venture ecosystem factbook: seattle - pitchbook · pdf file · 2017-06-27and its...

2017

Venture EcosystemFactBook:

Seattle

Credits & ContactPitchBook Data, Inc.

JOHN GABBERT Founder, CEO

ADLEY BOWDEN Vice President,

Market Development & Analysis

ContentGARRETT JAMES BLACK Manager, Custom

Research & Publishing

HENRY APFEL Data Analyst

JENNIFER SAM Senior Graphic Designer

Contact PitchBook pitchbook.com

RESEARCH

[email protected]

EDITORIAL

[email protected]

SALES

[email protected]

COPYRIGHT © 2017 by PitchBook Data, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means—graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, and information storage and retrieval systems—without the express written permission of PitchBook Data, Inc. Contents are based on information from sources believed to be reliable, but accuracy and completeness cannot be guaranteed. Nothing herein should be construed as any past, current or future recommendation to buy or sell any security or an offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security. This material does not purport to contain all of the information that a prospective investor may wish to consider and is not to be relied upon as such or used in substitution for the exercise of independent judgment.

Introduction 3

Seattle in the US Venture Ecosystem 4

Economy 5

Investment Activity 6-10

Exits & Fundraising 11-12

League Tables 13

The PitchBook PlatformThe data in this report comes from the PitchBook Platform–our

data software for VC, PE and M&A. Contact [email protected]

to request a free trial.

Contents

2 PITCHBOOK 2017 VENTURE ECOSYSTEM FACTBOOK: SEATTLE

Marked by an economic boom; tempered from recent peaksIntroduction

When it comes to analyzing one’s hometown—of not just the author but also

the company—one should be particularly aware of behavioral biases swaying

the direction of analysis. Having grown up within the Seattle metropolitan area

(comprised of Seattle, Bellevue and Tacoma), my perspective of, say, rising

rents could overly color my reading of the sustainability of real estate value

appreciation. Bearing that in mind, it is clear the overall startup and venture

ecosystem in Seattle has been directly affected by the area’s considerable

economic boom and accompanying population growth. It’s not just a matter of

potential talent pools expanding—contending with higher costs of living, which

play into a competitive labor market, remain key issues for startups. Another

key aspect of the labor market is the role played by the longstanding domestic

tech giants. Whether they play as direct a role as participating in financings or

acquisitions or unwittingly developing future startup founders, Amazon and

Microsoft—among others—are crucial players in the local venture ecosystem. On

an anecdotal basis, perhaps their most direct impact is on the talent market, as

entrepreneurs must make the case for the mission of their startup over the lofty

wages and considerable perks companies such as Amazon can supply. Yet their

role isn’t the only key factor affecting the most recent tempering of the peak

investment activity of the past decade observed in 2014 and 2015; we explore

many more in the following pages.

This is just the latest entry in our series of reports focused on exploring US

venture ecosystems at a more granular level, relying most heavily on PitchBook

datasets but also including relevant figures sourced from outside providers. We

welcome your feedback and questions—reach out to us at

[email protected]. Special thanks to Voyager Capital, Maveron, TLG

Capital, Dave Sharkey, local entrepreneurs and the National Venture Capital

Association, among others, all of whom assisted in the production of this report.

GARRETT JAMES BLACK

Manager, Custom Research & Publishing

Look up a company.

And its cap table.

And its investors.

And its EBITDA

multiples.

And its board

members.

In seconds.

The PitchBook Platform

has the data you need

to close your next deal.

Learn more at

pitchbook.com


http://pitchbook.com/news/search?media-types=NP&tags=venture-ecosystem

mailto:mailto%40reports.com?subject=PitchBook%202017%20Venture%20Ecosystem%20FactBook%3A%20Chicago

Seattle in the US Venture EcosystemSnapshot of Seattle MSA’s size within the US venture ecosystem as a whole

In early August 2016 we released the

first US Venture Ecosystem: FactBook,

the largest PitchBook report ever and

a compendium of venture and relevant

economic datasets for the top 12 (by

overall venture activity) metro areas

within the US.

