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

Osage University Partners vs Kairos

Not ranked

Whole-book follow-on hit rate 100.0% (6 of 6 labeled deals). 95% Wilson interval 61.0%–100.0%. Vintage-weighted base rate 49.1%. This is not a fund return.

Not ranked. A book needs at least 15 labeled deals with a vintage base rate. This one has 6.

Fund board

Vs same-vintage base rate

+50.9 pp

100.0% on 6 deals vs 49.1%

Vs median VC book

+35.3 pp

100.0% on 6 deals vs 64.7%

Vs top-quartile VC

+18.4 pp

100.0% on 6 deals vs 81.6%

Vs Y Combinator

+33.6 pp

100.0% on 6 deals vs 66.4%

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

Mean model percentile

Flagged deals

0no labeled flagged deals

Companies

6 labeled follow-on deals, 0 matched without an observable label (dropped, not counted as failures).

Company	Vintage	Follow-on	Kairos percentile	Flagged
MC10mc10inc.com	2009	Yes	96	—
Cleave Biosciencescleavebio.com	2011	Yes	87	—
Effector Therapeuticseffector.com	2013	Yes	73	—
Kolltan Pharmaceuticalskolltan.com	2008	Yes	64	—
Evolv Technologiesevolvtechnology.com	2013	Yes	34	—
Liquid Lightllchemical.com	2011	Yes	24	—