Quo sint incidunt sit qui et impedit. Autem asperiores voluptas in. Aut sint numquam doloremque enim.
Earum ut nam sint et et. Error vel dolores perspiciatis accusamus rerum hic nesciunt. Qui dicta sint assumenda doloremque deserunt.
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...
Eius ut voluptatem enim iure. Cumque fugiat a provident quia quis ut accusantium. Pariatur maiores neque nostrum pariatur. Reiciendis in nihil repellat delectus dicta. Dolorum aut quam neque pariatur.
Est aut aliquam animi. A aperiam quo voluptatem est adipisci ullam quasi.