Now, quantitative VC analyses run on algorithms, and the algorithms look at historical data (what entrepreneurs and investors have done so far). To make them more accurate, quantitative VCs are dedicating resources to collecting yet more data about startups and founders (including trying to better understand investors’ past investment decisions).
The critical contribution of the paper is to show that, to develop more effective algorithms, investors may be better advised to collect data on contextual factors, rather than pour more resources into collecting and interrogating the ‘traditional’ pools.
As Gary Dushnitsky says, “That’s the big picture here – we have lots of data on contextual factors, such as sunshine, nowadays. There’s lots of readily available data that is actually more cost-effective to collect and which might increase the efficacy of your algorithms.”
“Ultimately, when it comes to the use of algorithms, it’s all about marginal differences. Take two similar startup-investor pairs. One startup gets funded and the other one doesn’t – the literature says it’s because one startup is better than the other, or one investor was more biased than the other. What we are saying is, that’s not necessarily true – it’s possible the two are exactly the same. Why did one get funded when the other didn’t? Because of the sun! It illustrates that the algorithm would fall short of explaining what is actually happening, and therefore the investor would not be as effective in making their investment decision; whereas if you incorporate contextual cues (such as sunshine), you can explain the difference. We believe this will allow for an improvement in VC algorithms.”
Europe: an entrepreneurial hotbed
The location of the study is also highly significant, in terms of both the academic literature and real-world implications for VC algorithms. There are thriving accelerator ecosystems in many parts of the world but, as far as the authors are aware, all the academic research into them to date has been done either in the US or in emerging markets, which have a very different feel and purpose. This appears to be a gap in the research – not least because Europe prides itself on being an entrepreneurial hotbed – so it is significant that this is the first study of a European accelerator on such a large scale, looking at startups graduating from many different accelerators over a decade.
Given the authors’ immersion in the world of rigorous academic research, the weather also had an instrumental role in the genesis of the idea for the paper. Dushnitsky happened to glance at the LinkedIn post of a London-based VC investor (whom he knew to be actively investing in seed-stage startups) that featured the screenshot of a London street bathed in sunshine and a caption that read: “It’s hard to beat London in the sunshine. Even the most mundane scenes look beautiful J”.
For Dushnitsky, it was almost a ‘eureka’ moment: “I thought, ‘Oh my God – this person has lived in London for over a decade and, after being here that long, he’s just walking down the street when he stops, takes a picture, and posts it on LinkedIn.” It suddenly made me realise just how much sunshine makes you feel better.
“Then I thought, ‘Here’s this person who makes investment decisions on an individual, basically just using a seven-slide PowerPoint presentation. The kind of feelgood factor that would move them to post on LinkedIn would surely – at the margin and when no other information is available to them – sway them when it comes to their investment decisions.’