The Capital

Behind
Venture
2020
Insights from the investors behind
Europe’s Venture Capital
Ecosystem
Stay updated CapitalBehindVenture.com
Disclaimer
This report is for information purposes only. You should not construe any such information or other material
as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice. All content in this report is information of a general
nature and does not address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Nothing in the report
constitutes professional and/or financial advice, an offer, invitation or inducement to purchase or acquire
interest in any of the companies presented, nor does any information in the report constitute a
comprehensive or complete statement of the matters discussed or the law relating thereto. Mountside
Ventures is not a fiduciary by virtue of any person’s use of, or access to, this report. You alone assume sole
responsibility for evaluating the merits and risks associated with the use of any information or other content
in this report and of making any decisions based on such information or other content. In exchange for
using this report, you agree not to hold Mountside Ventures, its affiliates or any third party service provider
liable for any possible claim for damages arising from any decision you make based on information or
other content made available to you through this report.

The information set forth herein has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but this is
not guaranteed. This publication is provided with the understanding that the authors and publisher shall
have no liability for any errors, inaccuracies or omissions therein and, by this publication, the authors and
publisher are not engaged in rendering consulting advice or other professional advice to the recipient with
regard to any specific matter.

63 Limited Partners with offices in over 15 countries contributed to the report, over a period of three months.
We used Typeform to collect the data, along with manual checks to check whether participants were in
fact LPs.

The contents of this publication are protected by copyright. All rights reserved. The contents of this
publication, either in whole or in part, may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
without written permission of the publisher.

© Copyright 2020 Mountside Ventures. Mountside Ventures is the trading name of Mountside Venture
Partners LLP. It is regulated by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales for a range of
investment business activities and is registered at 27 Old Gloucester Street, London, WC1N 3AX.

© Copyright 2020 Allocate Events Ltd, which is registered at 207 Regent Street, Third Floor, London, W1B 3HH.

2
Before we get started
Foreword

Despite COVID and BREXIT, this remains a very exciting - albeit challenging -
time for the European technology venture capital ecosystem.

For fund managers and investors alike, there is very little information in the public
domain on best practice, preferred terms and practical advice on raising a VC
fund. Our goal in writing this report is to reduce barriers for VC fund managers,
but also show Limited Partners how their peers are exploring investing into
European Venture Capital funds. We hope that this report is a first step towards
making the ecosystem more transparent and shedding some light on the
mechanics of this exciting and growing space.

Heading into 2020, there was cause for optimism within the European VC
Ecosystem. While American investment slowed, European VC deal value in 2019
recorded a record-breaking high as deal sizes swelled across the continent, with
over 110 billion Euros being invested in European startups, across 48 countries, in
the last five years¹.

We would like to thank all our survey respondents and distribution partners
without whom this report would not have been possible.

Jonathan Hollis
Managing Partner, Mountside Ventures

Lomax Ward,
Managing Partner, Luminous Ventures; Co-founder, ALLOCATE

Andrew J Scott
Managing Partner, 7percent Ventures; Co-founder, ALLOCATE

¹ Pitchbook

© 2020 Mountside Ventures, Allocate Events Ltd

3
Contents

5 17
Executive Summary Practical insights for VC funds

6 21
Overview of participants You've raised, now what?

7 22
Why venture? COVID-19

9 23
Building LP relationships Improving the Ecosystem

10 25
LP investment thesis Our public contributors

13 26
Government funding of Distribution partners
European VC

14 27
Emerging VC managers About the producers

54
Executive summary
This report is based on detailed data collected LPs' appetite to invest in a
from 63 Limited Partners (LPs) globally who particular VC is driven by,
invest in, or are interested in investing in, in order of importance:

European Venture Capital (VC) funds.

