Hubbry Logo
Venture roundVenture roundMain
Open search
Venture round
Community hub
Venture round
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Venture round
Venture round
Venture round
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

A venture round is a type of funding round used for venture capital financing, by which startup companies obtain investment, generally from venture capitalists and other institutional investors.[1][2] The availability of venture funding is among the primary stimuli for the development of new companies and technologies.

Features

[edit]

Parties

[edit]
  • Founders or stakeholders. Introduce companies to investors.
  • A lead investor, typically the best known or most aggressive venture capital firm that is participating in the investment, or the one contributing the largest amount of cash. The lead investor typically oversees most of the negotiation, legal work, due diligence, and other formalities of the investment. It may also introduce the company to other investors, generally in an informal unpaid capacity.
  • Co-investors, other major investors who contribute alongside the lead investor.
  • Follow-on or piggyback investors. Typically angel investors, high-net worth individuals, family offices, institutional investors, and others who contribute money but take a passive role in the investment and company management.
  • Law firms and accountants are typically retained by all parties to advise, negotiate, and document the transaction.

Stages in a venture round

[edit]
  • Introduction. Investors and companies seek each other out through formal and informal business networks, personal connections, paid or unpaid finders, researchers and advisers, and the like. Because there are no public exchanges listing their securities, private companies meet venture capital firms and other private equity investors in several ways, including warm referrals from the investors' trusted sources and other business contacts; investor conferences and symposia; and summits where companies pitch directly to investor groups in face-to-face meetings, including a variant known as "Speed Venturing", which is akin to speed dating for capital, where the investor decides within 10 minutes whether s/he wants a follow-up meeting.
  • Offering. The company provides the investment firm a confidential business plan to secure initial interest.
  • Private placement memorandum. A PPM/prospectus is generally not used in the Silicon Valley model.
  • Negotiation of terms. Non-binding term sheets, letters of intent, and the like are exchanged back and forth as negotiation documents. Once the parties agree on terms, they sign the term sheet as an expression of commitment.
  • Signed term sheet. These are usually non-binding and commit the parties only to good faith attempts to complete the transaction on specified terms, but may also contain some procedural promises of limited (30- to 60-day) duration like confidentiality, exclusivity on the part of the company (i.e. the company will not seek funding from other sources), and stand-still provisions (e.g. the company will not undertake any major business changes or enter agreements that would make the transaction infeasible).
  • Definitive transaction documents. A drawn-out (usually 2–4 weeks) process of negotiating and drafting a series of contracts and other legal papers used to implement the transaction. In theory, these simply follow the terms of the term sheet. In practice they contain many important details that are beyond the scope of the major deal terms. Definitive transaction documents are not required in all situations. Specifically where the parties have entered into a separate agreement that does not require that the parties execute all such documents.
  • Definitive documents, the legal papers that document the final transaction. Generally includes:
  • Stock purchase agreements – the primary contract by which investors exchange money for newly minted shares of preferred stock
  • Buy-sell agreements, co-sale agreements, right of first refusal, etc. – agreements by which company founders and other owners of common stock agree to limit their individual ability to sell their shares in favor of the new investors
  • Investor rights agreements – covenants the company makes to the new investors, generally include promises with respect to board seats, negative covenants not to obtain additional financing, sell the company, or make other specified business and financial decisions without the investors' approval, and positive covenants such as inspection rights and promises to provide ongoing financial disclosures
  • Amended and restated articles of incorporation – formalize issues like authorization and classes of shares and certain investor protections
  • Due diligence. Simultaneously with negotiating the definitive agreements, the investors examine the financial statements and books and records of the company, and all aspects of its operations. They may require that certain matters be corrected before agreeing to the transaction, e.g. new employment contracts or stock vesting schedules for key executives. At the end of the process the company offers representations and warranties to the investors concerning the accuracy and sufficiency of the company's disclosures, as well as the existence of certain conditions (subject to enumerated exceptions), as part of the stock purchase agreement.
  • Final agreement occurs when the parties execute all of the transaction documents. This is generally when the funding is announced and the deal considered complete, although there are often rumors and leaks.
  • Closing occurs when the investors provide the funding and the company provides stock certificates to the investors. Ideally this would be simultaneous, and contemporaneous with the final agreement. However, conventions in the venture community are fairly lax with respect to timing and formality of closing, and generally depend on the goodwill of the parties and their attorneys. To reduce cost and speed up transactions, formalities common in other industries such as escrow of funds, signed original documents, and notarization, are rarely required. This creates some opportunity for incomplete and erroneous paperwork. Some transactions have "rolling closings" or multiple closing dates for different investors. Others are "tranched," meaning the investors only give part of the funds at a time, with the remainder disbursed over time subject to the company meeting specified milestones.
  • Post-closing. After the closing a few things may occur:
  • Conversion of convertible notes. If there are outstanding notes they may convert at or after closing.
  • SEC filing with relevant state and/or federal regulators
  • Filing of amended Articles of Incorporation
  • Preparation of closing binder – contains documentation of entire transaction

Rights and privileges

[edit]

Venture investors obtain special privileges that are not granted to holders of common stock. These are embodied in the various transaction documents. Common rights include:

  • Anti-dilution protection – if the company ever sells a significant amount of stock at a price lower than the investor paid, then to protect investors against stock dilution they are issued additional shares (usually by changing the "conversion ratio" used to calculate their liquidation preference).
  • Guaranteed board seats
  • Positive and negative covenants by the company
  • Registration right – the investors have special rights to demand registration of their stock on public exchanges, and to participate in an initial public offering and subsequent public offerings
  • Representations and warranties as to the state of the company
  • Liquidation preferences – in any liquidation event such as a merger or acquisition, the investors get their money back, often with interest and/or at a multiple, before common stock is paid any funds from liquidation. The preference may be "participating", in which case the investors get their preference and their proportionate share of the surplus, or "non-participating" in which case the preference is a floor.
  • Dividends – dividend amounts are usually stated but not mandatory on the part of the company, except that the investors will get their dividends before any dividends may be declared for common stock. Most venture-backed start-ups are initially unprofitable so dividends are rarely paid. Unpaid dividends are generally forgiven but they may be accumulated and are added to the liquidation preference.

Round names

[edit]
"Series B" and "Series C" redirect here. For other uses, see B Series and C Series.

