By: Nate Bek
Take a tour of Seattle’s active venture firms, curated by Ascend.
VC for the rest of us: The ultimate guide to investing in venture capital funds for tech employees
By: Nate Bek & Sean Sternbach
For tech workers, being an early-stage startup investor holds a distinct allure.
It’s like having a backstage pass to the pitch decks and demos that could become the next Uber, SpaceX, or OpenAI. But accessing venture capital (VC) as an asset class can seem daunting and complex — especially if you are balancing the demands of a full-time job.
Let’s break down the process.
Investors in VC funds, known as limited partners (LPs), are like the silent backers in the wings. They provide the necessary capital with limited liability, remaining largely uninvolved in the daily operations. Most LPs do not participate in scouting or decision-making, though there are a few exceptions.
Prior to recent changes, becoming a solo LP required substantial financial means. You needed an annual income of more than $200,000, or $300,000 with a spouse, or a net worth over $1 million, excluding your home.
Recent US law changes have broadened participation. The Equal Opportunity for All Investors Act of 2023, passed by the House, lets individuals qualify as accredited investors based on financial knowledge, not just income or net worth. SEC amendments in 2020 had already included certain professional certifications.
Now, passing a FINRA exam may also qualify you.
For finance or STEM workers, these changes are major. Their expertise in tech and investment means they may meet the new criteria. This opens the door to invest in startups and private offerings previously out of reach.
We want to break down the asset class for these folks. Ascend teamed up with Cloud Capital and talked to more than a dozen LPs, legal experts, and VCs.
We combined these convos with our own insights to share a detailed FAQ.
-
The main draw is, of course, the potential for financial return. VC offers investors the chance to earn significant multiples on their principal investment throughout a typical 10-year fund cycle. A good fund might 10X your money.
Indeed, it’s not just about the cash. VC investing also supports broader economic growth. It’s all about placing bets on the future, funding visionary founders setting out to disrupt industries from healthcare to clean energy.
There’s also more to being an LP than financial rewards and innovation, especially in a smaller fund or angel network. Additional benefits might include:
Board participation: Some LPs have the chance to serve on the boards of companies within the portfolio. This role comes with governance responsibilities, strategic input, and sometimes additional equity stakes.
Insider knowledge: LPs get insights into the strategies and performance of startups within the fund. They use this information to offer targeted advice based on their expertise.
Networking opportunities: Regular interactions with fund managers and other LPs can open up further valuable investment opportunities and insights.
It’s worth highlighting these additional reasons to consider an investment in VC and — within each reason — you should consider the following questions:
Diversification to your financial structure
Does the inclusion of alternatives improve the risk/return characteristics of a portfolio?
Is there low correlation with public markets, or is it just an illusion of data?
Are suitable vehicles available to implement a diversified alternatives portfolio over time, industry, asset type and managers?
Performance
Do alternatives outperform public markets?
How about after fees and taxes?
Do prior winners repeat or persist? Can we use a track record to pick winners?
Investor Purpose
Are venture-based impact investments useful for advancing social objectives?
Are alternatives effective assets for wealth transfer?
Business Value
Are alternatives the best way to “beat the market” for returns-focused clients?
Will alternatives help you move upmarket, or will “demystifying alternatives” be an equally effective tool set?
Do alternatives offer sufficient confidence and value to justify the operational complexity of delivery?
-
These days, most of the value creation gets done in the private markets. Before, it was mainly captured post-IPO.
For instance, Amazon’s valuation in 1997 at IPO had a market cap under $1 billion. Microsoft’s market cap was also under $1 billion in 1986, when it went public.
Today, all the larger tech companies of the decade accrue 100% of the first $20 billion in market cap pre-IPO in the privates. This means that if the right VC funds can pick great startups, there is significant upside potential before the company even goes public.
There’s been a rush into VC chasing these high returns. Here are the numbers:
$30 trillion. That’s the amount of wealth that’ll transfer to millennials and GenX over the next several decades. This cohort of investors favor investments in private technology, evidenced by growth of platforms such as AngelList ($16 billion AUM).
12%. That’s the average amount of allocation family offices put towards VC.