1

Collectively, our LP respondents met with

over 2,000 prospective VCs in the last 12
months. Over the last 3 years, they invested Financial Returns
in 360 VCs.
2
European taxpayers (via government
backed LPs) are responsible for a large
proportion of VC investing.
Building relationships takes time: just 20% of Diversification
LPs had invested in a fund they'd known for
less than a year. Over 70% wanted to meet 3
VCs as early on in their fundraising journey
as possible.
90% of LPs were willing to take a risk with
Option to deploy capital
emerging fund managers, now or in the
into later rounds
future. Over 80% had already invested in
them, with half as their biggest investor. 4
65% of LPs were interested in alternatives to
investing solely in VC funds to get exposure
to this asset class, such as investing directly
into companies, investing in fund-of-funds Contributing to the
venture ecosystem
and secondaries.
The most common blockers to funding VCs 5
were geography, fund size, ESG and sectors.
43% of institutions or fund-of-funds said
COVID has accelerated their deployment
into VC, while family offices said it had Market
intelligence
slowed their deployment.
Overall, only 20% of respondents said COVID
had slowed their investment activities.

55
Overview of participants
Geographic spread

Despite European VC funds securing just 13% of aggregate capital raised globally,
the region represents a favourable fundraising environment: 90% of venture
capital vehicles raised by European managers met or exceeded their target size,
compared to only 79% of North America based funds¹. Our view is that this is as a
result of the recent EU Venture Capital Funds (EuVECA) regulations which
address certain issues arising from the Alternative Investment Fund Managers
Directive (AIFMD). The changes included greater flexibility on VC investments
across the region, as well as limiting the imposition of host fees and charges,
making the asset class more attractive to investors.

The majority of respondents

were located across Europe

Respondents
also included
those based
in South East
Asia and the
Middle East.

Many Limited
Partners and
Family offices are
also based in
America, and are
interested in what
You have the right to remain silent
Europe has to All respondents were offered anonymity. Many LPs and Family
offer. Offices continue to remain private.

23 40 35
Shared data & Shared data Declined to
published their name participate

¹ Ancillary data from Pitchbook

6
Types of Limited Partners

Capital flows into VC funds from Limited Partners (LPs) such as pension funds,
other venture capital funds, university endowments, government agencies, fund
of funds, and high net worth (HNW) individuals or family offices. Some of these
players have a stronger focus on private markets, whilst others such as pension
funds and university endowments, allocate more of their capital to the public
markets. 2018 was a record high for fundraising in Europe, with over 11b Euros
being committed ¹.

Types of LPs surveyed, as a percentage of total respondents

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
s

s
ns

en

en
nd

nd
HN

io

nm

m
Fu

Fu
ns

w
&

Pe
of

er

VC
do
s
ce

ov
nd

&

En

er
ffi

G
s
Fu

th
te
O

O
ra
ily

po
m
Fa

or
C

In the US, endowments and foundations are comparatively more

aggressive, and willing to take more risk by allocating larger portions
to VC asset classes, whereas in Europe, they are less active. T̀his
category had the greatest increase in European VC from 2014-2018.¹

Family offices & HNWs are a significant source of capital for VC

funds. According to the World Wealth Report, wealthy families and
individuals control about 36 trillion Euros globally.

Fund-of-funds are established as an intermediary to allow larger

institutional investors to research, access, and manage VC
investments. They contributed 1b Euros in 2018, more than any other
LP type apart from government agencies.¹

¹ The State of European Tech 2019 Report

7
Why venture?
Partner
Input

The European ecosystem is maturing, closing in on and now rivalling the US and
Asian ecosystems. Europe produced more tech IPOs than the US in the years 2012-
2018* and VC deal value in 2019 hit a record-breaking 110b Euros invested in
European startups, across 48 countries, over the last five years.²

Europe was responsible for completing over 4,600 rounds* in 2019 into high-growth
sectors such as healthcare, artificial intelligence and financial services. Factors
including the deregulation of certain sectors, lower costs of living and established
corporates investing in VC have all contributed to Europe’s progress, whilst helping
the ecosystem flourish.

In the UK alone, the focal point for European tech, early-stage companies were
responsible for around 500 exits in both 2018 and 2019, many with strong multiples on
their initial valuations. The benefits of having such a booming startup scene reach far
and wide, not only increasing jobs, but creating innovation that can dramatically
improve our personal and working lives.