Venture capital financing rounds typically have names relating to the class of stock being sold:

  • A pre-seed or angel round is the earliest infusion of capital by founders, supporters, high net worth individuals ("angel investors"), and sometimes a small amount of institutional capital to launch the company, build a prototype, and discover initial product-market fit.[3]
  • Seed round is generally the first formal equity round with an institutional lead. The series seed can be priced, meaning investors purchase preferred stock at a valuation set by the lead investor, or take the form of convertible note or simple agreement for future equity that can be converted at a discount to preferred shares at the first priced round. A Seed round is often used to demonstrate market traction in preparation for the Series A.[4][5] Although in the past seed rounds were mainly reserved for pre-revenue companies, as of 2019 two-thirds of companies raising seed rounds already had revenues.[6]
  • A priced equity round is often called Series A, with each subsequent round using the next letter in the chain (e.g. B, C, D). Generally, the progression and price of stock at these rounds is an indication that a company is progressing as expected. Investors may become concerned when a company has raised too much money in too many rounds, considering it a sign of delayed progress.[7]
  • Series A', B', and so on. Indicate small follow-on or bridge funding rounds that are integrated into the preceding round, generally on the same terms, to raise additional funds.
  • Series AA, BB, etc. Once used to denote a new start after a crunchdown or downround, i.e. the company failed to meet its growth objectives and is essentially starting again under the umbrella of a new group of funders. Increasingly, however, Series AA Preferred Stock investment rounds are becoming used more widely along with convertible note financings or other "lightweight" preferred stock financings, such as "Series Seed" or "Series AA" preferred stock, to support less capital-intensive business growth, as their simplicity and generally lower legal costs can be attractive to early investors and founders.[8]
  • Pre-IPO round is a late-stage equity round for a private company to raise funds in advance of its listing on a public exchange. This allows both individual and institutional investors to invest in such late-stage, VC-backed private companies prior to its initial public offering (IPO).[9]
  • Mezzanine finance rounds, bridge loans, and other debt instruments used to support a company between venture rounds or before its initial public offering.

Option pool shuffle

[edit]

Option pool shuffle[10] relates to the allocation of shares to a venture capital (VC) investor at the point of investment, when also creating an Employee Share Option Pool at the same time. There are two different approaches to determine the number of shares to allocate to each investor, the VC Friendly Approach and the Founder Friendly Approach.

The VC Friendly approach

[edit]

The VC Friendly approach, which may also be called a pre-money pool, gives the VC a greater share of the company. The Share Options are allocated first, and then the VC is allocated its shares. The impact is the VC share allocation dilutes the Share Option Pool and the VC ends up with a greater percentage of the company

The Founder Friendly approach

[edit]

The Founder Friendly approach, which may also be called a post-money pool, gives the VC a smaller share of the company. The VC are allocated their shares first. The impact is that the VC is diluted by the new Share Option Pool and the VC ends up with a smaller percentage of the company

Example

[edit]

A company has 90,000 shares, and wants to (i) allocate 18,000 shares to a VC and (ii) create an Employee Share Option Pool (ESOP) of 10%.

The VC Friendly approach:

1. The ESOP is created first – allocating 10% of the Company. So the ESOP gets 10,000 shares (10,000 / 100,000)
2. The VC is allocated its shares – 18,000 shares. The VC ends up with 15.25% of the company (18,000 / 118,000)
3. The ESOP ends up with 8.47% of the company (10,000/118,000)

The Founder Friendly approach:

1. The VC is allocated its shares – 18,000 shares.
2. The ESOP is created. There are now 108,000 shares outstanding, so the ESOP gets 12,000 shares, and has 10% of the company (12,000 / 120,000)
3. The VC ends up with 15% of the company. 0.25% less than the VC Friendly Approach

Ironically, the founders (existing shareholders) will end up with a smaller shareholding under the Founder Friendly Approach than the VC Friendly Approach, as more new shares will have been issued.

See also

[edit]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Venture round

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A venture round, also known as a round, is a structured funding event in which startup companies raise capital from venture capital firms in exchange for equity ownership, typically occurring in sequential stages to support from early ideation to market expansion and potential exit. These rounds provide essential financing for high-growth potential ventures that may not yet generate significant revenue, enabling them to hire talent, develop products, and achieve key milestones while investors assume higher risks in anticipation of substantial returns. Venture rounds generally begin with seed funding, the earliest stage involving institutional investors, where startups secure modest amounts—often in the range of $500,000 to $2 million—to validate , conduct , and assemble initial teams, typically lasting 12 to 18 months before progressing to the next stage. Following seed, Series A rounds focus on optimizing the product and , raising average amounts of $5 million to $15 million at pre-money valuations up to $50 million, primarily from dedicated firms to refine offerings and expand customer bases. Subsequent Series B funding, with median valuations around $120 million as of Q2 2025, supports operational scaling, marketing efforts, and , often involving larger investments from both existing and new venture capitalists. Later stages, such as Series C and beyond, target established companies with proven revenue streams, providing hundreds of millions in capital—sometimes exceeding $1 billion in exceptional cases like Stripe's $6.5 billion Series I in 2023—to facilitate geographic expansion, product diversification, acquisitions, or preparations for liquidity events such as initial public offerings (IPOs). These advanced rounds attract a broader investor base, including hedge funds, firms, and banks, reflecting reduced risk due to demonstrated traction and stable financials. Across all stages, venture rounds involve negotiations over valuation, equity dilution, and governance rights, such as board seats, underscoring the collaborative yet high-stakes partnership between founders and investors.

Overview

Definition and Purpose

A venture round is a funding event in which startups raise capital from investors, such as firms or angel investors, in exchange for equity ownership or convertible instruments like or notes, enabling the company to advance its development and operations. These rounds occur in sequential stages, starting with seed funding, with investors providing not only financial resources but also strategic guidance to support long-term growth potential. The primary purpose of a venture round is to bridge funding gaps that startups face during critical phases of expansion, allowing them to validate their business models, scale operations, and reach key milestones such as product development, market entry, or user acquisition. By injecting capital, these rounds facilitate hiring talent, investing in technology, and efforts that would otherwise be unattainable through internal resources alone, ultimately aiming to increase the company's valuation and attractiveness for future investments or exits. Unlike debt-based financing such as loans, which require fixed repayments with interest regardless of performance, venture rounds involve equity-based risk-sharing where investors assume the risk of failure in return for potential high returns through ownership stakes. In contrast to , which relies on founders' personal savings or revenue to maintain full control, venture rounds introduce external capital and expertise but dilute ownership. Typical funding amounts vary by stage, with early rounds ranging from $500,000 to $5 million to cover initial scaling needs, while later rounds often exceed $10 million to support broader growth. In 2025 trends, median Series A rounds have ranged from around $8 million to $15 million depending on the source and quarter, reflecting increased investor confidence in sectors like AI, according to reports from Carta and PitchBook-NVCA.

