Reconstructed first-round book from the research data, not a scrape of today's website. Public portfolio pages over-report winners, and this graph has the same public-data bias. Investor edges are essentially Crunchbase through late 2015, plus Y Combinator.
Research book · 3-year follow-on
Arboretum Ventures vs Kairos
Not ranked
Whole-book follow-on hit rate 80.0% (4 of 5 labeled deals). 95% Wilson interval 37.6%–96.4%. Vintage-weighted base rate 46.6%. This is not a fund return.
Not ranked. A book needs at least 15 labeled deals with a vintage base rate. This one has 5.
Vs same-vintage base rate
+33.4 pp
80.0% on 5 deals vs 46.6%
Vs median VC book
+20.1 pp
80.0% on 5 deals vs 59.9%
Vs top-quartile VC
+3.4 pp
80.0% on 5 deals vs 76.6%
Vs Y Combinator
+12.2 pp
80.0% on 5 deals vs 67.8%
Ranked when at least 15 labeled deals have a vintage base rate. Rank is the average-rank percentile of shrunk excess (20 pseudo-deals at that book's vintage base rate) among eligible VC books that clear the same minimum. 100 is best. The whole book is never compared to Kairos's top-50 hit rate.
What Kairos would have said
Scores are the model’s percentile at each company’s first observed funding event, not at a later round. That matches this fund’s entry only when the fund was in the first-round syndicate. A deal is flagged when its percentile clears that vintage’s top-50 cutoff. The whole book is not compared to the top-50 hit rate.
Deals with a score
5
Mean model percentile
70
Flagged deals
0no labeled flagged deals
Companies
5 labeled follow-on deals, 0 matched without an observable label (dropped, not counted as failures).
| Company | Vintage | Follow-on | Kairos percentile | Flagged |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ArborMetrixarbormetrix.com | 2013 | Yes | 98 | — |
| BAROnovabaronova.com | 2006 | Yes | 94 | — |
| NxTheranxthera.com | 2011 | Yes | 74 | — |
| PathCentralpathcentral.net | 2010 | Yes | 46 | — |
| Esperion Therapeuticsesperion.com | 2008 | No | 36 | — |