Source: PitchBook. *New York and San Jose technically tied but given San Jose’s exit value and VC invested we gave it second place. Note that PitchBook uses the US

Census Bureau definition and delineation of metropolitan statistical areas.

Note: As of 6/30/2016, this ranking was generated by weighting capital raised, VC invested, VC activity and venture-backed exit value equally, tallying up their ranking in each area, then summing and sorting from lowest to highest, with a lower score indicating a larger ecosystem.

MSA*Size of VC ecosystem,

rankedTotal VC funds raised

since 2006Total VC invested since

2010Total # of VC rounds

since 2010Total exit value since 2010

San Francisco #1 $117.6 billion $101.4 billion 9,710 $90.8 billion

San Jose #2 $35.5 billion $43.3 billion 4,152 $63.5 billion

New York #3* $43.6 billion $33.9 billion 6,174 $17.6 billion

Boston #4 $41.2 billion $30.7 billion 3,664 $28.7 billion

Los Angeles #5 $2.7 billion $21.3 billion 3,403 $11.2 billion

Seattle #6 $7.6 billion $8.4 billion 1,717 $6.7 billion

Chicago #7 $3.4 billion $8.3 billion 1,348 $9.95 billion

Washington, DC #8 $4.8 billion $8.2 billion 1,416 $7.4 billion

San Diego #9 $1.5 billion $9.4 billion 1,317 $8.7 billion

Austin #10 $1.9 billion $6.6 billion 1,376 $3.7 billion

Philadelphia #11 $3.0 billion $4.8 billion 1,003 $5.4 billion

Atlanta #12 $1.15 billion $5.0 billion 837 $7.8 billion

#1

#2

#1

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

#11

#12

#1 #1

#2

#2 #2#4

#3

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

#11

#12

#3

#4

#5

#7

#8

#6

#9

#10

#11

#12

#4

#3

#5

#6

#7

#10

#9

#12

#11

#8

When it comes to the Seattle MSA’s

relative standing, it is clear Seattle

qualifies as chief among what could

be deemed a second tier of VC

ecosystems. Just looking at deal

volume, Los Angeles records nearly

double the tally of Seattle in the same

timeframe, although Seattle does

stand as fifth in fundraising. (Here,

we must clarify size does not denote

quality in any way, shape or form,

as frankly the Seattle area punches

above its weight when it comes to

producing successful venture-backed

businesses.)


Business is boomingSeattle’s current economic condition & recent trends

Seattle old-timers will recall a

notorious billboard at the city limits

requested that the last person

leaving turn out the lights, during the

depths of the “Boeing Bust” in 1971.

Nowadays, local headlines trumpet

the statistic that about 1,000 people

moved to Seattle per week in the past

couple of years. Drawn by the allure of

significant economic growth—however

concentrated it is within King County

boundaries and in a few sectors—the

population of the area is growing at

a rapid clip, although anecdotally it

is still a job-seeker’s market in not

only the tech but also the service

sectors. (For workers in the service

and other industries that don’t enjoy

similarly high median wages, however,

grappling with rising living costs is

difficult.)