Over the last 9 years, UK startup expenditure has soared, increasing by £10b in
investment, from £2b in 2011 to £12b in 2020. Moreover, investors have been driving
growth by deploying significant cash into the economy marked by startups securing
£2.7b in equity investment in Q3 2020, a 48% increase from Q2 2020 and just a 1%
drop from Q3 2019, despite the pandemic.

¹ Data provided by Beauhurst

² Pitchbook, 2019
*State of European Tech Report, 2019

8
Building LP
relationships
The venture ecosystem has always been
rooted in forging trusted relationships between
managers and investors. COVID-19 and the
move to remote working has arguably put a
strain on the VC/LP dynamic in 2020.
Collectively,
Relationships are based on trust, transparency
and time in person. respondents met
with over 2,000
Most venture relationships have to last longer prospective VC
than most marriages (typically over a
funds each year.
decade), so it is crucial to know who you are
partnering with. LP's want to understand
intimately how VCs invest and how they do
business in general.

Over 70% of LPs strive to engage as early as possible, with 16% (mostly
family offices) engaging after soft commitments and the rest looking to
engage after the first investments have been made.

The number of times LPs have

20% of respondents had invested met VCs before they invest
in a fund which they’d known for 50%

less than a year, with over 50% 40%

taking one to two years to build 30%

the relationship, and 30% more 20%

than two years. 10%

0%
1-5 5-10 10-15 15-20

9
LP investment thesis

65% of Limited Partners are interested in deploying

capital, beyond straight VC fund investing

~50% of Limited Partners are interested in direct investment

opportunities (investing into startup companies). The
majority of these being family offices or HNW individuals.
Neither pension funds or the government backed entities
considered a direct investment strategy.
Direct investment

58% of Limited Partners were interested in co-investment

opportunities (where LPs invest directly alongside a VC).
This is possible, for example, when a VC cannot take their
whole allocation in a follow-on round.

Co-investment

Only 12% of LPs were interested in allocating capital to fund

of funds (funds which invest into other VC funds). This can
be a good way to achieve diversification, to gain wider
exposure to a specific market or sector, or alternate
investment stage.
Fund of funds

34% of LPs were interested in secondaries (where LPs

acquire portfolios of VCs). VC funds are an illiquid asset
class, and secondaries allow increased liquidity for funds
that may not be able to continue funding the ongoing
capital requirements of their portfolio companies.
Secondaries

10
 Restrictions Track record

44% of LPs stated that they had Although a VC's thesis is an

restrictions as part of their important consideration for an
investment thesis. The most LP, the exact details of the thesis
common restrictions identified in pale in comparison to an
the survey were geographic investor's primary criteria when
restrictions, fund size restrictions, considering an investment:
ESG considerations, fund number investment track record.
and sector restrictions. This comes as no surprise.

Most popular Least popular

Sector popularity

Preferred sectors

Over half of respondents indicated

that they do not have a specific
sector preference. Those that did, Potential fund managers need to
invested in a wide range: be able to clearly articulate their
enterprise software, life sciences, value add propositions above that
pharma & biotechnology, edtech, of purely being able to leverage
autonomous their network; having a clear
vehicles/mobility/transportation, differentiation will not only allow
artificial intelligence, consumer, you to raise from LPs but also allow
fintech, agriculture, industrial you to access competitive deals.
manufacturing and defence.
Sam Ettelaie, Investment Manager

11
Investment criteria summary

60% said track

record was the most
important factor.

9% 9% 12%

Percentage of
respondents who
thought these
factors were most
Alignment Size of network Fund investment
important of Interest thesis

A handful of LPs said

these factors were
most important
Strength of Reputation of
relationships the fund
between the VCs

This report provides unique behind-the-scenes analysis, highlighting the

maturing venture capital ecosystem in the UK and Europe across all
stages, seed to growth. A worthwhile read for any aspiring fund manager!

Europe is home to world-leading technology thought leaders, supported

by a strong science and developed innovation ecosystem, enabling the
growth in category leaders in groundbreaking technologies.