90%. Almost universally, family offices have exposure to private equity, investing through both funds and direct transactions. VC continues to be top of mind, with up to 90% of family offices globally reporting VC investments.
-
Let’s look at VC fund performance compared to public markets.
We evaluate this through a ratio called “Public Market Equivalent (PME).” This metric compares the cumulative return of a private equity investment (net of fees) to an investment in a public benchmark. A PME of 1.21 implies that, at the end of the fund’s life, investors ended up with 21% more than if they had invested in public markets.
Click here to view the infographic.
This infographic shows us that VC fund performance has outperformed each of the indices above over the time period in question. While this data is not recent, it does highlight the impact VC calls have on a portfolio.
That said, one should still consider the following factors:
Risk adjustment: In general, early-stage VC tends to invest in very small companies with fat-tailed outcomes. There are a large number of failures and a few big winners.
After tax: How would results compare after tax to a public market fund?
After-estate tax: In certain cases, a public market fund may never realize gains, and it can pass through a client’s estate without tax. VC funds will likely realize gains, even if QSBS is present.
Additional fees: Will additional fees be applied from investment vehicles such as fund of funds to enable more confident diversified investing?
Liquidity: Venture funds often have long lockup periods, and it can take 10 years or more to fully realize return on capital.
Source: Harris, Jenkinson, and Kaplan, "Private equity performance: What do we know?" (2014). As displayed in the above graphic, PME ratios use a reference index as a public benchmark. Reference indices include the S&P 500 Index, Russell 3000 Index, and Russell 2000 Index. It is not possible to invest directly in an index. Index performance does not reflect the expenses associated with the management of an actual portfolio. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Indices are shown for informational and comparison purposes only – there are no private equity holdings in any of the indices shown.
-
The first hurdle to clear is knowing your status as an investor, whether that’s meeting income thresholds or having financial sophistication. VC is among the riskiest asset classes, so the SEC wants to know that you can recover if funds are lost.
Tier I, accredited: You’re an accredited investor if your annual earnings exceed $200,000, or $300,000 together with your spouse, for the past two years. Another way is if your net worth is more than $1 million, excluding your primary residence. Certain financial certifications can also qualify you (more on that above). Either way, this status lets you invest in VC funds that limit their investors to 99.
*Funds that take checks from accredited investors are typically seed-stage and in the sub-$100 million range. These requirements might mean an entry price between $250,000 to $1 million for their main funds, and they might even take less for sidecar funds.
Tier II, qualified purchasers: This category is for those with more than $5 million set aside for investments. Funds for qualified purchasers can accept up to 2,000 investors. These funds cater to a wealthier investor base and aren’t open to accredited investors that don’t reach the financial threshold.
*Late-stage funds, which are much larger, will require larger check sizes to reach their fundraising goals. These VC funds usually stick to this financial criteria, but they might bend the rules for portfolio founders, close friends, and top execs.
Here’s what else you should know:
LP selection: VC funds can be nit-picky about their LPs. They often prefer those with strong reputations and a clean public image, as each investor impacts the fund’s branding and appeal.
Professional background: Funds might favor LPs with a technical background or startup experience. This can help with board seats, advisory roles, or introductions.
Tech: Both big and small tech companies are generally agnostic about their employees investing in VC, as long as these investments don’t compete with the company’s interests. This is particularly true for blind funds, where LPs don’t participate in investment decisions.
Financial sector: If you work in finance, your company might have stricter rules to avoid conflicts of interest, especially with investments that could overlap with company operations or client interests.
Publicly-traded companies: These companies have specific ethics codes about investing, as well as a compliance department.
-
Build your network: Access to top funds will start with who you know. Connect with VC fund managers on LinkedIn, individuals with “Limited Partner” in their bio, as well as founders who have fundraising experience. Warm intros from portfolio founders or fellow LPs can be a valuable first step into getting in front of the right fund managers.
Time it right: Understand when funds are looking for investors. Keep in touch with fund managers and watch market trends to know when to make your move. Most funds will kick off the fundraising process before they are fully deployed in their previous fund. For top VC funds, it’s like catching a train — you need to be at the station at the right time.