In turn, this expansion has contributed

to significant, in some cases rich

appreciation in house and rental

prices. A corresponding boom in

construction has mitigated the issue

of supply more so than in other hyped

tech-centric metropolises, with an

estimated 10,000 apartments set to

open this year and 12,000 more in

2018—some estimate 98,000+ units

will be needed by 2030. Although

short-term pain of prospective renters

doubtless exists, accompanying

strength in the job market has

softened the potential impact on

recruiting talent. Average rents may

have risen significantly over the past

few years, but for a major metro area,

Seattle still lags many when it comes

to rent spending as a percentage of

income. In fact, Zumper’s October

2016 numbers show that Seattle had a

median household income of $80,349,

relative to an average 1-bedroom rent

Seattle metropolitan statistical area (MSA)Select

statistics

Resident labor force, Seattle/Bellevue/Everett, April 2017 1.6 million

Portion of residents aged 25 or older holding bachelor’s degree 59%

Population growth, King County, 2015-2016 2.5%

Population estimate, July 2016 3,798,902

Employment growth, April ‘16-April ‘17 2.7%

Change in unemployment rates, not seasonally adjustedApril ‘16-April ‘17

-0.8%

Compensation cost change for private industry, 12-month, not seasonally adjusted, March ‘16-March ‘17

2.4%

Consumer price index (urban) annual percentage change, April 2017 3.1%

2017 ranking for startup activity 24

2017 ranking for entrepreneurial growth 22

Year-over-year wage growth, 1Q’16-1Q’17 2.5%

Job growth ranking among top 200 MSAs from 2010-2015, 2016 10

Current-dollar GDP estimate, 2015 $313.7 billion

Current-dollar GDP percentage change, 2014-2015 5.2%

Overall growth ranking among largest 100 US metropolitan areas, 2010-2015

33

Year-over-year growth in seasonally adjusted S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Indices, March ‘16-March ‘17

12.2%

Approximate range of change in annual fair market rents, 2-bedroom, 2015-2016

7.6%

Sources: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, HUD FY 2017 Fair Market Rents, PayScale, Brookings Institution,

US Bureau of Economic Analysis, The Kauffman Index, Washington Office of Financial Management, The

Milken Institute Center for Jobs & Human Capital, Zumper, Employment Security Department Washington

State, CBRE, National Apartment Association, National Multifamily Housing Council

of $1,800. Skewed by the rich wages

doled out by local tech giants, that

salary level masks how lower-paid

startup workers may face difficulties

when it comes to finding housing. Yes,

there is room for further rises in rent

and doubtless demand will still exist

even if increases happen, but such

hefty wage levels should be factored

into operating cost analysis. From

startups’ perspective, simply matching

the overtures made by Amazon or

Microsoft or other Valley-based

companies such as Google to tech

workers is the far greater challenge.

On a related note, the engineering

talent pipeline is considerable yet

could well stand to expand even

further, judging by the University of

Washington’s focus on expanding its

computer science program, as well as

anecdotal evidence.


Quarterly momentum has settled somewhat

Seattle MSA venture activity

Source: PitchBook. *As of 5/31/2017

Activity looks set to roughly come even with last year’s tally

Seattle MSA venture activity

Is 2017 set for a plateau?An overview of Seattle’s venture investment activity

Tempering the investing cycle

At approximately $601 million across

120 venture financings through the

end of May, 2017 is unlikely to eclipse

2015’s massive $2.1 billion invested

in 353 venture financings of Seattle

MSA-based companies. That said,

particularly when it comes to analyzing

activity on such a granular geographic

level, larger late-stage financings

skew tallies of VC invested to a

considerable degree—take Adaptive

Biotechnologies’ massive $195 million

Series F venture funding in 2015, for

example. Hence, it is often safer to rely

on transaction volume to assess the

health of a given metropolitan venture

ecosystem, with quarterly figures in

particular lending clues as to overall

momentum. On those fronts, the

Seattle MSA is recording historically

healthy levels of investment, if

tempered somewhat from prior

heights.


