Ask HN: What is the success rate of those that join YC?
curious to know what the success rate of those that join YC is?
Success as in they reach IPO or cashed out in secondary markets or acquired for at least 1000% ROI (10x bagger)
What does the % look like here roughly?
For those still grinding it out, are they profitable and able to generate their own runway from enterprise sales?
Of those that failed to get any acquisition or ROI, what is the % rate look like there?
14 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 48.3 ms ] threadhttps://seed-db.com/accelerators/viewall?acceleratorid=1011
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13HIAEwspdjqKENvi5uHJ...
YC mythos is crumbling before me...
Failure : (92.95%)
Small Success : (3.94%)
Medium Success: (2.39%)
Large Success : (0.28%)
Unicorn : (0.44%)
and the ROI distribution doesn't look good either (but I understand those home runs will pay for the losses)
-100% (Total Loss): (80.9%)
-99% to -50% : (2.4%)
-49% to 0% : (1.4%)
1% to 100% : (2.6%)
101% to 500% : (5.7%)
501% to 1000% : (2.8%)
1001% to 5000% : (3.8%)
5001%+ : (0.4%)
There's a page of their bigger successes: https://www.ycombinator.com/topcompanies/public
But those are the bigger ones. There's small ones that bring value to the world like OMGPOP, that made that Draw Something game that was sadly acquired by Zynga for $200m.
Apparently they've invested in over 5000 companies. That's $750m-$2.5b. Their top 10 exits probably covers that.
and only 10k for first batch ... forget YC man
damn super disappointed only 0.2% of IPO...with success rates this bad might as well just become a professional poker player lmao
Startups are hard. The vast majority fail. Joining YC doesn't mean they run the company and drive the vision for you. It sounds like they give you some money and people connections, and from there, it's almost all you.
IPO isn't entirely the success metric though. Reddit was founded in 2005, the first batch, and IPOed this year. That's almost two decades and it's one of the more successful YC stories - nobody at the time would have touched a non-profitable company led by someone below 40. YC started the cliche of founders being 20 year olds who have no plan for profitability. And many VCs just copied it, snatching all these young, brash, YC rejects, which is what gives the demographic a bad reputation.
Also I'd say the exit most people want is an acquisition. There's plenty of those too. You get cash right away, and so do the VCs. You don't get into the billionaires list, but the thing is with IPO, you can't even cash out a lot of it without the stock tanking. IPOs are often the option because some companies get too big to acquire.
And the other thing is you don't leave with $0 on failure - you get experience, the resume item, possibly a job later. Acquihires might even mean it's a good job. Sam Altman didn't IPO but he got a job with YC after his exit, and now he's a superstar founder.
And YC the most successful by a large margin. 500 Startups might be the next best. 500 has more small exits than most other accelerators. They're more marketing based, while YC is product based. So it may fit different people.
It's also very destructive to the economy. The wealth concentrates at the hands of the few and those capital are almost certainly outside US jurisdiction to avoid taxes.
Lastly, the shock to the people that helped those few get rich have to find new jobs or at the mercy of those seeking enrichment over building long term jobs which can only come from those with long term focus not cash out so i can retired mentality.
You can see the differences in how East Asian conglomerates operate vs the West. Life long job prospects, conservative long term focused at monopolizing and transferring jobs from the West to the East.
The society and city are completely different as a result. Whereas in tech bro cities you have homelessness, violence, addiction and ideological absurdities.
East Asia + Singapore have created stable civil societies without those things and its reflected by the type of billionaires they create and allow to operate with long term focus and stability top to down.
crowdfunding is always hardware for some reason and consumer stuff...like games
The downside of crowdfunding is you actually have to sell pretty hard to investors and you're also locked in to whatever you promise. Kickstarter locks you into stretch goals. Equity crowdfunding may lock you into a mini IPO situation, with inexperienced investors who put unwanted pressure.
Upside is you don't need to build a unicorn. Bootstrapping works best for something that is a small market, and VCs won't fight over small markets. Best example is something that only works in one country or one language, or say, a company that makes realistic 3D tree assets for CGI.