they both go out and raise money from LPs (limited partners)
they both are looking to make as much money as possible by buying and selling companies.
VCs, typically focus on smaller, higher growth companies while PE focuses on more mature companies.
VC more often does growth equity investments whereas PE more often does your traditional LBO.
Oftentimes, companies VCs invest in are making little to no money and the VC firm is backing an idea with a few managers. obvioulsy much higher "failure rate" but when you hit a homerun, the returns can be extraordinary. you can think of a VC fund firing 100 bullets and even if only 5-10 of the are deemed a "success", that can support the other 90 bad deals.
whereas a PE fund typically has larger and fewer investments in a given fund - say 10-20 bullets. If 2-3 big investments don't perform or go under this can make a significant hit on the returns.
in summary: VC invests in early-stage, PE in more mature (usually some EBITDA or CF).
there are exceptions to these guidelines of course...
Nutshell: VCs invest in earlier stage companies and take a minority stake. PE firms invest in later stage companies and take a majority or total interest.
Nutshell: VCs invest in earlier stage companies and take a minority stake. PE firms invest in later stage companies and take a majority or total interest.
Dude are you on meth or something, this is a 6 year old thread.
Nutshell: VCs invest in earlier stage companies and take a minority stake. PE firms invest in later stage companies and take a majority or total interest.
Dude are you on meth or something, this is a 6 year old thread.
VC. Tech is the place to be at the moment with Silicon Valley by far the most prosperous industry anywhere.
Meanwhile, PE is undergoing intensified scrutiny as Romney and his taxes make carried interest a household conversation, to say nothing of what the anti-Bain-Capital-here's-how-they-borrowed-money-and-laid-off-people commercials have tarnished the common person's perceptions of PE in general. You may ask why this matters, but it's certainly harder bidding for a company if the seller thinks you're just going to over-lever it and wreck it.
To say nothing of the portion of PE returns that come from simple financial engineering versus VCs which actually invest in ideas. (I'll catch flak from this from the PE guys but they know it).
Pretty obvious. There's a difference between returns based on a debt recap, and returns from actual operational improvements and/or growth equity. Many buyout firms, by definition, focus on the former.
VC is a vastly shrinking industry and it is going to be harder and harder to break in, especially given that a lot of VCs want someone who has the industry background / skill set that their fund focuses on. Additionally, it is a difficult value proposition in these times with debt rates where they are for a company to consider giving up substantial equity to a VC when they could just as easily go to the capital markets and pay a lower rate of interest and still retain stronger ownership. That being said, I think VC is a really cool portion of the business life cycle to be in, and I would love to meet with companies in their early stage and help them grow, especially on the tech side. While I don't have a background in tech, I find some of these companies to be fascinating... new websites, app companies, and tech service companies pop up all the time, and they invariably have something sexy about them... Would be a cool job for sure... I still think the ability to get in and money is better in PE though...
I left a top mega HF (after IBD) for the VC fund I am currently at now (top-tier) which I also chose over a top PE fund - best decision I have ever made.
"Jesus, he's like a gremlin; comes with instructions and shit"
I left a top mega HF (after IBD) for the VC fund I am currently at now (top-tier) which I also chose over a top PE fund - best decision I have ever made.
I don't care much about how "cool" the ideas are in VC or how PE firms can "add value"... I'm more concerned with what would give me flexiblity, a viable business network and independence in the remaining few years I have left on this planet... being independent and having the time & means to do what you want in life is much cooler than business/investing.
I would choose a top PE firm over VC... I think it's more likely that I will be able to use that to do my own thing later on... e.g. leave to do my own LBOs on a deal by deal basis for large investors/corporates/whatever capital sources I can convince, or get invested in proper companies by helping them do deals... I don't see how I could use VC as a springboard to financial and work/life independence.
I'm a bit biased as I'm currently in REPE... I've seen several people make 7 figures just by brokering a deal / doing an acquisition for a decently sized investor/corporate... no need to find the next facebook, just help a family office buy a skyscraper/mall... a few million in the bank would be quite liberating for someone young (in their 30s).
What do you guys think of my approach / thought process?