$1,7

19

$1,6

26

$1,0

69

$757

$760

$721

$1,2

77

$1,1

90

$1,8

81

$2,0

93

$1,4

09

$601

122161 165 156

195211

248

307284

353

261

120

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

Deal Value ($M) # of Deals Closed

44

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

$0.0

$100.0

$200.0

$300.0

$400.0

$500.0

$600.0

$700.0

$800.0

$900.0

1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*


2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

150 179 198 231 279 256 330 248 118

Seattle MSA-based companies (#) receiving venture funding



Late-stage numbers may be normalizing, but the early

stage still experiences inflation

Median venture financing size ($M) in Seattle MSA

The outsized late-stage figure is, of course, due to

small sample sizes and should come down to earth

Median venture post-valuation ($M), Seattle MSA

Nationwide creep in costs continues

to affect domestic figures

Although the first five months of 2017

have seen a decrease in the median

VC round size in Seattle at the late

stage, pricing among more youthful

financing types remains on the

historically higher end. Competition

among recently raised domestic funds,

as well as ongoing interest on the

part of outside investors, is certainly

contributing to the continued elevation

of financing price tags, but from a

more macro perspective, that in itself

is just part of the nationwide increase

in such deal metrics. Anecdotally, it’s

clear that a startup can receive Valley-

level valuations, if the founding team is

proven.

Seattle’s tech ecosystem has been

marked by local giants

The Seattle tech ecosystem has

been indelibly marked by the

presence of Microsoft and Amazon.

Corporations have not participated in

financing many startups, likely due to

incumbency challenges in the area—a

steady flow of such participation is still

occurring, but its volume trends below

recent national averages at just 9%.

However, the local tech giant presence

is clear via what recycling of talent and

capital occurs, as entrepreneurially

minded employees jump ship to start

their own enterprises or form angel

groups to fund nascent ventures. Brad

Silverberg, a Microsoft veteran who

later became co-founding partner at



Case study: Tracking the 33 Seattle MSA-

headquartered companies seeded in 2010 and follow-

on financing rates by company count & financing type

Source: PitchBook. *As of 5/31/2017. In cases where the precise series of the

financing is unknown, the stage is labeled instead.

$0.8$1.0

$3.8$4.6

$9.0

$7.2

$0.0

$2.0

$4.0

$6.0

$8.0

$10.0

$12.0

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

Angel/Seed Early-stage VC Late-stage VC

$6.5$10.3

$31.2 $32.0

$59.1

$135.0

$0.0

$20.0

$40.0

$60.0

$80.0

$100.0

$120.0

$140.0

$160.0

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*


Follow-on financing type

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Angel 2 2 1 1

Seed 1 4 1

A 1 3 2

B 2 1 1

Early stage 2

Late stage 1 2

Corporates’ involvement contributes to a fair degree

Seattle VC activity with corporate venture participation

$163

.4

$151

.1

$299

.9

$292

.4

$367

.1

$609

.9

$192

.4

$122

.5

16

24

26

31

25

31

25

11

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

Deal Value ($M)

# of Deals Closed



Seattle MSA VC activity (#) by round size Seattle MSA follow-on VC activity (#) by stage

Ignition Venture Partners, serves as

one prominent example. It should be

noted that given how long Microsoft

and Amazon have been established

players that the rate of such recycling

could be expected to be much

higher. Local cultural tendencies

and competitive pressure from said

players, not to mention the more

cautious demographic characteristics

of the older, more established tech

worker population, likely detract.

Source: PitchBook. *As of 5/31/2017Source: PitchBook. *As of 5/31/2017

Seed financing volume in Seattle has remained steady,

by and large, although it could grow even more

Seattle MSA VC activity (#) by series

Intriguingly, the boom period of 2014-2015 saw a

significant sum of follow-on capital at the early stage

Seattle MSA follow-on VC activity ($) by stage

Source: PitchBook. *As of 5/31/2017 Source: PitchBook. *As of 5/31/2017

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*


0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

Under $500K $500K-$1M $1M-$5M

$5M-$10M $10M-$25M $25M+

$0.0

$500.0

$1,000.0

$1,500.0

$2,000.0

$2,500.0

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

Seed Series A Series B Series C Series D+

Pricier ecosystem over past years plus

access to capital contributing to size

dispersion

In the case of the Seattle venture

ecosystem, the surge in sub-

$500,000 rounds in 2015 led to

a larger population of companies

primed to raise follow-on financings in

subsequent years, given a reasonable

interval in between for initial capital

injections to be spent. Accordingly, the

prevalence of rounds sized between

$1 million and $5 million could well be

attributed to that predecessor crop of

startups funded in a smaller size class.