Historical Development

The origins of venture rounds trace back to the post-World War II era in the United States, where the first modern venture capital firm, (ARD), was established in 1946 to fund innovative technologies. ARD's investment of $70,000 in in 1957 exemplified early successes, yielding substantial returns upon DEC's growth into a computing pioneer and marking a pivotal moment in linking to high-tech innovation. This model gained momentum in the 1970s and 1980s amid the boom, as firms like emerged to back transformative startups; a key example was Apple's 1978 funding round of $150,000 led by , which fueled its rapid ascent in personal . The 1990s saw explosive expansion in venture rounds driven by the internet boom, with capital inflows surging as investors funded a wave of dot-com startups eager to capitalize on online opportunities. The subsequent burst in 2000 led to a contraction, but the brought recovery, particularly with a focus on cleantech, where venture investments in sectors like escalated from $32 million in 2004 to nearly $1.85 billion in 2008, reflecting optimism around sustainable technologies. From the 2010s onward, venture rounds evolved amid regulatory shifts and innovative instruments, including the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act of 2012, which relaxed securities regulations to facilitate easier capital raising for emerging companies and encouraged hybrid funding structures beyond traditional equity. Y Combinator introduced Simple Agreements for Future Equity (SAFE) notes in late 2013 as a streamlined alternative to convertible notes, simplifying early-stage deals and gaining widespread adoption. Global venture activity grew significantly, with Asia and Europe collectively accounting for over 40% of deals by 2024 as non-U.S. ecosystems matured. The period from 2022 to 2024 marked a downturn, with flat and down rounds—where valuations were the same or fell from prior financings—reaching a decade-high of nearly 25% of U.S. deals in 2024 due to economic pressures and valuation resets. By 2025, resurgence emerged, driven by heightened funding in AI and climate tech, with global venture investment exceeding $80 billion in the first quarter alone, bolstered by major AI deals; this trend continued into Q3 2025, with investments reaching approximately $100 billion.

Participants

Company Side

On the company side of a venture round, the founders and management team play a central role in articulating the startup's vision and driving the process. They are responsible for preparing and delivering pitches to potential investors, highlighting the , market potential, and growth to secure interest and commitments. Additionally, the team manages access to the , a secure repository containing , details, customer contracts, and other sensitive documents, ensuring that only authorized parties receive information while facilitating thorough . During negotiations, founders and executives engage directly with investors to discuss terms such as valuation, equity allocation, and governance rights, often balancing the need for capital with retaining control over the company's direction. The pre-existing board of directors provides oversight and strategic guidance prior to closing the round. Composed typically of founders and early advisors, the board must formally approve the financing transaction, including the budget implications and capitalization plan, to ensure alignment with the company's long-term objectives. This approval process involves reviewing the proposed terms and assessing how the influx of capital will support product development, market expansion, and operational scaling, while mitigating risks such as over-dilution or unfavorable investor protections. By endorsing the round, the board signals internal consensus and helps position the startup favorably for investor confidence. Legal and financial advisors are essential in supporting the company's execution of the round. Company counsel, often specializing in startup transactions, drafts responses to inquiries, populates disclosure schedules with accurate representations and warranties, and negotiates protective provisions in the stock purchase agreement to safeguard the startup's interests. Meanwhile, accountants or financial experts prepare and maintain the capitalization table, a detailed tracking equity , option pools, and dilution effects from the new , ensuring transparency and compliance during closing. These professionals collaborate to verify that all documentation reflects the agreed terms and avoids discrepancies that could delay funding. Across these roles, the company's representatives bear key responsibilities to protect the startup's integrity and facilitate a smooth transaction. They must maintain strict confidentiality by using non-disclosure agreements and secure data rooms to limit the sharing of proprietary information, preventing competitive risks during outreach to multiple investors. Promptly responding to investor queries during due diligence—covering topics like financial projections, legal compliance, and team capabilities—is crucial to build trust and expedite the process. Finally, ensuring adherence to securities laws, such as filing Form D under Regulation D for exempt offerings, is paramount to avoid regulatory penalties and validate the round's legitimacy. Founders often retain 50-70% collective ownership immediately after a seed round but experience significant dilution, typically holding less than 20% by Series C as subsequent investments and employee equity grants accumulate.

Investor Side

Lead investors in venture rounds are typically established venture capital firms, such as or , that commit the largest portion of capital, often 30-50% or more of the round's total. These investors spearhead the syndication process by inviting and coordinating co-investors, negotiate the primary terms of the deal, and oversee documentation and closing to ensure alignment with fund objectives. Co-investors, including other VC firms and angel investors, contribute smaller stakes, typically ranging from 5-20% of the round, and rely on the lead investor's for validation. Angel investors, often high-net-worth individuals, play a key role in early rounds by providing initial capital and signaling to attract larger institutional backers, with investments commonly syndicated in pools of $200,000 to $400,000 per deal. Follow-on investors consist of prior backers, such as early VCs or angels, who increase their stakes in subsequent rounds to preserve ownership percentages and support scaling. This participation is influenced by fund size and performance signals from initial investments, helping to mitigate dilution while signaling continued confidence to new participants. Other investor types include (CVC) arms of large corporations, which deploy internal funds into startups for strategic synergies like technology access, and funds of funds, which diversify by investing in multiple VC funds rather than directly in companies. In 2025, sovereign wealth funds have shown increased activity in venture capital within emerging markets, with leading globally by attracting $391 million in VC , driven by mandates to bolster local ecosystems. Beyond capital infusion, investors conduct thorough risk assessments during to evaluate market potential and team capabilities, provide input via board seats—particularly for leads, who join in about 61.5% of cases—and deliver post-investment strategic advice on operations, hiring, and scaling to enhance value creation. Venture capitalists aim for 10x or higher multiples on winning investments to offset losses, as only 10-20% of portfolio companies typically achieve outsized success under the industry's power-law return distribution.

