Startup Portfolio Review for 2022 - The pain of costly capital

I just reread my 2021 report and unfortunately a lot of the points/predictions we made one year ago came true. The growth stock rerating lasted the entire year with no reprieve in sight as the Fed raised interest rates to 4+% in an effort to combat persistent inflation. SPACs and IPO attempts mostly all failed as the markets refused to tolerate expensive listed company valuations. Carousell, Kredivo, Carsome/Carro all have to say IPO or SPAC deferred for another 1-2 years as investor appetite dried up on loss making companies. And those few ASEAN startups that did manage to exit in 2020/21 like Goto, Grab, Buka, Prenetics, Propguru all crashed anything from 50-80%. Even the largest ASEAN tech company SEA crashed 76% from 220 to 52 per share.

In spite of the tough investing environment, Ning & I stuck to our investing philosophy and continued investing into 4 new startups and did 5 follow on rounds for existing portfolio. Amount invested 20% lower than 2021 which was a record year for us with 9 follow ons.  As shared in 2021, covid and Ukraine war has caused great pain to 3 of our startups and we have chosen to write them down to zero in 2022. On a positive note, 2022 saw a decent exit from our 2012 investment in an animation startup. Also, in spite of the bad market, we had 5 series A up rounds happening for our first Vietnamese and Thai startups and 3 SG startups. So in total,  for the 41 startups we invested since 2015, the IRR is now ~28% (down from 38% last year) with a TVPI of 2.66 (down from 2.98 last year).

On the VC front, our 8 funds are at 2.6 TVPI mirroring our angel side and actually up from 2021 2.47 TVPI. IRR should be low 20%s as they took capital much faster. 

Putting both angel and VC together, we actually still eked out a small gain of 2ish% year on year for 2022. Hard to believe but there is big caveat. See point 5 below.

Some comments and thoughts :

1) The drop in early stage valuations has happened. The valuations for follow on A rounds have been significantly worse than what founders thought. However, it is nowhere near the levels of how the growth stocks have fallen. ARKK fell almost 70% in 2022, it is only logical that series Seed, A, B, C, D, E valuations fall drastically too. Right now, startups are deferring fund raising if they have cash or raising from existing investors whose interest is to maintain last round valuations. Something has to give and i believe if interest rates stay above 4,5% this entire year, we will see some capitulation and failures from later stage startups which will cascade further to the earlier stages.

2) At Seed level, valuations have fallen 20-30% but its still expensive with no revenue startups valuing themselves at 4-6M SGD. If the later stage fallout happens as described in point 1, then maybe we will see valuations for seed back to the old S$2-3M range which would reflect the risk reward for angels and seed investors. 

3) One silver lining is many ASEAN VCs just raised capital for new fund and have cash to deploy. So it is entirely possible that they can maintain their winners valuations and ride out the storm until 2024/25 where they expect inflation rates to moderate back to the 2-3% range and hence interest rates to weaken and valuations to rebound somewhat. For these VCs with cash, they are in a relatively good place to slowly pick and choose  for new stories and only invest in valuations are good. For VCs who want to raise a new fund, i hear 2022 2H was very tough and i believe it will be very hard to close any meaningful sum for a few months more. Global investors need more clarity on inflation and IR and economy before deciding next steps. 

4) VCs (as of 3Q end) are still declaring good numbers. Two ways to see this. First explanation is the nice way.  Winners can still grow and command up-rounds in bad climate. Some of our VC funds invested in Ninjavan, Carsome, Grab, Buka, Kredivo etc. So its possible to swim against the tide for sure.  Second reason is that VCs have leeway in how they determine valuation. Usual rule of thumb is to keep at last round valuation. But they can also chose to up a valuation if company has no new round but business has a grown a lot. Also, they can continue to fund internal rounds at last round or even up from last round. All these moves allow them maintain valuation stickiness. The game is only up if the startup fails to perform, or lists and stock price drops or if climate stays permanently depressed and new round is down. Then write down becomes inevitable. 