Coupling those staggered trends

with analyzing financing activity by

series shows that seed financings—in

that sub-$1 million size range—led

to a subsequent flurry of financings

in a traditional Series A size range

of $1 million to $5 million, at least

prior to 2016. Interestingly, follow-on

trends reveal the segmentation of

investing at the seed stage, given the

seed surge in 2015, although early-


Traditional strongholds in the area continue to attract

the most volume

Seattle MSA VC activity (#) by sector

Software’s proportion has only grown larger as of late

Seattle MSA VC activity ($) by sector


Off-pace volume, as first-time VC invested stays strong

First-time financings in Seattle MSA

The city environs host the most activity, still

City of Seattle-only venture activity




stage follow-ons have yet to quite

catch up, hinting at a Series A hurdle

of sorts. What’s important to note

here is that although the customary

nomenclature of venture rounds has

doubtless been strained in recent

years by size inflation, in the Seattle

MSA matters aren’t quite as inflated as

elsewhere, despite the macroeconomic

developments of the past few years.

Hefty first-time sums invested

suggests some outliers in

combination with inflation & optimism

Although slight, a more telling

indication of round size inflation and/

or investor optimism in general is the

steadiness in aggregate sums invested

in first-time financings, despite a slow

if slight decline in volume. That aligns

over the past few years, as the role of

outliers in driving overall VC invested

becomes stark when looking at the list

of companies funded in 2017 through

the end of May, as well as earlier this

decade. Faraday Pharmaceuticals,

a biopharma company focused on

elemental reducing agents, raked in

$32.6 million in early 2017, accounting

for a hefty percentage of total first-

time VC invested for the year already.

Seattle’s top sectors remain

biopharma & software

As noted above, the sheer

concentration of talent and historical

legacy of top tech companies within

the Seattle region couldn’t help but

engender a heavy concentration

of venture investor focus on that

$150

.6

$132

.1

$272

.7

$190

.4

$148

.5

$161

.5

$156

.8

$105

.8

7786

102

115

97 101

85

38

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*


$436

.1

$533

.4

$838

.0

$767

.3

$1,4

63.8

$1,5

26.5

$941

.8

$381

.6

127 135

158

200 192

241

176

80

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100% So�ware

Pharma & Biotech

Other

Media

IT Hardware

HC Services & Systems

HC Devices & Supplies

Energy

Consumer Goods &Recrea�onCommercial Services

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100% So�ware

Pharma & Biotech

Other

Media

IT Hardware

HC Services & Systems

HC Devices & Supplies

Energy

Consumer Goods &Recrea�onCommercial Services


Investment ($) by size in Seattle MSA-based companies

by investors HQ’d outside Washington only

Investment (#) by size in Seattle MSA-based companies

by investors HQ’d outside Washington only

Investment in Seattle MSA-based companies by investors HQ’d outside

Washington only

particular sector. Likewise for

biopharma in general, as the metro

area of Seattle is home to multiple

enterprises prominent within that

arena. Immunotherapy-focused Juno

Therapeutics serves as a key example

of a company formed from the happy

confluence of key medical centers such

as Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research

Center and Seattle Children’s Research

Institute. From the perspective of an

ecosystem framework, it’s safe to note

that the local network of hospitals

and research centers within Seattle,

which serves as the hub of the entire

US Pacific Northwest region when

it comes to medicine in general,

will continue to serve as a source of

spinouts as well as talent.

Outside investment remains key

although intriguingly overall larger-

sized investments have shrunk as of

late

When it comes to the role of outside

investors, the basic heuristic common

across our analysis of most metro

areas outside of the Bay Area is the

late-stage market remains underserved

unless outside investors join in the fray.