Kerry Baldwin, Vice Chair, BVCA

A potentially good VC fund 1. Team 2. Investment

cannot only be judged by
the investment track
record; it is a combination
of different key factors
alongside this
We love funds that can Strategy 3. Track Record
offer high volume, high 4. Terms...'
quality co-investments

12
Government
funding of
European VC
5 120
Governmental institutions of the 360 VC funds were
account for a large proportion invested in by
of investment activity. government backed LPs

Public policies for VC have sparked an gap, or pump more financial resources
active theoretical and empirical into the private venture capital market.
debate. First, do European
governments need to intervene in the Public funding in VC has remained
VC market in the first place? Previous relatively stable, although private
reports emphasise that government wealth that has accumulated over the
intervention can be justified as a past decade from exited entrepreneurs
result of the “equity gap”, which arises is, now more than ever, being
from a lack of funding for channeled back into the VC ecosystem,
entrepreneurs. Private investors also with Atomico reporting a 38m Euro
have limited resources and may increase in commitment from private
decide not to fund ventures requiring individuals over 2017-2018.¹
high set up costs and large R&D
budgets. Our objective has always been to
foster innovation and support the
Therefore, a considerable number of development of a sustainable market,
independently of the economic
potentially promising ventures may
cycles. By funding massive European
remain unfunded, and the shortage of
GPs, and thanks to stronger
capital may constrain their performances, this market has
development and growth. It is, become attractive for private
therefore, natural for governments to investors; we now see more and more
either invest in companies that are VC funds being oversubscribed!”
adversely affected by the equity
David Dana, EIF
¹ The State of European Tech 2019 Report

13
Emerging VC managers
There is no one size fits all when it comes to "emerging fund managers". Nor is
there a consensus between LPs as to how they are defined. The diagram below
presents data on how respondents define an emerging manager:

Emerging Market
First Fund 14%
25%
Previous Experience
12%

Fund I - III
Fund I - II 19%
30%

14%
Defined emerging as a manager
targeting emerging markets.
Investing in emerging markets
comes with a number of challenges,
in particular:
greater uncertainty about the
political, economic, legal and
regulatory environments
longer holding periods may be
needed to develop an asset to
the point where it is suitable for
a trade sale, reducing liquidity
a lack of a viable IPO exit route
in some markets
A minority
25%
saw first-time fund managers with no
prior institutional investing experience,
but with angel investing or operating
backgrounds as emerging managers.
30%
consider VCs continue to be emerging
after having deployed their first fund,
and a further 19% still within the scope
when raising their third.
Other ideas
Some LPs believed the
definition was more
nuanced. Such as: those
'with "small, agile teams" or

Perhaps surprisingly, 12% believed those with "sufficient

emerging managers were those investment experience".

with 'previous experience'.

14
 82% of all the LPs have invested in emerging fund managers.

50% of those LPs led as a cornerstone investor.

80%
of non-governmental LPs have invested in
emerging fund managers. We feel this is a very
encouraging statistic for the European ecosystem.

first-time funds had received individual

117 investment, with 80% of the VCs' partners being
first-time institutional investors.

90% of Limited Partners are interested in investing in

emerging fund managers now or in the future.

It is very hard for emerging VC The time to market has always been critical
funds to raise, especially with for startups as much as it is for venture funds.
increasing competition. It’s also Backing emerging managers is a great
hard for LPs to build conviction on opportunity to spot new funds with a more
new VC managers, but it sophisticated and innovative investment
happens. Focus on building your thesis, giving them a competitive advantage
track record, having a truly over us (as a direct investor) and more
differential strategy and ensuring established funds to access the best deals.
there is economic alignment to
build LP interest. Bilal Djelassi, Orange

Martin Punt, BVCA

15
The emerging fund manager's competitive advantage

Some investors cite the lack of track record and possible resource constraints as
the biggest challenge when investing in emerging fund managers, but many
Limited Partners now consider emerging managers to have other advantages.