While we can understand the logic of VC behavior, it does contrast with later PE funds. We also invest in some later stage PE funds and because they have many listed investments, they have had to write down 20+% mirroring at least a good chunk of tech stocks revaluation. So it’s important to take the VC numbers with a big grain of salt. 

5) On a personal front, while 30% IRR sounds good, it is mostly unrealized gains on unlisted companies.  The weakness in the ASEAN ecosystem is the lack of distributions. In current climate, I would much rather have a TVPI of 2 and 15% IRR but with 1x DPI already. 

6) This combination of high interest rate + high inflation + geopolitical issues = great uncertainty in global and ASEAN/SG economy. And when we add on our personal asset allocation shift into property, we feel a need to recalculate how much more to invest in startups. Bottom line, we want to see cash returns from earlier investments before committing much more capital into the space. So a lot depends on what happens next 2-3 years. Hitting 50 startups will probably happen but hitting 100 will require more exits. 

Bottom line, capital is now costly. Why would an investor take high risk to earn 15% returns if they can get 8% investing in a relatively safer bond portfolio? And why invest in a loss making unlisted startup if they can invest in google or baba at 12-18 PE ratio? Ning & I remember a time when startups were valued at 15 times profit and that was considered good valuation. And if you are not profitable, your business is not worth much until you show you can be soon!

7) We have actively communicated this investing climate change to many of our portfolio companies reminding them that profits matter a lot more now. I do believe many founders understand that turning profitable is the surest way to navigate 2023 successfully. Quite a few of our startups are either profitable in 2022 or have a clear path to become profitable in 2023. Those who can't are cost cutting to at least show narrowing losses and also making sure they line up equity funding to stay alive.  

It’s not a good time to run a startup now. Costs are rising due to inflation esp wages, but funding is hard to get. Debt is expensive and we expect startups that need lots of debt to suffer in the months ahead. See what's happening to Affirm and Klarna and Carvana. What will drag things down further is if USA economy goes into bad recession with its consequent impact on ASEAN. Then customers too will be hard to find as overall demand shrinks. 

8) Timelines to exit are now all extended at least 1-2 years as many startups will just stay alive and tread water in 2022 and 2023. So fellow investors, please do your own modeling and analysis and base it on a 10-15 year horizon for each startup and VC fund you invest in. With 10 years being a good scenario!  

9) One great thing that happened in 2022 is how the AngelCentral community has continued to grow. Our first investments into Vietnam and Thailand paid off well this year with significant uprounds happening as Series A rounds happened with good VCs. We also had earlier syndicated investments raising Series A in 2022 at improved valuations. So if you are keen to join us, do check out our services to help angels.

Moving forward this year, we intend to continue investing but with even more caution and discipline. This climate is not a bad thing as it removes all the crazy excesses of the 0 interest rate environment. It never did make sense that NFTs/alt coins were worth trillons or that startups are worth 10-30 times their sales even with lousy gross profits. Its a much needed reset for asset prices and forces everyone to get back to basics of profits and cash flow management. 

On a founder or investor individual level, we of course hope for the global economy to not tip into bad recession in this adjustment process and that inflation is curbed with minimal collateral pain. However, an old adage comes to mind - we can hope for the best but we should plan for the worst. Sounds like a good philosophy for 2023!

Footnote : This review focuses only on our startup and angel investments mostly in ASEAN space. if you want to know about overall philosophy in life, pls read annual review on life.

Back to the 2000s for startup valuations?

Have been watching and analyzing the public tech markets and broader markets for the year. Like everyone else, I have been taken by surprise by how rapidly valuations for loss making growth companies have fallen. Some examples ranging from those with really bad financials to those with slightly better ones:

1) Carvana has fallen 90+% in value. It’s now trading at just 1.65b usd or about 0.15 times of its revenue. So what does that say about what carsome or carro is worth and the IRR and TVPIs of their VCs?

2) SEA has fallen 88% from peak and is now worth just 20b or barely 1.5 times revenue. And they have a profitable gaming unit some more.