Match investment sizes: Know what funds expect in terms of investment amounts. Make sure you can meet these figures and have enough cash on hand in the future to be able to meet commitments when fund managers call capital (more on that below).
-
Finding the right fund manager is the most important decision you’ll make as an LP. The fund manager’s execution influences the outcome of your investments.
Performance history: Review the manager’s historical performance, including returns generated, success rates of past investments, and the growth trajectories of companies they've supported. Key documents to request are Limited Partnership Agreements (LPAs), Schedules of Investments (SOIs), and recent investor updates.
Portfolio data: Examine the portfolio for successful exits via IPOs or acquisitions, and track startups that have secured significant funding in subsequent rounds. Metrics such as Multiple on Invested Capital (MOIC), Total Value to Paid-In (TVPI), and Internal Rate of Return (IRR) are essential for assessing a portfolio's success rate.
Fund duration: Remember that VC funds typically operate over a 10-year cycle. Newer funds may lack historical data, which can be used for assessing long-term performance and market adaptability.
Philosophical match: The VC fund’s investment thesis should resonate with your personal values, whether that’s driving social change, focusing on specific geographies, or empowering underrepresented groups.
Sector- and stage-focus: Match the fund’s specialized industry focus or stage of business development—from startups to growth-stage companies—with your areas of interest and perceived opportunities.
Operational competence: Assess the manager’s ability to effectively oversee the fund’s operations, from capital allocation to risk management and exit strategies.
Process: Understand the fund’s process for deal sourcing, due diligence, and investment decision-making. Ask the fund manager to explain how they can access proprietary deal flow and receive allocation in competitive deals. The best funds have robust funnels to maximize visibility and move on investment decisions quickly.
As an example, some funds implement a shotgun-like spray-and-pray model, where they invest in dozens of companies within the same fund. Other fund managers shoot from a sniper rifle, identifying very specific companies from deep due diligence and then write larger checks within each company they select. Understanding these types of nuances may sway you from opting-in, or out, of a fund.
Team: Consider the breadth of the management team’s expertise and the resources they have at their disposal for portfolio support. A strong platform team can significantly support founders and maximize the outcomes of investments by offering strategic guidance, customer leads, operational support, access to upstream investors, and more.
Research: As a starting point, ask the VC if you can talk to a portfolio company CEO and an LP in the fund. Ensure the VC is supporting founders how they prescribed in their fund offering and ensure that LPs are receiving regular communication about the fund as promised.
-
Middle and lower quartile funds often do not justify the risk and illiquidity profile of VC.
Click here to view the infographic.
With close to 4,000 US VC funds, it is difficult to keep track of all fund opportunities.
Evaluating fund manager strategies is time consuming and requires domain expertise that involves detailed track record assessment, team dynamics, competitive positioning, portfolio construction, reference calling, etc.
VC remains an insular category and access requires deep-seated relationships, brand and reputation, and large minimum commitments
VC funds from 2001 to 2020, which were top quartile in their prior fund, only have a 30% chance of being top quartile, or 54% chance of being above the median, in the next fund.
Click here to view the infographic.
Source: Harris, Robert S., Tim Jenkinson, Steven N. Kaplan, and Rüdiger Stucke, "Has persistence persisted in private equity? Evidence from buyout and venture capital funds" (2022). PME ratios use the S&P 500 Index as a public benchmark. It is not possible to invest directly in an index. Index performance does not reflect the expenses associated with the management of an actual portfolio. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Indices are used for informational and comparison purposes only. 1. Top quartile funds are determined using PME data available at the time of fundraise for the next fund.
-
Time management: Investing in a VC fund is passive. You provide the money, and the fund managers handle the rest. It requires little of your time. Angel investing is active. You have to find startups, do the research, and make the investment decisions. It demands a lot of your time and involvement.
Deal flow: VC funds have access to a steady stream of deals. Fund managers use their networks and resources to find the best startups. As an angel investor, you must find your own deals. You need to network, attend events, and stay active in the startup community to discover opportunities.
Portfolio risks: VC funds diversify your investment across many startups, spreading the risk. Angel investing typically involves fewer startups, resulting in higher risk since your investments are more concentrated, though you reap more upside on the winners.