Funding Process

Preparation and Pitching

Startups preparing for a venture round begin by developing a compelling pitch deck to articulate their and attract interest. This document serves as the primary tool for initial outreach, typically consisting of 10-15 slides that highlight the core elements of the opportunity. Key components include a clear statement of the problem the startup addresses, the proposed solution or product, and an assessment of market size using metrics like (TAM) and Serviceable Addressable Market (SAM) to demonstrate potential. Traction metrics, such as user growth, revenue figures, or key performance indicators, provide evidence of early validation, while financial projections outline projected revenues, expenses, and over 3-5 years to show path to profitability. The deck should also cover the , competitive landscape, team expertise, and a specific ask, ensuring the is concise and visually engaging to hold attention during a 10-20 minute presentation. Networking forms a critical part of pitching, with startups prioritizing warm introductions to venture capitalists through trusted intermediaries to increase response rates and credibility. Accelerators like facilitate these connections by providing access to their alumni network and investor events, while platforms such as enable founders to leverage mutual contacts for targeted outreach. Attendance at industry conferences, demo days, and founder meetups further expands opportunities for serendipitous introductions, emphasizing the importance of building relationships prior to formal pitches. To generate initial interest without revealing sensitive details, startups create a teaser—a one-page summary or abbreviated deck sharing anonymized metrics like high-level traction and market opportunity—to distribute broadly. Upon receiving interest, a (NDA) is executed, granting access to a secure containing comprehensive documents such as detailed financial models, cap tables, legal agreements, and product demos. This setup ensures controlled information flow, with tools like role-based permissions and activity tracking to maintain during early discussions. Founders must also establish clear round targets, including the total amount to raise—often $1-5 million for rounds based on needs—and a cap to guide convertible instruments like SAFEs. A minimum viable commitment, typically from a lead anchoring 30-50% of the round, helps signal and attract follow-on participants, preventing the round from stalling. These parameters are informed by comparable deals and advisor input to balance ambition with realism. The overall conversion rate from initial pitch to is very low, often less than 1%, underscoring the need for refined preparation amid competitive markets. Only about 5-10% of startups that reach proceed to receive a . AI-powered tools, such as automated deck generators, are increasingly aiding creation by suggesting structures, generating visuals, and optimizing content based on successful templates, though human oversight ensures authenticity.

Negotiation and Due Diligence

Once initial interest is secured from pitching, the negotiation phase involves drafting a , a non-binding document that outlines the key economic and control terms of the proposed investment. This includes the , which determines the startup's worth before the investment and influences ownership percentages; liquidation preferences, typically set at 1x non-participating to ensure investors recover their capital plus any accrued dividends before common shareholders in an ; and schedules for founders, often over four years with a one-year cliff to align long-term incentives. Negotiations center on several critical levers that balance protections with founder . Founder control is often addressed through voting rights on major decisions, allowing founders to retain influence despite dilution. Board composition is a key point, where investors may secure one or more seats to guide , while founders push for balanced representation to maintain operational oversight. Anti-dilution clauses, such as broad-based weighted average provisions, protect investors from erosion in future down rounds but can be negotiated to avoid overly punitive full ratchet mechanisms that heavily impact founders. Parallel to or following discussions, serves as an intensive verification process to uncover risks and validate claims. Legal focuses on reviews, examining patents, trademarks, and ownership to ensure no disputes or encumbrances exist. Financial involves audits of statements, cash flows, balance sheets, and projections to assess health and detect irregularities like overstated revenues. Technical , particularly for software startups, includes code audits to evaluate , , and scalability. Market entails customer interviews and calls to gauge satisfaction, retention rates, and competitive positioning, alongside analysis of size and growth trends. In 2025, AI tools are increasingly used in to automate risk detection and analyze data, helping to identify potential failure signals more efficiently. The combined negotiation and due diligence phases typically span several weeks to a few months, depending on deal complexity and startup stage, with early-stage rounds often compressing to 4-8 weeks to maintain momentum. In , the adoption of virtual data rooms has accelerated this process, enabling secure, remote document sharing and collaboration that reduces due diligence time by approximately 20-40% compared to traditional methods. However, a significant portion of term sheets fail to close due to diligence revelations, such as hidden liabilities or unresolved legal issues.

Closing and Post-Closing

The closing of a venture round involves the execution of binding legal agreements that formalize the terms negotiated earlier in the process. The primary document is the stock purchase agreement (SPA), which details the sale of to investors, including the purchase price, number of shares, representations and warranties, and closing conditions. The investor rights agreement (IRA) complements the SPA by outlining ongoing investor protections, such as information and registration rights, without directly governing the stock sale itself. Additionally, amendments to the company's bylaws are typically adopted at closing to align with the new governance structure, including provisions for board composition and stockholder meetings. Upon satisfaction of all closing conditions—such as receipt of necessary approvals and confirmations of representations—signatures on these documents are released from , triggering the funding process. Investors their committed capital to the company, often held in escrow until all signatures are finalized to mitigate risk. Closings are frequently conducted remotely using platforms like DocuSign, enabling efficient execution without physical presence. In 2025, the average timeframe from signing to closing stands at approximately 60 days, encompassing completion, document drafting, and final approvals. Post-closing, the company must file SEC Form D with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission within 15 days of the first securities sale to notify regulators of the exempt offering under Regulation D. The capitalization table (cap table) is then updated to reflect the new share issuances, ownership percentages, and dilution effects, ensuring accurate equity tracking for future rounds. Board seat installations for lead investors occur immediately or shortly after closing, as stipulated in the IRA, to integrate investor oversight into governance. Following the close, integration efforts focus on investors and establishing operational protocols. This includes providing new investors with access to secure portals for document sharing and initial communications, fostering alignment on strategic goals. reporting setups are implemented per the IRA's information rights, typically involving quarterly financial updates, key performance indicators, and progress against agreed to maintain transparency.

Types of Rounds

Early-Stage Rounds

Early-stage venture rounds encompass the initial funding phases for startups, primarily pre-seed and , which provide capital to validate concepts and achieve early amid high uncertainty and risk. These rounds differ from later stages by focusing on proof-of-concept rather than scaling established operations, with investors accepting elevated risks in exchange for potential high returns. Pre-seed funding typically ranges from $150,000 to $1,000,000, sourced from friends, family, accelerators, or angel investors to support idea validation and initial prototyping. These rounds often utilize simple instruments like Simple Agreements for Future Equity (SAFEs) or convertible notes to defer valuation until later stages, minimizing legal complexities for nascent ventures. As of Q2 2025, the median pre-seed SAFE raise reached about $700,000, reflecting slightly increased investor appetite despite market caution; however, Q3 saw a decline in overall activity. Seed rounds follow, raising $500,000 to $5 million from institutional investors such as micro-VCs or early-stage funds, aimed at developing a (MVP) and securing initial user traction. These can involve priced equity rounds or instruments, with pre-money valuations commonly between $12 million and $16 million as of 2025, signaling growing confidence in viable business models—particularly for AI startups, where medians reach $16 million compared to $15.3 million for non-AI. SAFEs are now used in over 85% of early-stage rounds for their flexibility in high-risk environments, compared to traditional equity structures or notes. Key differences between pre-seed and include scale, risk profile, and maturity: pre-seed addresses ideation with lower amounts and valuations around $5 million to $6 million pre-money, while mitigates somewhat reduced risk through demonstrated prototypes, often yielding higher funding at elevated valuations. Both stages carry higher overall risk than growth rounds due to unproven markets, but emphasizes early or user metrics for investor appeal. A 2025 trend integrates platforms like , enabling non-accredited investors to participate in pre-seed and deals alongside traditional VCs, broadening access and accelerating capital raises. Milestones for these rounds center on tangible progress, such as building a product in pre-seed to test feasibility and acquiring initial users in to validate . Achieving an MVP with early customer feedback serves as a critical bridge, demonstrating potential to justify further .