3) Grab, Goto, crowdstrike, twillo, teladoc all crashed 50-90+%. 

4) QQQ which is profitable big tech mainly has fallen 34%. But at least the valuations are supported by profit. That’s an important point- profits and not revenue now support valuations more.

5) And to add to all this pain even China tech and consumer companies- which frequently are profitable too have not been spared. They too are down >>50%. Their issue is a combination of worldwide revaluation + slowing economy + lack of trust in Chinese markets. 

For us in Asia, I am hearing most investors are hit bigger by the China & SE drop than by the DM fall in the form of QQQ or SPY as we started the year feeling that China stocks were cheap.

What does all this have to do with earlier stage startup founders in Asean? I hope I am wrong but current multiples remind me of post 2000s tech crash when it was normal for tech companies to be worth something serious only if profitable or approaching profits. A company with 10m revenue and 3m profit back in 2005/6 was worth more than a 100m revenue company with 10m losses because it is the PE ratio that matters more.

And the PE ratios for fast growing companies were usually ranging from 15 to 40. So the profitable tech company with 3m net profit off high gross margin of 70-80% was still just worth $45m give or take depending on growth rate. But the loss making one is probably worthless to public market investors or just worth its NAV esp if it cannot show path to profits and has widening losses.

So if I am a founder today running a loss making startup, I would plan for a “profit and cashflow hungry” capital market. Revenue growth matters much less than narrowing losses and profits. It’s also far more sustainable.

And if I were a fund, I would aim to make the current portfolio profitable and focus on getting distributions for LPs. Forget about raising a new fund for a while until the dust settles. Any LP will want to see this situation clear up and stabilize first. We also want to see distributions being done before just believing in current fund IRR and TVPI as it includes unrealized gains which have not reflected public market reality. Very soon LPs will see that 6x tvpi and 40% IRR means little if distribution is only 0.1x for a 6-7 year old fund. I would much rather have a 1x distribution and tvpi of 3x.

Unfortunately, there seems to be a state of tension going on between optimism/kicking the can down the road and being honest and realistic. Eg. bridge financing is needed but are still being done on last round valuation even though clearly the listed comparables have crashed to a 1/3. This deliberate mispricing by VC and PE funds is self serving behavior and will result in unhappy LPs if the write down ultimately happens 1-2 years later. 

Let’s see how this plays out. I would not be surprised if this downturn worsens on revenue front as businesses and consumers cut back.  if that happens,  there will be big loss making startup failures or down rounds in 2023 or 2024 as there is no way to justify 10x or more revenues when growth disappears and profit is absent.

As investors, we have been hiding out in profitable companies for listed market (only one nostalgic position in loss making SE) and some quality bonds since start of year. Even so, still down for the year but better than Acwi benchmark. For startups, we intend to continue investing but we will only do so at reasonable market valuations led by new lead investors to the round. No internal round at last round valuation for us if business has not improved dramatically.

As for our existing portfolio companies, we continue to ask them to prioritize ebitda and cashflow over revenue growth. Don’t count on always having investors to fund you and instead get customers to do it. Focus more time/energy on product, on customers and on employees. That always pays off.

Happy to see that many of our founders seem to get this and have moved to lower spend and drive revenue growth.  In the 2000s, it  was normal and desirable to turn a net profit if you have a few million gross profit. It was also normal to grow costs only if revenue grows in tandem or better still grows proportionately more. It’s time to bring that mindset back in vogue and stop being proud of losing money and using investor money to stay afloat! 

Startup Valuations in Recessionary Environment

Just 1+ mth ago back in early feb,  I was noticing that startup space esp early startup space, (Early meaning Series A , Seed space) seems largely living in lala land where valuations don’t seem affected by slowdown or is anyone worried about the spread of coronavirus.

Now the situation in my assessment should and will change  as the entire world economy is whacked big across the board and for the foreseeable future.