Management fees: VC funds charge management fees. You pay a percentage of your investment, usually 3%, for the fund managers’ services. Also, they take a percentage of the profit called carried interest. As an angel investor, you don’t pay management fees. However, you bear the cost of your time and resources to manage your investments.
-
Direct early-stage deals
Co-investments
Emerging Managers
Established Managers
Growth Funds
Fund of Funds
Starting with the top of the list above and working its way down, you will generally see it flow from higher to lower risk profiles and also higher to lower return profiles.
-
If the topics above have not yet scared you away from this asset class, there are plenty of good reasons to consider venture capital as part of your overall portfolio.
Capital constraints over the past two years have created more operating discipline at startups.
VC’s have been valuing the quality of revenue over growth at all costs.
Investing is moving from “shotgun weddings” between investors and founders to traditional lengthier diligence processes for investment decisions.
With numerous layoffs from big tech firms, more and more talent is going the path of launching startups.
One of the biggest reasons is that valuations across fundraising stages have come way down since mid-2022. Take a look at the valuation data from Carta between Q2 2022 and Q1 2023:
Click here to view the infographic
Valuations have come down across the later stage. Couple favorable valuations with new tech advancements in AI and machine learning over the past 12-18 months and there becomes opportunity for venture capital funds to perform well.
-
That’s a personal choice. It’s based on your financial health and how much risk you can handle. Many experienced investors advise beginning modestly. For example, starting with about 5% of your net worth is typical as you get familiar with the field. As one investor put it, it’s better not to put all your eggs in one basket. Investing in a fund can spread out your risk. It gives you a diverse mix of startups to invest in, which lowers the risk and eases the management load compared to direct angel or stock investments.
Just like a diversified stock portfolio, it is important to stay diversified in other asset classes. So, once you have identified the right asset allocation to VC, it is important to spread the risk across at least two to three venture funds. You may seek to diversify across investment thesis, geographies, funding stages, etc.
If you are allocating 5% of your net worth to this asset class, and the minimum subscription amount to a venture fund is $250,000, your net worth should be a minimum of $5 million. However, as the paragraph above stated, you may be better off investing in two or three VC funds. If each fund has a $250,000 minimum subscription and you commit to two of them, you may need a higher net worth if you are seeking to stay within that 5% threshold.
One thing that is sometimes overlooked is the capital call management side. When you commit to a VC fund, your full fund commitment is rarely called up front. Generally, your first capital call may be in the 15-30% of your commitment with the majority of your remaining commitments to be made over the next 2-3 years. Therefore, it’s important to keep liquid assets nearby for whenever future capital calls are made. It’s always a good idea to ask about the capital call schedule of each venture fund before making a commitment.
-
If you have not made privately-held investments before, you may not have received a K-1. The Schedule K-1 is the form that reports the amounts passed to each party with an interest in an entity, like a business partnership or an S corporation. This tax form is part of your overall tax return each year and some funds may not provide you with a K-1 before April 15, requiring you to file a tax extension. Ask the fund about the timing of K-1s.
Not all funds are created equal. Some funds have higher fee structures than others, some funds are composed of new fund managers, have varying strategies, and a whole lot more. Spend the time talking to the fund managers and other LPs before you make a commitment.
About the authors:
Nate Bek is an associate at Ascend, where he screens new deal opportunities, conducts due diligence, and publishes research. Prior to that he was a startups and venture capital reporter at GeekWire.
Sean Sternbach is the Chief Investment Officer at Cloud Capital, a boutique RIA and multi-family office, where he analyzes fund offerings across asset classes on behalf of the firm’s clients.
Disclaimer: The information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute financial advice, and you should always consult with a qualified financial professional before making any investment decisions. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
Meet Sunil Nagaraj: The Bay Area VC Nerding Out on ‘Software Beyond the Screen’
By: Nate Bek
Sunil Nagaraj loves to nerd out about the future.
The founder and managing partner of early-stage venture firm Ubiquity Ventures says his passion lies at the intersection of cutting-edge tech and real-world impact. It’s part of the pitch of the firm’s $75 million Fund III, which focuses on “Software beyond the screen.”
At the core, Sunil believes the most transformative companies will be those that harness software to navigate, perceive, and control the physical world.