Growth-Stage Rounds

Growth-stage venture rounds typically follow early-stage financing, such as rounds, where startups have achieved initial product validation and are ready to expand operations. These rounds, often labeled Series A and beyond, provide capital for scaling businesses with demonstrated traction, emphasizing growth, market expansion, and over mere ideation. Investors in these stages include firms seeking higher returns through mature companies with reduced risk profiles compared to pre-revenue ventures. Series A rounds generally raise between $5 million and $15 million to help startups achieve and build out core teams, with s ranging from $20 million to $50 million. Funds are allocated toward refining products, hiring key personnel, and conducting initial market tests to validate scalable demand. For instance, in Q1 2025, the median for Series A rounds reached $48 million, reflecting confidence in startups with early signals. By Q2 2025, the median deal size for Series A stood at $12 million, a decline from the 2021 peak when medians exceeded $14 million amid a hotter environment. Subsequent rounds like Series B and C raise $20 million to over $100 million, focusing on aggressive scaling, such as entering international markets or optimizing channels, with a strong emphasis on established streams—typically $5 million to $10 million in annual recurring (ARR) for Series B candidates. These investments support hiring at scale, infrastructure upgrades, and geographic expansion to capture larger market shares. Series C and later rounds often exceed $50 million, targeting pre-IPO preparation where companies exhibit predictable cash flows and lower execution risks, commanding higher valuation multiples—around 7x ARR for SaaS firms in —due to proximity to events. In , market dynamics have led to increased use of bridge rounds, such as Series A' or B', which provide interim notes or smaller equity infusions of $5 million to $20 million to extend runways amid longer intervals between full rounds and cautious investor sentiment. These bridges, comprising about 17% of U.S. activity as of Q2 , help startups bridge gaps without immediate full dilution but signal potential valuation resets in a post-2021 slowdown. Overall, growth-stage financing prioritizes metrics like growth rates (often 2-3x year-over-year) to justify escalating sizes and terms.

Key Deal Elements

Valuation Methods

In venture capital financing, valuation determines the startup's worth and the equity percentage investors receive for their . refers to the company's estimated value before receiving new capital, while includes the amount added to the pre-money figure. For instance, a $10 million with a $2 million results in a $12 million . The dilution percentage, which represents the equity fraction ceded to new investors, is calculated as the amount divided by the . This derives from the equaling the plus the : post-money = pre-money + . Substituting yields dilution % = / ( + ). To arrive at this, consider that investors' equity share equals their capital contribution relative to the total value after , ensuring the captures the proportional ownership transfer without altering the pre-existing value. For example, with a $10 million and $2 million , dilution = $2M / $12M = 16.67%. Several methods guide these valuations, tailored to early-stage uncertainties. The Berkus method assigns up to $500,000 per key —such as sound idea, , , strategic relationships, and product rollout—for a maximum early-stage value of $2.5 million, emphasizing qualitative progress over financials. The scorecard method starts with the average of comparable startups in the sector and region, then adjusts upward or downward (e.g., +25% for superior , -10% for weaker market) based on factors like strength, market size, and , providing a relative benchmark. The (VC) method projects the company's terminal value at exit (e.g., via acquisition or IPO), discounts it to using an expected ROI (often 10x for early rounds), and divides by the anticipated equity percentage to estimate : pre-money = (terminal value × investor ROI multiple) / equity %. This backward-looking approach prioritizes investor return targets. As of 2025, valuation practices incorporate AI-driven tools for comparable analysis, automating adjustments from vast datasets of funding rounds to enhance precision in matching sector and stage peers. Additionally, down rounds—where new valuations fall below prior ones—have increased, comprising about 20% of Series A deals following the 2022 market correction, reflecting cautious sentiment amid economic volatility.

Investor Rights and Protections

Investor rights and protections in venture rounds are contractual safeguards designed to mitigate risks for investors by prioritizing their returns, preventing dilution, ensuring oversight, and providing access to information and liquidity options. These provisions are typically outlined in key documents such as the , investors' rights agreement, and voting agreement, granting preferred stockholders advantages over common stockholders. Liquidation preferences provide investors with priority in the distribution of proceeds during a liquidity event, such as an acquisition or sale, ensuring they recover a multiple of their original before other shareholders receive distributions. The standard multiple is 1x, meaning investors receive at least their initial investment amount, though 2x multiples may be negotiated in higher-risk deals. These preferences can be non-participating, where investors choose the greater of the preference amount or their pro-rata share of total proceeds, or participating, allowing them to receive the preference plus their pro-rata share, often capped at 2x or 3x the original to balance investor protection with founder incentives. Anti-dilution provisions protect investors from value erosion in subsequent "down rounds" where new shares are issued at a lower valuation than the prior round. Under a full ratchet mechanism, the conversion price of the investor's preferred shares is adjusted downward to match the new round's price, effectively granting additional shares as if the original investment was made at the lower price. In contrast, the more common weighted average anti-dilution adjusts the conversion price using a formula that considers the number of new shares issued and the price difference, providing a moderated protection that less severely impacts founders. Governance rights enable investors to influence company decisions and monitor operations, typically including board representation and veto powers. The lead investor in a round commonly receives one board seat to represent their interests, with additional seats possible for larger investments or syndicates comprising up to two seats total. Investors also hold protective provisions, granting rights over major actions such as issuing new stock, amending the , approving mergers, or changing , which require affirmative consent from a specified percentage of preferred shares. Information rights ensure ongoing transparency by requiring the company to provide major investors with regular financial and operational updates, including unaudited quarterly comprising income statements, balance sheets, and statements for the first three fiscal quarters. Registration rights facilitate liquidity upon an exit, particularly through an IPO, with demand registration rights allowing investors holding a minimum share threshold to compel the company to file a registration statement with the SEC to sell their shares publicly. These rights often include piggyback provisions, enabling investors to join any company-initiated registration. In recent years, ESG clauses have emerged as an additional layer of investor protection, incorporating environmental, social, and governance criteria into term sheets to align investments with sustainable practices and mitigate reputational or regulatory risks. While not yet ubiquitous, such provisions are increasingly common in impact-focused deals, reflecting broader trends in responsible investing.