Higher Closer Hunger, ambition Differentiated

returns relationships & persistence

While all LPs understand that Performance

thoughtful allocation to VC can lead to
super-normal returns, many will invest
only in "brand name" VCs. While this
might appear the optimal strategy,
data from Cambridge Analytics
suggests such an approach may not
be as profitable as it used to be.
There are many specialist emerging
managers that have unparalleled
expertise in their respective markets or
verticals, and consequently are often
the first choice for the best founders.
Across Europe the median net IRR for
2006-2014 vintage first-time venture
capital funds sits three percentage
points higher at 12.9% than that of
experienced managers at 9.9%.
However, their risk levels (measured
by standard deviation of net IRR) sit
at 19.1%, with higher vintage funds at
15.6% ²

First time funds

Over 30% of the VC funds that

reached a final close in 2018 were
first-time funds, compared to 25% in
2016². Funds under $100m represent
about 5-10% of
committed in any given year, and
since 2012 22b Euros was raised by
870 micro-VC managers¹.
Emerging managers have a
fresh approach to investing; a
unique origination capability,
total capital and lean operating models with
low fees.
A family office.

¹ Pitchbook. ² Intertrust, 2018

16
Practical insights for VCs
What are the biggest sources of frustration for LPs when
being pitched to by VCs?

Lack of investment experience or understanding

VCs that lack fundraising experience should strive to obtain individual
fundraising experience through angel investing or leading
investments at established firms to build their track record.

Lack of transparency or honesty

Ensure you are transparent on any perceived weaknesses -
remember that your relationship with an LP will be a long one and
needs to be built on mutual trust.

Weak competitive differentiator

Ensure you are clear on your fund's USP - differentiate yourself from
your competitors.

Not recognising the need to build long-term relationships with LPs

Only 20% of respondents have invested in a fund whom they’ve
known for less than a year. The majority take 1-2 years to build a
relationship before investing, with 27% taking more than 2 years.

They don't try to

understand your Big and
situation and process unnecessary
before pitching words
The banality of
language they use to try
to impress me

17
Jurisdiction

Luxembourg was by far the preferred choice for LPs.

Europe's smallest country (at just 82 km long

and 57 km wide) Luxembourg has for many
years provided corporate structures favoured
by the industry. In 2013, Luxembourg
companies law was amended to simplify and
modernise the limited partnership regime via
the special limited partnership, enabling full tax
transparency.

The government has since pledged to make

Preferred jurisdiction
Luxembourg the primary on-shore centre for
venture capital by 2020. The Reform Bill (2016)
Luxembourg
which came into force on 23 August 2016 was
another step forward in achieving this aim. It UK
introduced key changes in the context of
Cayman
cross-border venture capital transactions. For
example, new tools were introduced which Jersey
help investors to facilitate venture transactions
Guernsey
structured through Luxembourg.
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Fee structure

Consistent with the industry standard, the majority of LPs still

expect a "2 and 20” fee structure (2% annual management fee,
20% carried interest). More than half of LPs are content with a 2%
fee but expected it to taper off after a few years. For example, the
fee might be 2% per year for 4 years (typically the investing
period) falling thereafter by 0.25% per year for the remaining 6
years, assuming a 10-year fund.

These results would suggest that the traditional "2 and 20" is not
contentious and that innovation in fee structure should not be a
priority for VCs.

18
Recycling
It's generally accepted that re-investing profits to cover previously
drawn down fees (thus making a fund whole again) is a good idea.
More capital invested should mean a greater chance of returning the
fund.

Only 10% of LPs were not comfortable with VCs recycling their fees.
These were mostly pension funds and other VC firms.

LP ownership
LPs have limited liability and while they usually have monetary priority
over the VCs upon liquidation of the partnership, traditionally an LP
does not have any ownership in the general partnership, or access to
the IC / approval of investment decisions - the decision sits with the
General Partner (GP).

In some circumstances, emerging managers concede an interest in

the GP to anchor investors and/or other LPs that are supportive in the
early days of a partnership.

However 48% of respondents felt another LP holding a stake in a GP

was bad sign. An additional 13% of investors considered an LP stake
to be an automatic disqualification.

Placement agents
For 1/3rd of LPs, use of a placement agent doesn't impact negatively
their view of the VC. Of the 2/3rds of LPs who do believe it has a
negative impact, 30% still invested in VCs they met through an agent.