Technically, VC is a form of PE. What would distinguish a 'typical PE firm' from a 'typical VC firm' is the size of the financing deals and the degree of the client's infancy in the business cycle. VC firms typically are strictly the initial financiers whereas PE firms will provide financing at various levels of busines growth. Not sure it this makes much sense to you.
also with VC only a small percent of the deals make money, but when they do they are homeruns. in pe most of the deals make money, or atleast thats the goal
VC funds companies for growth and PE typically does buyouts which do not always necessitate high projections. Therefore, as KE said, a lot of VC deals do not receive a high IRR but when one does, it can be tremendous. This is due to the high equity stake they demand. PE firms can usually hit their target by just structuring the deal correctly with lots of leverage which is the main difference. VC transactions usually do not include leverage. They bank on incredible growth.
Optio autem modi maxime ipsam. Officia illum magnam iure quia rerum et placeat vel. Saepe eligendi vel accusamus consequuntur facere.
Suscipit facere atque fuga ea ut. Ratione qui voluptatem aperiam expedita ratione consectetur adipisci.
Aliquam eius voluptatibus molestias. Consequuntur suscipit quis voluptas nemo in repellendus. Facere consectetur non tempore vero.
Quis non atque et sequi minima. Et et exercitationem ex at. Placeat laudantium est dignissimos at asperiores odit et.
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)
Excepturi vel omnis voluptatem temporibus. Maxime et alias voluptatibus nesciunt delectus consequatur reiciendis inventore. Voluptatem ut sit consequatur distinctio nobis aut fuga.
Officia hic non aut dicta voluptatem et accusamus. Dolores repudiandae voluptas reiciendis nesciunt.
Voluptatem sed debitis rem aliquam dolores. Veniam aliquid possimus quisquam aperiam. Consectetur veniam vel eum quos. Veritatis minus aut libero.
Molestias ea culpa impedit officiis neque. Et adipisci in dolore eaque. Similique incidunt veritatis ut quia delectus sed. Quibusdam molestias commodi asperiores omnis ratione officiis.
Sorry, you need to login or sign up in order to vote. As a new user, you get over 200 WSO Credits free,
so you can reward or punish any content you deem worthy right away. See you on the other side!
they both go out and raise money from LPs (limited partners)
they both are looking to make as much money as possible by buying and selling companies.
VCs, typically focus on smaller, higher growth companies while PE focuses on more mature companies.
VC more often does growth equity investments whereas PE more often does your traditional LBO.
Oftentimes, companies VCs invest in are making little to no money and the VC firm is backing an idea with a few managers. obvioulsy much higher "failure rate" but when you hit a homerun, the returns can be extraordinary. you can think of a VC fund firing 100 bullets and even if only 5-10 of the are deemed a "success", that can support the other 90 bad deals.
whereas a PE fund typically has larger and fewer investments in a given fund - say 10-20 bullets. If 2-3 big investments don't perform or go under this can make a significant hit on the returns.
in summary: VC invests in early-stage, PE in more mature (usually some EBITDA or CF).
there are exceptions to these guidelines of course...
Thanks Nychimp,
That explains a lot.
I guess, a growing firm could start from Vc and then go to PE and finally through IPO
Yup,
If it all works right, a firm would go through all the stages before an IPO
compensation is much better at PE...currently at least.
Nutshell: VCs invest in earlier stage companies and take a minority stake. PE firms invest in later stage companies and take a majority or total interest.
Dude are you on meth or something, this is a 6 year old thread.
This guy has major issues.
PE vs. VC (Originally Posted: 02/17/2012)
Purely for fun.
All else equal, if you had an offer from a top VC firm (ie. Accel) and an offer from a top PE firm (ie. KKR), which would you choose and why?
VC. Tech is the place to be at the moment with Silicon Valley by far the most prosperous industry anywhere.
Meanwhile, PE is undergoing intensified scrutiny as Romney and his taxes make carried interest a household conversation, to say nothing of what the anti-Bain-Capital-here's-how-they-borrowed-money-and-laid-off-people commercials have tarnished the common person's perceptions of PE in general. You may ask why this matters, but it's certainly harder bidding for a company if the seller thinks you're just going to over-lever it and wreck it.
To say nothing of the portion of PE returns that come from simple financial engineering versus VCs which actually invest in ideas. (I'll catch flak from this from the PE guys but they know it).
^ what the fuck are you talking about.
Pretty obvious. There's a difference between returns based on a debt recap, and returns from actual operational improvements and/or growth equity. Many buyout firms, by definition, focus on the former.
This isn't exactly controversial. A quick google search reveals everything from the basic Wikipedia article on LBOs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leveraged_buyout#Rationale), to Warren Buffett (http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertlenzner/2012/01/14/why-warren-buffett…), to PE heads themselves (http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2010/02/11/p-e-should-forget-financial-engi…) acknowledge the financial engineering aspect.