Employee Option Pools

Employee option pools serve as a critical mechanism for startups to attract, motivate, and retain talent by reserving a portion of equity for future grants to employees and service providers. These pools typically comprise 10-20% of the company's fully diluted shares, calculated on a pre-money basis prior to a funding round, enabling the issuance of stock options without immediate dilution from new issuances. The creation of an employee option pool involves adding unissued shares to the capitalization table, often as part of the financing in venture rounds. This pool is established or expanded to cover anticipated hires, with investors frequently conditioning their participation on its inclusion to ensure the company has sufficient equity incentives post-investment. For instance, in early-stage rounds like Series A, the pool is commonly sized at around 15% to support key hires through the next funding milestone. Options granted from the pool follow a standard schedule of four years, with a one-year cliff, under which 25% of the grant vests after the first year, and the remainder vests monthly thereafter. This structure aligns employee incentives with long-term company success while protecting against early departures. Pools are refreshed or expanded in subsequent rounds to replenish grants for new talent, maintaining the company's ability to compete for skilled professionals. A key aspect of pre-money option pools is their disproportionate dilution effect on founders compared to investors, as the reserved shares reduce the pre-investment ownership percentage of existing shareholders without impacting the new investors' share. This practice underscores investor protections by safeguarding their economic interests during talent acquisition. In 2025, trends in employee option pools emphasize enhanced protections such as double-trigger acceleration provisions, which trigger full upon both a change of control (e.g., acquisition) and an involuntary termination, providing to employees in exit scenarios. As of November 2025, the use of option pools to support diverse talent hiring remains part of broader DEI efforts in venture-backed companies, though these initiatives face increased scrutiny and backlash following the 2024 U.S. , potentially affecting future practices.

Negotiation Tactics

Option Pool Shuffle Mechanism

The option pool shuffle is a strategic negotiation tactic employed by venture capitalists during financing rounds, wherein investors insist on expanding or creating the company's pool immediately prior to their investment, thereby allocating the resulting dilution primarily to the existing shareholders, especially the founders. This approach effectively transfers the cost of reserving equity for future hires from the incoming investors to the pre-existing owners, preserving or enhancing the investors' relative ownership stake. The core impact of this mechanism lies in its effect on percentages: when the option pool is increased on a pre-money basis, the additional shares dilute the founders' equity before the new capital is injected, which boosts the investors' post-investment without altering the headline . For instance, a required 15% pre-money pool in a round can reduce founder by an additional 2-5% compared to a post-money equivalent, depending on the investment size. This dilution dynamic is closely linked to Section 409A valuations, independent appraisals mandated by U.S. tax regulations to establish the of , ensuring option grants comply with IRS rules on non-qualified and avoiding penalties for undervalued exercises. In practice, the option pool shuffle is a standard feature in venture s, where investors typically demand a pool sized at 10-20% of the fully diluted post-money to cover anticipated hiring needs through the next 12-18 months. The National Venture Association's (NVCA) model reflects this norm, specifying an unallocated option pool as a of the post-money immediately prior to closing, often aligning with the 10-15% range for early-stage rounds. This tactic is prevalent in U.S. venture financings, appearing in the majority of early-stage deals as a normative practice shaped by market conventions. However, by 2025, founders have increasingly pushed back against the shuffle, favoring instruments like post-money SAFEs that clarify dilution upfront and mitigate pre-money pool manipulations by tying ownership calculations more transparently to post-investment capitalization.

VC-Friendly Approach

In the VC-friendly approach to option pool negotiations during venture rounds, the option pool is established on a pre-money basis, meaning the shares allocated to the pool are added to the company's prior to the closing. This results in the dilution from the new option shares affecting only the pre-existing shareholders—typically the founders and early investors—while the incoming investors receive their targeted ownership percentage without any reduction from the pool creation. This method benefits venture capitalists by maximizing their post-investment ownership stake, as they avoid sharing in the dilution caused by the option pool, effectively preserving or enhancing their economic position in the company. From the founders' perspective, the pre-money option pool increases their effective ownership dilution beyond what would occur in a post-money scenario, often by 2-5 percentage points depending on the pool size relative to the investment. The pre-money approach remains the standard practice in traditional term sheets, commonly employed by lead investors to align with their preference for protecting economics.

Founder-Friendly Approach

In the founder-friendly approach to handling option pools during venture rounds, the employee option pool is sized and created on a post-money basis, meaning it is calculated as a of the company's after the new has been added but before the pool shares are issued. This results in proportional dilution across all shareholders, including the new investors, rather than placing the burden primarily on existing owners. As described in standard equity management practices, this method ensures that the pool's creation dilutes founders and investors alike, promoting fairness in distribution. This approach benefits founders by preserving a more equitable share of ownership and aligning incentives among all parties, as the dilution for future hires is shared rather than disproportionately affecting pre-investment stakeholders. It reduces the risk of founders being overly diluted in early rounds, allowing them to retain greater control and while signaling commitment to the . In contrast to investor-favored pre-money pools, this avoids the "option pool shuffle" where founders alone absorb the pool's impact. From the venture capitalist's perspective, the post-money pool can result in a slightly lower percentage for the new , as their stake is also diluted by the pool creation, potentially making it less appealing in negotiations. However, it still provides the necessary equity reserves for hiring without compromising the overall deal structure. The founder-friendly post-money approach has gained significant traction since introduced the post-money in 2018, which incorporates similar post-money calculations to clarify and dilution upfront. This innovation has been widely adopted by YC-backed startups and extended to broader venture practices, influencing and early-stage deals by emphasizing transparency and founder protections. A representative example illustrates the mechanics: Consider a startup with a $10 million raising $2 million in investment (resulting in a $12 million without the pool). The investors would initially hold 16.67% ($2 million / $12 million). If a 15% option pool is then created post-money, it equates to $1.8 million in new shares (15% of $12 million), diluting all parties proportionally. The total becomes $13.8 million, and the investors' final ownership is approximately 14.5% ($2 million / $13.8 million), while founders experience even dilution alongside the investors, maintaining relative fairness rather than bearing the full pool impact alone.