19
 Best practice: sharing
your track record
For more than 90% of LPs, track
record is the most important part of
their due diligence. This puts great
pressure on VCs to deliver complete
and accurate performance data to
prospective investors.
Betterfront has helped
dozens of VCs upgrade
their track record
presentation to better
engage with LPs. Here are
5 practical tips from their
CEO, Michel Geolier:
1 you another opportunity to tell your
Always share your track record in
Excel format and never, ever in PDF
format. Most LPs review hundreds of
deals a year and do not have the
time to input PDF data into Excel
spreadsheets. Using software to
convert PDF to Excel will very likely
lead to data errors and therefore to
wrong due diligence outcome.
2 5
All track record data should be in one
single worksheet. Yes, all funds in just
one worksheet. That way LPs can
easily kick off their analyses and give
you feedback faster!
Partner
Input
3 This single Excel worksheet should
present your track record line by line,
where each line represents a
portfolio company - that is why it is
also called a “deal-by-deal” track
record. Very often, fund managers
ask Betterfront if they should display
the round-by-round information.
While this information is important
for fund returners and outlier
portfolio companies, it might create
an information overload for most
LPs. Our suggestion is to only provide
round information when LPs
specifically ask for it.
4 Sharing your track record data gives
story. In order to do that well, fund
managers need to share different
categories of information:
investment, deal, and portfolio
companies data. When relevant,
differentiate between data at entry
and data at exit/current (e.g.
ownership, valuation..).
Finally, your fundraising will most
likely last more than 3 months. In this
case, you need to update your
fundraising with new quarterly data
to show the development of your
portfolio."
20
You've raised, now what?
In the same way that many VCs provide not only capital but often take an active
role in the portfolios of companies they back, many Limited Partners take a
similar approach with the fund managers they invest in.

Although 'regular communications and reports', 'access to other VCs' and

'thought leadership' were all important, 'co-investment opportunities' were
perhaps the most important, with many requesting these rights.

Percentage of LP types who registered co-investment opportunities as important:

100% 75% 60% 0%

VCs investing Corporates Family offices Governments

& Fund of Funds & Endowments

VCs are often willing to provide co-investment rights, but can become frustrated
by ad hoc approaches, or that may depend on LPs performing their own DD on
co‑investment opportunities, impacting time frames when closing deals.

Most important Least important

Access to Regular Thought Access to

co-investment communication leadership other VCs
opportunities and reports

Staying connected

30% of LPs are happy with receiving monthly updates, 38% with
quarterly updates and 15% updates on fund performance twice
a year. Others expected weekly or bi-weekly contact.

21
COVID-19
No 2020 report would be complete without mentioning Coronavirus. Although
the VC and startup sector has been impacted, only 20% of LPs stated that they
have reduced the amount of funding they are looking to deploy into new funds.

"Post-Covid-19, it will be essential

LESS FUNDING that the UK builds back better, with
20%
the technology sector at the
NO IMPACT forefront of job creation, growth
By focusing on top and prosperity. It is important
37%
performers therefore that the UK continues to
be a magnet for Limited Partners
ACCELERATED and the capital that powers startup
43% Driven by increased growth across the country."
investment in
healthcare funds Gerard Grech, CEO, Tech Nation

43%
Family offices
The pandemic has decreased
their desire to invest in VC.

of respondents indicated that Institutional investors

they had actually accelerated Little to no impact. Likely due to a
their deployment into VC as a greater need to continue to
result of the crisis. deploy capital.

Impact on emerging managers

The effects of the crisis have been particularly felt by emerging managers, with
LPs tending to prioritise existing relationships, according to survey results.
The counter to this is that first time managers are unencumbered by an existing
portfolio that's potentially troubled by the impact of COVID, enabling them to
focus on the opportunity ahead.

22
 Improving the ecosystem
Diversity and Inclusion

Creating an industry which is inclusive and free from bias is in

everyone's interest. Yet as our results show, although most
firms desire equality, only a minority are taking active steps to
work towards it.

Is increasing the number female VCs you back a goal?

Yes, have KPI

There is clearly intent from LPs
18%
to increase their exposure to
female-funded VCs. 64% want
to do something about it, but
Not currently crucially only 18% have set key
18% performance indicators to
Yes, it's a goal
64% measure progress.
18% currently have no policy.