What else do you find mind-boggling? "The sky is blue." "What the fuck are you talking about, 310 banker?!"
have you actually worked in PE or VC?
VC is a vastly shrinking industry and it is going to be harder and harder to break in, especially given that a lot of VCs want someone who has the industry background / skill set that their fund focuses on. Additionally, it is a difficult value proposition in these times with debt rates where they are for a company to consider giving up substantial equity to a VC when they could just as easily go to the capital markets and pay a lower rate of interest and still retain stronger ownership. That being said, I think VC is a really cool portion of the business life cycle to be in, and I would love to meet with companies in their early stage and help them grow, especially on the tech side. While I don't have a background in tech, I find some of these companies to be fascinating... new websites, app companies, and tech service companies pop up all the time, and they invariably have something sexy about them... Would be a cool job for sure... I still think the ability to get in and money is better in PE though...
I left a top mega HF (after IBD) for the VC fund I am currently at now (top-tier) which I also chose over a top PE fund - best decision I have ever made.
Care to elaborate, JD? How so?
@melvvvar:
PE yes, VC no. What are you driving at?
Janitor or doorman?
Cleaning lady actually.
I don't care much about how "cool" the ideas are in VC or how PE firms can "add value"... I'm more concerned with what would give me flexiblity, a viable business network and independence in the remaining few years I have left on this planet... being independent and having the time & means to do what you want in life is much cooler than business/investing.
I would choose a top PE firm over VC... I think it's more likely that I will be able to use that to do my own thing later on... e.g. leave to do my own LBOs on a deal by deal basis for large investors/corporates/whatever capital sources I can convince, or get invested in proper companies by helping them do deals... I don't see how I could use VC as a springboard to financial and work/life independence.
I'm a bit biased as I'm currently in REPE... I've seen several people make 7 figures just by brokering a deal / doing an acquisition for a decently sized investor/corporate... no need to find the next facebook, just help a family office buy a skyscraper/mall... a few million in the bank would be quite liberating for someone young (in their 30s).
What do you guys think of my approach / thought process?
diff between PE and VC? (Originally Posted: 12/01/2006)
Hi can anyone clarify the diff between VC and PE? skills they look for would be the same?
Technically, VC is a form of PE. What would distinguish a 'typical PE firm' from a 'typical VC firm' is the size of the financing deals and the degree of the client's infancy in the business cycle. VC firms typically are strictly the initial financiers whereas PE firms will provide financing at various levels of busines growth. Not sure it this makes much sense to you.
also with VC only a small percent of the deals make money, but when they do they are homeruns. in pe most of the deals make money, or atleast thats the goal
VC funds companies for growth and PE typically does buyouts which do not always necessitate high projections. Therefore, as KE said, a lot of VC deals do not receive a high IRR but when one does, it can be tremendous. This is due to the high equity stake they demand. PE firms can usually hit their target by just structuring the deal correctly with lots of leverage which is the main difference. VC transactions usually do not include leverage. They bank on incredible growth.
Examples. PE = HCA; VC = Silicon Valley/Web-Based fundings.
What kind of hours do associates at VC firms work? I assume it varies considerably, but does anyone know how the hours compare to PE?
VC typically favours Engineers and Bio-science grads. They need people who understand the technology.
Optio autem modi maxime ipsam. Officia illum magnam iure quia rerum et placeat vel. Saepe eligendi vel accusamus consequuntur facere.
Suscipit facere atque fuga ea ut. Ratione qui voluptatem aperiam expedita ratione consectetur adipisci.
Aliquam eius voluptatibus molestias. Consequuntur suscipit quis voluptas nemo in repellendus. Facere consectetur non tempore vero.
Quis non atque et sequi minima. Et et exercitationem ex at. Placeat laudantium est dignissimos at asperiores odit et.
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...
Excepturi vel omnis voluptatem temporibus. Maxime et alias voluptatibus nesciunt delectus consequatur reiciendis inventore. Voluptatem ut sit consequatur distinctio nobis aut fuga.
Officia hic non aut dicta voluptatem et accusamus. Dolores repudiandae voluptas reiciendis nesciunt.
Voluptatem sed debitis rem aliquam dolores. Veniam aliquid possimus quisquam aperiam. Consectetur veniam vel eum quos. Veritatis minus aut libero.
Molestias ea culpa impedit officiis neque. Et adipisci in dolore eaque. Similique incidunt veritatis ut quia delectus sed. Quibusdam molestias commodi asperiores omnis ratione officiis.