References

  1. https://www.svb.com/startup-insights/vc-relations/stages-of-venture-capital/
  2. https://support.crunchbase.com/hc/en-us/articles/115010458467-Glossary-of-Funding-Types
  3. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/102015/series-b-c-funding-what-it-all-means-and-how-it-works.asp
  4. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/venturecapital.asp
  5. https://pitchbook.com/news/articles/understanding-the-stages-of-vc
  6. https://www.dfinsolutions.com/knowledge-hub/thought-leadership/knowledge-resources/venture-capital-investment-lifecycle-funding-rounds
  7. https://www.rbcx.com/ideas/startup-insights/bootstrap-financing-vs-venture-capital-vc-funding-whats-right-for-you/
  8. https://fi.co/benchmarks
  9. https://carta.com/learn/startups/fundraising/series-a/
  10. https://nvca.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Q2-2025-PitchBook-NVCA-Venture-Monitor-19728.pdf
  11. https://www.library.hbs.edu/hc/doriot/innovation-vc/ard/
  12. https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/09/70-years-of-vc-innovation/
  13. https://pitchbook.com/newsletter/recalling-apples-vc-funded-past
  14. https://www.goldmansachs.com/our-firm/history/moments/2000-dot-com-bubble
  15. https://www.wired.com/2012/01/ff_solyndra/
  16. https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2012/04/the-jobs-act-creates-new-opportunities-for-middlem
  17. https://www.ycombinator.com/documents
  18. https://dealroom.co/guides/global
  19. https://pitchbook.com/news/articles/why-us-startups-decade-high-flat-down-rounds-2024
  20. https://www.ey.com/en_us/insights/growth/venture-capital-investment-trends
  21. https://news.crunchbase.com/venture/global-vc-funding-biggest-deals-q3-2025-ai-ma-data/
  22. https://review.firstround.com/heres-what-you-can-really-expect-when-pitching-your-seed-stage-startup-at-a-vc-partner-meeting/
  23. https://www.4degrees.ai/blog/series-a-data-room-how-to-run-the-room-best-practices-2025
  24. https://www.avery.law/insights-posts/inside-the-vc-decision-making-process-what-founders-should-expect
  25. https://www.kauffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/primer_for_building_an_effective_board.pdf
  26. https://westaway.com/faq/what-does-my-startups-board-of-directors-generally-need-to-approve/
  27. https://www.goodwinlaw.com/en/insights/publications/2022/09/09_14-the-15-minute-founders-guide
  28. https://carta.com/blog/cap-table-management-tips-for-investment/
  29. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/resources/business-law-today/2024-february/understanding-basics-cap-table-math-start-ups/
  30. https://www.cooleygo.com/should-you-require-a-signed-nda-from-a-potential-investor/
  31. https://spzlegal.com/blog/funding/legal-due-diligence-process
  32. https://faisonlawgroup.com/blog/sec-compliance/
  33. https://carta.com/data/founder-ownership/
  34. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/08/15/more-than-money-venture-capitalists-on-board/
  35. https://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/~/media/Files/EGK-VC-20180402.ashx
  36. https://cpevc.tuck.dartmouth.edu/center-activity/resources/l
  37. https://www.sec.gov/resources-small-businesses/capital-raising-building-blocks/early-stage-investors
  38. https://www.sec.gov/resources-small-businesses/smallbiz-essentials-what-are-different-types-early-stage-investors
  39. https://cpevc.tuck.dartmouth.edu/uploads/centers/files/Note_on_Angel_Investing.pdf
  40. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2024/02/20/common-venture-capital-investors-and-startup-growth/
  41. https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/working-papers/organizational-structure-decision-making-corporate-venture-capital
  42. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/making-corporate-venture-capital-work/
  43. https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/256/SSBCI_Program_Profile_Venture_Capital_FINAL_May_17.pdf
  44. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-04-22/saudi-arabia-becomes-biggest-emerging-market-for-vc-fundraising
  45. http://www.columbia.edu/~xg2285/VC.pdf
  46. https://conferences.law.stanford.edu/vcs2019/wp-content/uploads/sites/63/2018/09/003-The-Venture-Capital-Risk-Return-Matrix.pdf
  47. https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/163250/brillaud-namib-msms-mgt-2025-thesis.pdf
  48. https://www.ycombinator.com/library/2u-how-to-build-your-seed-round-pitch-deck
  49. https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/10-steps-perfect-your-startup-pitch
  50. https://www.alumni.hbs.edu/Documents/events/NVCPitchDeckTemplate.pdf
  51. https://www.ycombinator.com/library/4A-a-guide-to-seed-fundraising
  52. https://www.codeventures.com/blog/how-to-get-venture-capital-funding-in-10-steps/
  53. https://www.thevccorner.com/p/find-startup-investors-guide
  54. https://www.aleberry.com/blog/a-comprehensive-guide-to-creating-the-best-startup-data-room-for-investors
  55. https://blog.thunder.vc/data-room-strategy
  56. https://carta.com/learn/startups/equity-management/data-room/
  57. https://www.rho.co/blog/valuation-cap
  58. https://www.goingvc.com/post/why-investors-fight-for-pro-rata-rights-and-what-founders-should-know
  59. https://www.goingvc.com/post/the-ultimate-guide-to-navigating-the-vc-investment-funnel
  60. https://www.goingvc.com/post/the-ultimate-guide-to-venture-capital-term-sheets
  61. https://www.contentbeta.com/blog/ai-pitch-deck-generator/
  62. https://skywork.ai/blog/how-to-build-investor-ready-ai-pitch-deck-2025-guide/
  63. https://www.svb.com/startup-insights/vc-relations/venture-capital-term-sheets/
  64. https://faisonlawgroup.com/blog/startup-founder-control/
  65. https://www.affinity.co/guides/venture-capital-due-diligence-best-practices
  66. https://www.wallstreetprep.com/knowledge/venture-capital-diligence/
  67. https://www.riskllama.com/blog/risk/the_venture_capital_blind_spot_why_traditional_due_diligence_misses_73_percent_of_startup_failures
  68. https://www.4degrees.ai/blog/venture-capital-due-diligence-guide
  69. https://homebusinessmag.com/money/financial-trading/smart-investors-use-virtual-data-rooms-before-committing-capital/
  70. https://webhightechcompany.com/why-virtual-data-rooms-are-essential-for-mergers-and-acquisitions-in-2025/