“I think to make money you want to invest in an area that people don't quite understand really well,” he says. “That doesn’t get a ton of attention... If you can find little pockets of interesting innovation, they can become huge economic opportunities.”
In 2011, he joined Bessemer Venture Partners, where he spent six years honing his investing chops. One of his notable investments from that time was Seattle-based Auth0, an identity management platform that eventually exited to Okta for $6.5 billion.
Doubling down on his “software beyond the screen” thesis, Sunil launched Ubiquity in 2017. The firm has since raised three funds totaling more than $150 million in AUM. It’s actively deploying checks at the pre-seed and seed stages with an aggressive “nerdy and early” approach. (More below on the firm’s funding strategy and details.)
Ubiquity takes a hands-on strategy, helping instill foundational principles around discipline. It’s this strategy that led to the firm’s 90% graduation rate from the seed stage to a successful Series A raise.
Sunil was kind enough to sit down with Ascend for our VC profile series, where we showcase early-stage investors from across the US. We talked in more depth about his VC passion, Ubiquity’s unique thesis, and his thoughts on the current fundraising environment. Read to the end for carve-outs.
*We've edited this conversation for brevity. Enjoy! — Nate 👾
Nate: Thanks so much for chatting with us, Sunil. What made you fall in love with VC?
Sunil: I think there’s two parts to the job.
First is about following new trends, nerding out on technologies, and getting inspired by new ideas. Many people think venture capital is about throwing darts on a board trying to predict the future. All of those things really resonate with the nerd engineer and the 5-year-old in me that used to love reading about new technologies and still what I do today. That’s half of why I love being a venture capitalist.
For the other half, I would say I didn’t have a deeper appreciation for how important it was to the job until after I became a VC. After I joined Bessemer — where I was for six years before launching Ubiquity — I got pulled in to join board meetings as an observer along with my boss at the time.
Through this experience, I started to see the innards of how companies are run, being in those pivotal meetings and discussions that change the direction of a company. These hard conversations about pivots, understanding metrics, and trying to separate the storytelling around startups from internal operations. That was the meat of building an exciting startup, which is quite different from just nerding out on cool new technologies.
It’s almost like a chess game of putting the pieces in the right place to nail the growth, management and board role of a company. That’s something I have come to love.
Can you go deeper on Ubiquity’s “software beyond the screen” thesis?
When you move a physical problem into the domain of software, you can iterate it more quickly. You can experiment more quickly, try more things, and spend a lot less money and get to a working physical solution.
In this domain, you’re still interacting with the physical world. Your input is physical, your output is physical, but inside it is software…
For example, Rocket Lab’s orbital class space rocket had an electric motor-powered turbo pump in its unique rocket engine. And as a result, the engine had a software brain and it ran lines of C++. When I visited them, they would run a test of the engine. If it didn’t work as planned, they would go back to a computer and change lines of software code within a few minutes, push it to the rocket, and then try it again. That idea was unheard of at the time. In the old world of rockets, you would have to take apart the physical rocket engine, change out a metal gear, go to the machine shop, make a new metal gear, and come back to reassemble it – for every iteration! So a software layer on hardware turns an iteration loop of months into seconds.
On the AI front, new advancements are being applied on the edge. There’s improving computer vision models and, of course, large language models. How is that contributing to software beyond the screen?
I've been investing since 2017 out of Ubiquity, and the two focus areas of the fund are smart hardware and AI. In the 2017 to 2018 window, AI was primarily focused on recognizing patterns through language or imagery, like computer vision.
In Seattle, there’s a company called ThruWave that sends millimeter wave signals through any box to determine what’s inside, effectively seeing through walls and boxes with human-safe millimeter waves. Imagine a waveguide, a sensor about as big as my hand. Once they get the signal returns, they use computer vision to apply it, recognizing patterns, detecting contraband or broken items, or missing bottles. This recognition-focused AI was the name of the game until the more recent developers where AI can start to create/generate.
