The most common question about our venture capital coverage is whether we can independently assess an investor's track record, or whether we're mostly relaying whatever reputation a firm already has.
Why this distinction matters
Investor reputation is partly self-reinforcing - well-known firms get covered more, which reinforces their visibility regardless of whether their actual returns track record is genuinely exceptional.
What we actually try to do
We try to note specific, verifiable outcomes - successful exits, follow-on investment patterns from other credible investors - rather than repeating a firm's reputation as though it were itself evidence of skill.
Why full verification often isn't possible
Venture fund performance data is largely private, and we're honest that our coverage of investor track records is necessarily based on publicly visible outcomes rather than full access to actual fund returns.
Why we think this limitation is worth stating
We'd rather be clear about what we can and can't verify about an investor's actual performance than let reputation alone stand in for evidence we don't have.