This isn’t necessarily a negative, simply

an observation that early-stage firms

must typically have connections to

enable later-stage VC injections. The

Seattle MSA is no different, although

intriguingly in the past 17 months the

proportion of outside VC invested in

the largest late-stage size classes has

shrunk considerably, in tandem with a

steep decline from the peaks observed

from 2014 to 2015. As 2017 thus far

looks set to approximate the tallies

of last year, this trend is likely a result

of timing more than anything else.

However, it still testifies to the crucial

nature of late-stage involvement from

outside sources of capital, in order for

local businesses to fully ascend the

capital stack.

Source: PitchBook

*As of 5/31/2017


$475

$372

$760

$593

$1,0

44

$1,2

79

$788

$321

131 136

154180

186

249

175

82

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

Deal Value ($M)

# of Deals Closed

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

Under $500K $500K-$1M $1M-$5M

$5M-$10M $10M-$25M $25M+

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

Under $500K $500K-$1M $1M-$5M

$5M-$10M $10M-$25M $25M+


Refilling pipelinesDatasets of venture-backed exits and local venture fundraising in Seattle

Exit volume has trended down, indicating cyclicality in historical context

Venture-backed exits of Seattle MSA-based companies

Seattle IPOs may be few but lucrative

Venture-backed exits ($) by type of Seattle MSA-based

companies

Venture-backed exits (#) by type of Seattle MSA-based

companies

The ongoing buildup of exit-ready

companies

When analyzing a metro area, the

effects of the recycling rate of capital

and talent are far more pronounced.

The surge of exit volume and value

in 2013 and 2014 in the Seattle metro

area may well have encouraged

the animal spirits behind a decade

peak of 211 complete angel and seed

fundings in 2015. However, as the

consequent decline in such early-stage

activity shows, cyclicality takes effect

swiftly when it comes to such types

of investing, not to mention sales.

Since the peak in 2013 through 2014,

exit volume has steadily declined,

suggesting the venture-backed

businesses best primed and motivated

for exits took the prime opportunities

to do so early and opportunistically

in the blockbuster seller’s market

of recent years. Refilling that same

pipeline has been one consequence,

with an important note that on such

Source: PitchBook. *As of 5/31/2017. Note: Aggregate exit post-valuations are included to better

represent the total value created by IPOs in particular. They include IPO post-valuations, which are

calculated as total shares outstanding multiplied by offering share price.

Source: PitchBook. *As of 5/31/2017Source: PitchBook. *As of 5/31/2017

$843

.0

$1,2

99.6

$54.

0

$5,2

85.4

$4,3

45.6

$528

.3

$1,1

73.8

$5.0

27

35

21

3841

28

21

9

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

Aggregate ExitPost-valua�on ($M)# of Exits Closed

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*Acquisi�on Buyout IPO

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*Acquisi�on Buyout IPO

a granular level as a single MSA’s

tally, outliers will continue to skew

considerably. Snap’s recent $200

million acquisition of Placed, not

reflected in these datasets, only

further reinforces that point.


Last year accounted for largest midrange surge


($) by size

2016 saw a healthy distribution of exits by size


(#) by size

Two hefty years of fundraising bode well

Seattle MSA venture fundraising

The surge of fundraising from 2015

to 2016 will exert upward pressure on

Seattle-area financing

With no fewer than 25 VC vehicles

closed between 2015 and 2016—even

with most on the micro side as is

evident from total VC raised—there

is plenty of capital for investors to

dispense in coming years. Hence the

continued steadiness of transactional

volume, especially at the earlier

stage, as well as the strong total of

sums invested in first-time rounds

alone. This cushion of capital should

continue supporting investing tallies

at the earlier stage in the years to

come, assuming typical fund lifecycles.

Anecdotally, there is still plenty of

room for dedicated seed-stage funds

to serve the early-stage market.