  71. https://techcrunch.com/2022/08/28/vc-due-diligence/
  72. https://nvca.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/NVCA-Model-Document-Stock-Purchase-Agreement.docx
  73. https://nvca.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/NVCA-Model-Document-Investor-Rights-Agreement.docx
  74. https://www.faegredrinker.com/en/insights/publications/2022/9/cashing-in-getting-ready-for-your-series-a-round
  75. https://siliconhillslawyer.com/2012/05/27/closing-time-sealing-the-deal/
  76. https://www.docusign.com/
  77. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=440db0ae-918f-4ac6-9b36-e774cfd4fe5a
  78. https://inceptiv.law/ten-things-you-should-do-after-closing-a-priced-round-financing/
  79. https://builtin.com/articles/information-inspection-observer-rights
  80. https://www.venturefundblueprint.com/articles/onboarding-excellence-best-practices-for-fund-manager-and-portfolio-interactions
  81. https://www.excedr.com/resources/things-you-should-do-after-closing-a-seed-round
  82. https://www.brex.com/spend-trends/startup/pre-seed-vs-seed-funding-round
  83. https://www.finrofca.com/startup-qa/pre-seed-funding-2025
  84. https://www.joinarc.com/guides/pre-seed-funding
  85. https://kruzeconsulting.com/blog/preseed-funding/
  86. https://carta.com/data/state-of-pre-seed-q1-2025/
  87. https://www.metal.so/collections/2025-pre-seed-funding-benchmarks-saas-startups-round-size-valuation-equity
  88. https://stripe.com/resources/more/pre-seed-capital-for-startups
  89. https://carta.com/data/state-of-pre-seed-q3-2025/
  90. https://waveup.com/blog/startup-funding-stages/
  91. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/valuation-trends-seed-rounds-16m-median-what-means-keiretsu-forum-l2fbc
  92. https://developmentcorporate.com/saas/should-you-chase-that-sky-high-seed-valuation-what-startup-founders-need-to-know-about-venture-capital-returns/
  93. https://www.venturemechanics.com/blog/why-safe-notes-are-so-rapidly-overtaking-convertible-notes-as-the-structure-of-choice-for-pre-priced-rounds
  94. https://www.zeni.ai/blog/pre-seed-valuations
  95. https://www.pitchdrive.com/academy/pre-seed-vs-seed-funding-startups
  96. https://republic.com/
  97. https://alcorfund.com/insight/tick-off-these-meaningful-15-milestones-for-your-early-startup-stage/
  98. https://slidebean.com/tools/early-startup-funding-stages
  99. https://macabacus.com/venture-capital/rounds
  100. https://carta.com/data/state-of-private-markets-q1-2025/
  101. https://news.crunchbase.com/venture/funding-rounds-average-mean-startups-charts/
  102. https://www.gilion.com/basics/funding-stages-of-startups
  103. https://www.saastr.com/the-new-bar-for-a-series-b/
  104. https://www.saas-capital.com/blog-posts/private-saas-company-valuations-multiples/
  105. https://www.gilion.com/basics/bridge-round
  106. https://kpmg.com/kpmg-us/content/dam/kpmg/pdf/2025/venture-pulse-q1-2025.pdf
  107. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ayousfi_startups-venturecapital-founders-activity-7385911262725050368-8N6J
  108. https://nvca.org/model-legal-documents/
  109. https://www.angellist.com/learn/liquidation-preference
  110. https://www.hsbcinnovationbanking.com/en/resources/a-deep-dive-into-liquidation-preferences
  111. https://www.carta.com/learn/equity/liquidity-events/liquidation-preferences/
  112. https://breakingintowallstreet.com/kb/venture-capital/liquidation-preference/
  113. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/anti-dilutionprovision.asp
  114. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/equities/anti-dilution-provisions/
  115. https://www.orrick.com/en/tech-studio/resources/glossary/Weighted-Average-Anti-Dilution-Protection
  116. https://denuo.legal/en/insights/news/F14/
  117. https://www.saastr.com/how-do-startup-boards-and-their-seats-work-and-how-does-a-ceo-set-themselves-up-to-retain-control-of-the-board-when-incorporating/
  118. https://www.angellist.com/learn/protective-provisions
  119. https://www.holloway.com/g/venture-capital/sections/information-rights
  120. https://scaleup.mofo.com/guidance/ask-a-mofo-common-provisions-in-venture-capital-term-sheets-information-and-observer-rights
  121. https://ecvc.wsgr.com/faq/financing/preferred-stock/what-are-registration-rights
  122. https://altumlegal.com/what-registration-rights-do-investors-receive-in-venture-capital-financings
  123. https://sifted.eu/articles/esg-term-sheet-vc
  124. https://capitalqventures.com/impact-investing-how-esg-will-continue-to-shape-venture-capital-in-2025-even-with-the-new-presidential-administration-in-the-u-s/
  125. https://carta.com/learn/startups/equity-management/option-pool/
  126. https://eqvista.com/equity/startup-employee-equity-pool-or-option-pool/
  127. https://assets.fenwick.com/documents/Venture-Financing-Overview.pdf
  128. https://ledgy.com/blog/pre-and-post-money-option-pools
  129. https://www.ycombinator.com/library/Ep-all-about-startup-equity
  130. https://carta.com/learn/equity/stock-options/vesting/
  131. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/option-pool.asp
  132. https://www.angellist.com/learn/employee-option-pool
  133. https://gouldratner.com/adsb%25202025%2520chapter%252015%2520revision.pdf
  134. https://diversity.vc/diversity-vc-report-2025-us/
  135. https://betakit.com/as-dei-backlash-spills-into-canada-black-tech-leaders-envison-a-more-sustainable-model/
  136. https://www.sewkis.com/publications/who-bears-it-part-1-the-option-pool-shuffle/
  137. https://kruzeconsulting.com/blog/option-pool-shuffle/
  138. https://ltse.com/insights/funding-your-startup-the-impact-of-the-option-pool-shuffle/
  139. https://brownrudnick.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BR_VC_Term_Sheets_SinglePages_5.2.2023.pdf
  140. https://nvca.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/NVCA-2020-Term-Sheet.docx
  141. https://www.gurustartups.com/reports/option-pool-shuffle-explained
  142. https://promise.legal/startup-legal-guide/funding/discount-rates
  143. https://foresight.is/docs/options/
  144. https://avc.com/2009/11/valuation-and-option-pool/
  145. https://www.glencoyne.com/guides/option-pool-dilution-impact
  146. https://nyemaster.com/news/term-sheets-decoded-for-founders
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.