An example of this new phase of AI is Ubiquity-backed Resemble AI, a startup that generates synthetic speech and detects audio deepfakes. It’s a compelling shift to use the modalities of language and vision to not just recognize but now to create imagery, videos, and language. We’re still seeing how far we can take these generative technologies with ChatGPT being a good example. It can be used to extend the user interface of any application. Instead of opening my phone and clicking buttons, I can now talk to it. I can type in natural sentences, and it can respond in kind. We’re all still sorting through how significant that is — a new interface to access technology more naturally. This might seem a minor difference, but for many industries, it was a huge deal, like Uber.
Another aspect to this next phase of AI is understanding more complicated things. AI now can navigate, perceive, understand, and actuate in the real physical world, often taking in more complexity and nuance than typical software. I think of the typical software I wrote as a kid — simple If-This-Then-That logic. Now, with machine learning, it’s like an extremely complicated, billion times more nuanced decision tree. So, AI offers opportunities to understand the details buried in medical records, legal data, or call logs and create more nuanced interactions.
This AI trend fits well with the vision of software expanding into more areas in the real world
ThruWave reminds me of Schrödinger’s cat… I do want to shift gears to Seattle. I think it’s pretty obvious what you’re going to say is your biggest win is here in terms of startup. But I am curious to hear your thoughts on the ecosystem and what makes it interesting for a Valley VC.
First, I should say that to make money, you need to be non-consensus and correct. It involves finding a niche in an otherwise saturated market, something not everyone is pursuing. Particularly, the Bay Area, while bustling and full of talent, has its own set of challenges and typical behaviors. I’ve been looking to other regions like Seattle, which presents a different dynamic. While Seattle lacks the sheer volume of startup activity of the Bay Area, it does possess an amazing level of technical and business talent, thanks to companies like Amazon, Google, and Microsoft. Further, Seattle doesn’t have the overwhelming intensity and many of the less desirable traits seen in the Bay Area.
In Seattle, I find that founders tend to be more grounded, pragmatic, and focused on building solid products and satisfying customers—qualities I highly value. For example, a few years ago, I was involved with Simply Measured with Aviel Ginzburg, who is still a close friend and now a VC. In the Ubiquity portfolio, there’s also Esper, Olis Robotics and others. These Seattle-based founders are practical, humble, and not focused on showmanship, which really appeals to me.
To add to that, these founders often come from great backgrounds, bringing a wealth of expertise but without the noise or, let’s say, the entitlement found elsewhere. They possess all the talent, perhaps even more hunger, but with significantly less noise.
I wrote a story at GeekWire around that thesis with “Substance over style” in the headline. Are there any bear cases or concerns about Seattle that someone in the Seattle ecosystem should think about?
Conventional wisdom in Bay Area venture capital suggests that there’s no better place than San Francisco to find top-tier technical founders and the critical mass necessary to scale a company. It’s taken as a fact that if you're serious about your tech startup, you’ll eventually need to relocate to the Bay Area to access a sufficient pool of engineers, managers, and leaders. I’m not entirely convinced of this necessity, however.
Take my situation; I'm from Raleigh, North Carolina, close to where I attended UNC Chapel Hill. The prevailing belief might be that starting a company there could initially involve a small foundational team, but scaling to hundreds or thousands of employees would pose a significant challenge due to a limited local talent pool. But I don’t share these concerns when it comes to Seattle. This might have been a legitimate worry in the past, but it no longer holds true today. Companies like Auth0, Esper, Remitly, and others have demonstrated that they can start, grow, and thrive in Seattle. This is thanks to the continuous growth of hometown giants like Amazon and Microsoft, whose employees might outgrow the cultures at those companies.
Addressing the point about geographic limitations impacting the potential for significant company growth or exits, this too seems outdated. The pandemic has further diminished such concerns, proving that acquisitions and operations can successfully extend beyond traditional hubs through remote work or establishing secondary offices.
While there might be an initial reaction to question the viability of non-Bay Area geographies for tech startups, the reality in places like Seattle challenges these assumptions. There aren't substantive, empirically-supported objections to investing there anymore. It’s more about making the effort to establish connections and networks. People in the Bay Area need to recognize the importance of engaging with other regions and invest the necessary time to foster relationships. In my view, the lack of investment in Seattle is no longer justified and is rapidly being fixed.
You told me that Ubiquity has a 90% graduation rate, why is that? And why should founders want you on their cap table?