Linked to the lesser rate of recycling

talent and personal wealth relative to

Silicon Valley, and in the context of

currently steady seed funding volume,

perhaps there will be growth in early-

stage investing beyond historical

norms. To reiterate, the late-stage

market remains characterized by fund

managers maintaining connections to

outside sources of capital for larger,

late-stage, follow-on funding rounds.



Under 1x

1-2x 2-3x 3-5x 5-10x 10-15x 15-20x 20-25x 25-30x 30x+

21.3% 11.7% 14.9% 10.6% 23.4% 6.4% 4.3% 2.1% 0.0% 5.3%

A significant portion of volume in the midrange

Percentage of Seattle exits separated by multiple on invested

capital (MOIC), 2006-2017*

Source: PitchBook. *As of 5/31/2017. This table recreated and updated the same

methodology as used in this article, excepting the inclusion of buyouts in this dataset.

https://pitchbook.com/news/articles/which-us-cities-generate-the-best-vc-returns

$538

$2,3

31

$2,9

03

$3 $10

$328

$551

$50

$789

$555

$2

56

7

12

4 43

15

10

1

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

Capital Raised ($B) # of Funds Closed

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

Under $25M $25M-$50M $50M-$100M $100M-$500M

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

Under $25M $25M-$50M $50M-$100M $100M-$500M


https://pitchbook.com/news/articles/which-us-cites-generate-the-best-vc-returns

Keiretsu Forum 18

Madrona Venture Group 16

Alliance of Angels 16

Keiretsu Capital 8

Founder's Co-Op 7

WRF Capital 6

Trilogy Equity Partners 5

Voyager Capital 5

Ignition Venture Partners 5

Right Side Capital Management

5

Most active investors in Seattle MSA,

2016, across all stages

Venture capitalVenture capital, for the purposes of this report, is defined as institutional investors that have raised a fund structured as a limited

partnership from a group of accredited investors, or a corporate entity making venture capital investments.

ValuationsPre-money valuation: the valuation of a company prior to the round of investment. Post-money valuation: the valuation of a company

following an investment.

Exits

This report includes both full and partial exits via mergers and acquisitions, private equity buyouts and IPOs.

FundraisingThis report includes Seattle MSA-based venture capital funds that have held a final close. Funds-of-funds and secondary funds are

not included.

League tables are compiled using the number of completed VC rounds for Seattle MSA-based companies in 2016. To ensure your firm is accurately represented in future PitchBook reports, please contact [email protected].

Source: PitchBook

CompanyDeal size

($M)Series/stage Sector

Smartsheet $52.1 Series F Software

Faraday Pharmaceuticals $32.6 Series APharmaceuticals and

Biotechnology

Outreach $30.0 Series C Software

Qumulo $30.0 Series C1 Software

Echodyne $29.0 Series B Commercial Products

Icertis $25.0 Series C Software

CreativeLive $25.0 Series C Services (Non-Financial)

WISErg $21.2 Late-stage Commercial Services

Magnolia Medical Technologies

$21.0 Series BHealthcare Devices and

Supplies

BulletProof $19.0 Series B Consumer Non-Durables

2nd Watch $19.0 Series D Software

Sensoro $18.0 Series B Retail

Select League TablesSelect rankings of most active investors and deals in Seattle

Select 2017* venture financings of companies headquartered in Seattle

Most recent round type

9-12 months

12-18 months

18-24 months

Angel/seed 42 51 69

A 9 12 14

B 6 5 8

C 2 3 3

Ready for the next round: companies

(#) by time since most recent round




mailto:[email protected].

See how the PitchBook Platform can

help VCs invest smarter.

[email protected]

We do pre-money valuations,cap tables,series terms,custom search,growth metrics.

You invest in the next big thing.

venture ecosystem factbook: seattle - pitchbook · pdf file · 2017-06-27and its...

Documents