Is increasing the number BAME VCs you back a goal?

Most LPs do not have a policy to Yes, it's a goal Yes, have KPI
actively try and increase capital 18% 18%

deployment into BAME run VC firms.

Though 18% say they have the intent

- and a further 18% have set a KPI -
to increase their investment into
VCs run by BAME VCs. Not currently
64%
In conclusion, while it appears there
has been progress with policies Cultural intent, well thought-out policies plus
designed to increase the gender accountability can equal tangible outcomes
diversity of investee VCs, initiatives for diversity, but progress doesn't happen if any
of the three are missing.
to increase the ethnic diversity of
the VC partnerships LPs into remain
Romanie Thomas, Founder/CEO Juggle
sorely lacking.
Diversity Specialist

23
The future
What is the single thing that, if changed in Europe, would
enable more money invested into VC funds?

1 2 3

More Liquidity Incentivise investment More Transparency

Solutions, Deregulation for pension funds or
and Tax Incentives large, private allocators

Looking ahead there was no consensus As geographic investment boundaries

from participants as to whether the biggest become ever more porous in a remote-
opportunities would come from the United working world, any talk of there being 'too
States, Asia or Europe. The big European much capital' in European VC is nonsense.
Series-A funds of 10 years ago are still with We believe European LP investing has taken
us: Index, Accel, Balderton and Atomico, great strides but it still has a long way to go.
etc - but they’ve beefed up their In 2018, 23b Euros was deployed by European
operational teams, content strategies and venture capital, whereas the US invested 111b
programmes, while the activity and size of Euros. For 2019 the figures are 30b Euros (a
others are also increasing. Northzone, EQT, five year high for Europe) and 113b Euros for
Creandum, HV, Idinvest and Lakestar the US. For Europe to hold its own and
amongst others, are raising ever larger produce it's own "Googles" - we need many
funds creeping up the alphabet of VC more European VCs with deep pockets and
rounds. But it’s the US funds (Sequoia, greater risk appetites to invest more money,
Benchmark, Bessemer et al) which are earlier, more often. That will require more
threatening their current dominance of the private LPs to believe in the European tech VC
European ecosystem, completing ever asset class; something this report aims to
more rounds. encourage and support.

Jonathan, Lomax and Andrew.

‘More business friendly regulation, less tax, more incentives, flexibility of the workforce, and a
major risk taking mentality, can be positive to the European VC environment’

- Family office

24
Our public contributors
We would like to thank all of our contributors, without whom this report would
not have been possible.

Listed below are the LPs who contributed to the survey and who were happy to
be named.

25
Distribution partners
United Kingdom

France Denmark Netherlands

Germany United States

European-wide

26
Producers

Mountside Ventures seeks to optimise the fundraising process for European startups,
investors and family offices. Firstly, they advise early-stage companies raising their
next round of funding. Secondly, they organise community events and a conference,
Funding Venture, in Central London, for the most promising VC Fund Managers, and
Limited Partners & Family offices. It typically involves panel discussions, curated round
tables and networking opportunities.

Jonathan Hollis, Managing Partner, Mountside Ventures

Jonathan@mountsideventures.com

Alex Reed, Co-founder, Mountside Ventures

Alex@mountsideventures.com

Jon Steinberg, Co-founder, Mountside Ventures

Jon@mountsideventures.com

Alexandra Davis and Jack Richardson, Contributors, Mountside Ventures

ALLOCATE is a grassroots initiative founded by Andrew J Scott and Lomax Ward with a
vision to accelerate the European tech VC ecosystem to be the most active and best
performing in the world. ALLOCATE is making it easier for LPs to find the right funds to
invest in and for VCs the right investors, by building a community of forwarding
thinking collaborators on a not-for-profit basis. In 2019, ALLOCATE held Europe's first
ever VC pitch event, and the next one will be held on November 17-18-19 2020.

Lomax Ward, General Partner, Luminous Ventures

Lomax@luminous.vc

Andrew J Scott, Founding Partner, 7percent Ventures

ajs@7pc.vc

27