If you’re serious about building a company, you'll want a serious investor from day one. Not everyone desires that, but for us, it means regular board meetings and priced rounds—it's not just lip service. You’ll present progress, gather feedback monthly and take it seriously. Some believe this approach is unnecessary at the pre-seed stage, but it's crucial for achieving a 90% graduation rate. If you want a strong, committed VC from the start, I'm the right person. This typically involves a $1-2 million investment at or soon after incorporation, a board seat, and a priced round. We're building companies to be large.
Our fund recently announced $75 million, emphasizing discipline, especially in deep tech. Our approach differs from models like Y Combinator, where $100k investments come with a casual “call if you need us.” We're hands-on, and a full third of Ubiquity’s investments are made the day of a startup’s incorporation, including Seattle-based Esper. Investing early and setting a solid foundation, I think, is what helps the success rate of Ubiquity companies.
You also have a great community resource called Ubiquity University… Let's pivot to more fun questions. What song is getting the most play on your Spotify/Apple Music?
I'm tied into Instagram reels and dance videos, so songs that come up there end up making their way onto my Spotify list. I love 90s Hip Hop. That’s when I was in middle school and high school and that’s when I locked in on music.
I was delighted to see Usher performing at the Super Bowl — that’s the stuff I grew up on and, somehow, it’s back front and center.
I love that. My dad has a Tribe Called Quest CD, and I bought him Nas’ Illmatic album. What’s your favorite shoe?
I have these Cole Haan Zerøgrand shoes that are athletic but dressy. They seem to be all the rage. I thought I discovered them, but like five of my dad friends also have them. You can wear them to a business meeting or with shorts. They’ve got cloth wingtips and rubber soles, but they look like dress shoes. They’re kind of secret dress shoes.
What’s your go-to ingredient in the kitchen?
Jalapeños.
Jen Haller's Bias for Action
By: Nate Bek
In March 2020, Jen Haller was everywhere. The Seattle operator underwent a grueling media circuit of MSNBC, Fox News, NPR, CNN, and many others. GeekWire crowned her Geek of the Week, the soon-to-be Vice President Kamala Harris called her a “true hero” on Instagram, and Oprah said she has “moxie.” Jen was the first person in the world to get the Covid-19 vaccine — and this was her 15 minutes of fame.
“I quickly found my voice,” Jen says about the experience. “In times of crisis, it makes sense for all of us to turn inward, focusing on ourselves and immediate family. But when I realized we were alright, I reached out, and was like, ‘Okay, how can I help?’”
That bias for action has led to Jen’s role today as partner at Ascend. She is among the most skilled operators and connectors in the Seattle startup scene, with a sixth sense for understanding founders and guiding them through the chaotic and sometimes unprecedented process of launching a company. For two decades, she has built a sprawling network in the Seattle tech sector, always finding ways to jump in and offer support at the earliest stages of a new venture — even if that means being first in line to get a new vaccine.
“Jen is an investor, confidante, therapist, and best friend all wrapped into one,” says Varun Puri, CEO and co-founder at Yoodli. “Her superpower is that she always shows up, no questions asked.”
In many ways, Jen is an architect of Ascend’s evolution as an early-stage venture capital firm. She and Kirby have an understanding: Kirby makes the investment decisions and Jen runs the firm’s platform and operations. This gives her the agency to focus on supporting founders and fostering community without worrying about evaluating founders or generating deal flow.
“What’s unique about this partner title is that it recognizes the significance of a support role — I don’t want to do Kirby’s job, and he doesn’t want to do mine, we get to focus in the areas where we shine,” Jen says. “It’s so rewarding to just be out there doing good for the larger Seattle startup community, knowing that it all ties back to building Ascend’s brand. It’s cool to be able to help whoever needs it, trusting that all of that will benefit us in the long run.”
In the two years since joining Ascend, Jen’s presence and network has left an indelible imprint on the more than 80 companies in the firm’s portfolio. She knows the right people — or, at least, people who know the right people — to provide instant support to startups.
