VC
Value Add VC
⚡HomePulse⚡Helpful Apps📝Blog
Home/Newsletter/VC vs PE Performance: The Data Beneath the Narrative
VCIssue #102·March 18, 2026·5 min read

VC vs PE Performance: The Data Beneath the Narrative

Performance has stabilized, but liquidity has not fully returned.

TC
Trace Cohen
Managing Partner at NYVP · 3x founder · 65+ investments

There is a persistent narrative that venture capital is broken and private equity is outperforming.

The data does not fully support that conclusion.

What it does show is a shift in where value is created, how long it takes to realize, and which managers actually matter.

The Current Snapshot

Private markets are coming out of a reset period following the peak of 2021.

Performance has stabilized, but liquidity has not fully returned.

Private Equity: ~8 percent annual return in 2024

Venture Capital: ~6 percent annual return in 2024

Distributions increased materially year over year, but remain below long-term averages

Capital calls have declined, reflecting slower deployment and pacing discipline

This is not a recovery driven by strong exits. It is a normalization driven by markdowns, cost discipline, and time.

The key distinction is that performance is improving on paper faster than it is in cash.

The Core Structural Difference

The simplest way to understand VC vs PE is not through returns, but through how those returns are generated.

Private equity is built on control, optimization, and financial engineering. Venture capital is built on asymmetry.

Private Equity:

Majority or control ownership

Leverage and operational improvements

Predictable cash flow businesses

Shorter duration to exit

Venture Capital:

Minority ownership

No control over outcomes

Power law distribution of returns

Long duration with delayed liquidity

This is why comparing headline IRRs between the two can be misleading. The underlying risk profile and time horizon are fundamentally different.

Why DPI Is Now the Only Metric That Matters

For most of the last decade, TVPI was enough.

Funds could show strong markups and raise the next vehicle without returning capital.

That has changed.

Today, LPs are overwhelmingly focused on DPI.

TVPI captures unrealized value and is sensitive to market conditions

IRR is heavily influenced by early marks and timing assumptions

DPI reflects actual cash returned and cannot be manipulated

Across venture funds right now:

Many 2020 to 2022 vintages show strong TVPI on paper

DPI remains near zero or low single digits for most of those funds

Older vintages are taking longer to convert TVPI into DPI due to exit delays

This is the core tension in the market. Paper performance is not translating into distributions.

The Liquidity Constraint Is the Entire Story

The biggest issue in venture is not entry price or company quality.

It is the lack of exits.

IPO markets are still meaningfully below historical averages

M&A activity has improved but is selective and price sensitive

Late-stage capital is more disciplined, reducing mark-to-market inflation

The downstream impact is significant:

Funds are holding assets longer than expected

Capital is not being recycled into new opportunities

LPs are over-allocated to private markets relative to targets

This creates a feedback loop where:

LPs slow new commitments

Emerging managers struggle to raise

Even strong-performing funds face longer fundraising cycles

In private equity, this dynamic exists as well, but to a lesser degree due to more structured exit pathways.

Vintage Year Performance Still Follows the Same Pattern

Despite everything, one thing has not changed.

Vintage year still matters.

Historically:

Funds deployed after market corrections outperform

Lower entry valuations expand potential multiples

Competition for deals decreases in down cycles

Current data suggests:

2022 and 2023 vintages are likely to be strong entry points

2020 and 2021 vintages face the most pressure due to high entry prices

2024 onward will depend heavily on exit environment normalization

But this only holds if funds maintain discipline.

Deploying too early into a falling market or too late into a rebounding one can erase the advantage.

Dispersion Is Still Extreme

The most underappreciated reality in venture is dispersion.

Across funds in the same vintage:

Top quartile funds can generate 3x to 5x+ returns

Bottom quartile funds often return less than 1x

Median outcomes are closer to breakeven than most assume

Key drivers of dispersion:

Access to top-tier founders and deals

Concentration into winners versus over-diversification

Follow-on discipline and ownership maintenance

Sector exposure, particularly to AI and infrastructure

In private equity, dispersion exists but is narrower.

In venture, a single investment can determine the entire fund outcome.

What Is Actually Changing

This cycle is not just a downturn. It is a structural shift.

Capital is no longer free

Cost of capital has increased

Growth at all costs is no longer rewarded

Exit timelines are extending

8 to 10 years is becoming the norm again

Quick flips are less common

Manager selection is becoming more important

The gap between top and median managers is widening

Brand alone is no longer sufficient

Liquidity is replacing markups as the signal

DPI is now the gating factor for fundraising

Secondary markets are becoming more relevant

What This Means for LPs

LPs need to recalibrate how they evaluate and allocate.

Prioritize managers with a history of distributions, not just markups

Underwrite longer fund durations and delayed liquidity

Diversify across vintages rather than trying to time the cycle

Expect lower near-term cash flows from venture portfolios

The biggest risk today is not missing returns.

It is being locked into illiquid positions for longer than expected.

What This Means for GPs

The environment has shifted from access-driven to outcome-driven.

Raising the next fund requires realized performance

Ownership and follow-on strategy matter more than initial entry

Portfolio construction needs to account for longer hold periods

Clear exit pathways must be part of underwriting, not an assumption

Managers who built strategies around continuous capital inflows will struggle.

Managers who can generate actual distributions will win.

Bottom Line

Private equity is currently outperforming venture on a realized basis.

But that is not the full picture.

Venture is still the highest-return asset class at the top end. It is simply delayed.

The real divide is no longer between VC and PE.

It is between funds that can return capital and those that cannot.

That is what will define the next cycle.

Venture Scout

High-quality software startups delivered straight to your inbox, every Wednesday.

www.venturescout.io/subscribe?_bhba=a912eba6-7a35-4c1b-a9cb-9721b5c72389

Subscribe | Innovate, Disrupt, or Die

Discover how innovation will accelerate your business.

www.innovatedisruptordie.com/subscribe?_bhba=a912eba6-7a35-4c1b-a9cb-9721b5c72389

Here's how I use Attio to run my day.

Attio's AI handles my morning prep — surfacing insights from calls, updating records without manual entry, and answering pipeline questions in seconds. No searching, no switching tabs, no manual updates.

Terms of Service

TC

Enjoyed this issue?

Get weekly analysis on VC fund economics, AI investing, IPOs, and startup markets — straight to your inbox.

Subscribe FreeBrowse all issues

More VC Issues

I Wrote A Book; The Value-Add VC Handbook!
A practical guide to understanding how venture capital actually works in the AI age
→
Inside 49 VC Funds: The Data Behind Venture Capital’s Scale Problem
Does size matter?
→
Value Add VC is Live!
The Hub for All Things VC and More.
→
Previous issue
The Era of Valuation Compression
Next issue
I Wrote A Book; The Value-Add VC Handbook!

Explore 45+ free VC tools, dashboards, and startup resources.

Explore DashboardsRead the Blog