Top VC Exits Are Outpacing Fund Growth

How fund sizes have only doubled while top exits have 7x’d

Trace Cohen
June 04, 2025

In partnership with

https://x.com/daveclark85/status/1925224897359290710

Startup Exit Sizes Have Grown Sharply

Data from PitchBook and VenCap highlights a major trend: the largest venture-backed startup exits in the U.S. have increased significantly over the past two decades. The shift is not only in magnitude but in frequency and strategic value, reflecting a maturing innovation economy.

2005–2009: ~$1.4 billion (99th percentile exit)
2010–2014: ~$2.7 billion
2015–2019: ~$5.75 billion
2020–2024: ~$10.2 billion (7.3x!)

That represents a 7x growth in the largest exits. These aren't just outliers; they’re increasingly frequent, often involving companies that scale faster and are acquired earlier.

Even exits at the 90th percentile have grown substantially:

From $400 million to $1.6 billion over the same period — a 4x increase.

This expansion shows a shift in what the market values. Whether through IPOs or acquisitions, high-growth startups are commanding significantly higher exit valuations. The winners are exiting sooner and bigger, making liquidity events more common across the top quartile of outcomes.

https://news.crunchbase.com/venture/data-global-monthly-funding-may-2025/

Venture Fund Sizes Have Grown, But More Modestly

In contrast, fund sizes have expanded more slowly. While the average size of a VC fund has certainly increased, it hasn't come close to matching the growth in exit values:

2005–2009: The top funds averaged $1.2B with Andreessen Horowitz Fund I 2009 only being $300M
2020–2024: The tops funds averaged $2.1B with Andreessen Horowitz latest fund in 2024 being $7.2B a 24x increase in 15years (which might skew it a little)

That's less than 2x increase in fund size compared to a 7x increase in top exits. This implies that capital efficiency and return-on-capital metrics for top-performing funds are improving. Funds are able to achieve larger exits without proportionally increasing their fund size or check size.

Additionally, many of today’s breakout startups are achieving scale with leaner cap tables and fewer rounds. This means that early-stage investors, including those from smaller funds, are able to realize larger returns without needing to massively increase their fund vehicles.

Why Are Exits Scaling So Much Faster?

There are several key reasons behind this divergence:

Public markets have expanded massively: The market cap of the S&P 500 has grown from approximately $13 trillion in 2005 to over $52 trillion in 2024. This reflects an enormous increase in the liquidity and demand for large, scalable technology companies.
The rise of Big Tech dominance: The combined market cap of the "Magnificent 7" — Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, Tesla, and Nvidia — has increased from ~$1 trillion to $17.6 trillion. These companies aren’t just potential acquirers; they’ve become ecosystems in themselves, absorbing high-growth startups as part of their strategic roadmaps.
Greater capital deployed into startups: Over the last 15 years, more than $1 trillion has been raised by U.S. based VC firms. This sustained investment has created a robust pipeline of growth-stage startups, many of which are maturing at the same time.
A broader, more aggressive buyer universe: Private equity firms and late-stage startups have joined Big Tech in acquiring early- and mid-stage startups. This competitive landscape has driven up exit valuations across all stages.
Faster innovation cycles and vertical specialization: With the rise of cloud infrastructure, machine learning, generative AI, and vertical SaaS, startups are scaling quicker, building defensible moats earlier, and exiting faster.
Strategic urgency among buyers: In a climate of accelerating technological change, acquirers are more eager than ever to buy innovation rather than build it in-house. The premium they’re willing to pay has increased accordingly.

Put together, these dynamics are reshaping the timeline, scale, and structure of exits, all while the VC funds backing these startups remain relatively lean compared to the size of outcomes they’re generating.

Strategic Takeaways for VCs and LPs

This growing gap between fund growth and exit growth changes how success is measured and achieved:

Returns are more concentrated than ever: The power law has intensified. A small number of outlier companies are delivering the vast majority of returns. GPs need to be laser-focused on identifying and backing potential category leaders early.
Small-to-mid-sized funds can still deliver outsized DPI: Funds don’t have to scale to $1B+ to hit top-quartile returns. A well-placed $250K check in the next $10B exit can be transformative for fund performance.
Access is the new alpha: LPs should prioritize GPs with access to competitive deals, strong founder relationships, and reputational advantages, not just headline fund size.
Portfolio construction matters more: In this environment, VCs must be intentional about check sizing, follow-on allocation, and ownership targets. A tight portfolio of high-conviction bets can outperform a wide net of diluted exposure.
Efficiency of capital is improving: GPs are doing more with less. Strong returns are being generated without the need to constantly raise larger funds.

Still More to Unpack

As promising as these trends are, I still have a number of questions I want to dive deeper into to fully understand this transformation:

Fund range by cohort — What was the largest and smallest fund in each vintage group? Understanding the spread helps contextualize averages.
Individual fund scaling — How much has each fund grown over time? Some may have doubled, but others have 5–10x’d. It’s important to study their individual trajectories.
Fund type segmentation — What kinds of funds are being measured? Are they seed, early-stage, growth, opportunity, secondary, PE, or sovereign wealth funds? This will affect the scale and exit profiles.
Fund consistency — Which funds have been present in every vintage? Who are the consistent players across all four periods? That continuity can reveal key structural lessons.