“Even in this short time that Avante has been in the Ascend family, I’ve seen Jen just go all out for me,” says Rohan D'Souza, co-founder and CEO at Avante. “Jen goes above and beyond, diving deep into her network — and even her network’s network — to pull out whatever resources or advice can help us out.”
That support line extends beyond just warm intros. Lakshay Chauhan, CEO and co-founder at Finpilot, says Jen helped with resources around legal, accounting, hiring, running background checks and random operational issues since Ascend’s initial investment last year.
Jen’s roots run deep in Seattle, shaped by more than two decades in its tech sector and a lifetime in the region. A University of Washington communications grad, she briefly dallied with politics at the Washington state Democratic Party. But it was the allure of startups, after stints in marketing and health tech, that captured her.
At Urbanspoon, then a darling of Seattle's startup scene, Jen stepped in as office manager. In a few years, she grew the team from 12 to 50, paralleling the company’s 400% growth. Her next stop was police body camera maker Axon, steering the buildout of the Seattle office’s expansion from 20 to 150. The new office, complete with its spaceship entrance and sci-fi pods, earned the “Geekiest Office” title from GeekWire in 2016.
However, as her roles inevitably veered towards HR in maturing companies, Jen felt out of sync. Her passion is with early-stage ventures, thriving in the chaos, playing the jack-of-all-trades. “I’ve always said I really like predictability, but when my jobs started becoming the same every day, that was a sign for me,” she says. Despite craving stability, she’s drawn to the disorder, aiming to organize and support.
This led Jen to co-founding The Flight Team, a consultancy aiding early-stage startups in strategic growth. After building a solid client list, she was recruited by Paul Allen’s Stratolaunch, managing the office and culture for more than 100 employees at the aerospace firm. Following Allen’s death in 2018, her role shifted to supporting employee offboarding and facility closures. This was part of the ebbs and flows of the startup world, the chaos she sought out, she says.
After being recruited by multiple companies, Jen then decided to join Seattle AI startup Attunely, drawn to the strong founding team. She worked there for almost three years during its rapid growth. “Jen was my right-hand person for several years,” says Scott Ferris, founder and former CEO of Attunely. “She operates with unparalleled efficiency and reliability.”
Through each stop in her startup gauntlet, Jen managed to keep a personal style that included maintaining a sense of camaraderie. Andy Romfo, who worked with Jen at three different companies, says “Jen instills a sense of calm.”
Leaving Attunely in late 2021, Jen was on the lookout for her next venture within the early-stage startup sphere. She approached Kirby to introduce her to some of the companies in his portfolio. Kirby did just that, but he also presented an alternative offer: to join Ascend and broaden her influence across multiple startups at once.
The first time I met Jen, I was still an intern at GeekWire covering startups and venture capital. At the time, I was eager to land scoops and meet as many founders as possible. This led me to participate in a ton of networking events. The only problem was that I had no idea how to actually network. Eventually, at a fintech cocktail event, Jen saw my struggle and shared her wisdom: embrace Seattle’s introverted vibe, engage engineers with questions about their tech, and simply showing up matters most. That advice stuck.
Jen’s knack for making people feel included has become her trademark in the tech world. She supports AI Tinkerers Seattle, a group of engineers that hack together projects. According to founder Joe Heitzeberg, her welcoming nature fosters a collaborative spirit crucial to the group’s success.
Jen has also been involved in developing events that specifically empower women. During a conversation with Goldenrod Ventures Founding Partner Martina Welkhoff, the duo brainstormed an idea to create a poker night for female founders and investors. Unlike others who might have just let such an idea like that fade, Welkhoff says, Jen followed up immediately to make it happen. It’s now a recurring event bringing together women founders and funders to network and play poker.
Asked about her drive to support and launch new projects, Jen tells me she gets energized by helping others and making a positive impact: “I get back so much more than I put in.”
Jen’s courage in being the first to receive the vaccine brought comfort to millions apprehensive about its effects. But it’s her capacity to forge deeply personal connections and offer her unwavering support that truly defines her impact on both Ascend and the broader Seattle startup community.
As Puri says: “There are few people who want Yoodli to succeed as badly as she does. In doing so, she always holds us to the basics — to be kind and focus on the things that matter outside of work above all else. We’re so lucky to have her in our corner.”