The funny thing is I still see startups thinking of valuing based on revenue or profit multiples that are totally out of whack with listed comparables. Here are some facts:

1) crazy guy in the room giving crazy valuations is in deep crap themselves having to sell prime assets now to redeem debt and show value. So no more crazy vision fund bets distorting market. And there is no one to replace them. 

2) loss making Uber is now worth about 6-8 times 2019 revenue high. i suspect if we use real revenue on grab and gojek they are really worth 40-50% less than last round which is validated by what secondary sales is showing. 

Slightly loss making grub hub is worth about 2-2.5 times it’s revenue. Saas which should benefit has also seen a rerating with profitable salesforce being valued at ps ratio of 7. The list goes on and the revaluation has happened and is not done.

So what to make of all this? Private Startup valuations should at least fall 20-30% just to follow market comparables. Add another 10-20% if you are not profitable or dominant in space. 

That brings us back to startup seed valuations at S$2m-4m or so. Or back to 2010-2013 levels which makes more sense. Series A should adjust accordingly. And maybe quick path to profit should be an indicator too. 

PE ratios back in 2002-2010 used to be 8-15 times for tech plays depending on strength of business. Go do the math..

This is not a sell serving article because I stand to lose a lot more if valuations go down than up having already invested in 31 startups and 7 VCs. We still intend to invest in 3-4 more startups this year and have already done 1 new investment and 3 follow on this year in engagerocket, worq and rara delivery.  For us it’s about backing founders. 

My goal is to tell founders to not live in lala land any more and don’t count on getting any easy outside money if this situation prolongs another quarter. And if you do survive, know that your business is probably worth a lot less than you think now. All this should generate actions on your part and behavioral change. I hope I am wrong and we get a V shape recovery 2nd half.. but we don’t plan on hope...

The only little silver lining is some VC at A and B rounds have dry powder. (Provided no pulling of LP capital. Not likely right now but we never know.) so this is a time to know if your VC really support you or not on cash infusion or loans.

Another positive note is that founders should also remember that many successful businesses grew out of tough recessions and were built with little or no early investor money. Building a profitable business in a recession strengthens your efficiency and mindset. And once you have a high quality profitable business, there will be lots of ways to monetize your hard work when the upturn comes!

Thoughts on Strategic Direction for Carousell

(Wrote an entry on Carousell before.)

Friend sent me an article on BT about Carousell. It resonates with how I have been feeling but I have been refraining from commenting partly because I want to see how they executed last 2-3 years and partly because we do have a small indirect stake via a VC that’s now actually significant. 

Note : Latest OLX deal is 22.12m cash, the rest by injecting OLX Philippines outfit at a 30+m valuation if I recall right. So they bought another 8-9mth burn time. And OLX is of course potential buyer. 

Can Carousell become mobile Craigslist of ASEAN? 

Not many people are aware that Craigslist is very profitable on close to 1B of revenue annually. Thats what Carousell is selling to investors. That it can dominate ASEAN as a classifieds player which is a very large 0.5-1B (my estimate) revenue market. However, the dynamics that allowed Craigslist to charge for jobs, property, cars and personals back in early days no longer apply in ASEAN.

It will be tough for caurosell to become a profitable mobile classifieds following the trajectory of Craigslist. Reason is it is not a true first mover in the various classified verticals and each vertical is crowded. The property, jobs, cars, dating classifieds space all have very deep custom built web/mobile platforms and strong brands with significant resources that already are taking up the available online advertising revenue. 

So it would be a hard slog to win against the likes of propertyguru, jobstreet or even sgcarmart. Can slowly make headway like in cars (weakest group) but quickly will be very tough.  Ask yourself where you go to look for jobs, cars, dates or property? 

Can Carousell become a MarketPlace?

Back in 2015, I thought the logical strategy would be to be a mobile marketplace ala Lazada on web and that the whole classifieds was a deliberate strategy to get started with some mindshare and users. Unfortunately, they did not try to primarily earn off GMV and transactional revenues and build out a comprehensive marketplace platform. Now I would argue they have missed the boat and Lazada and shoppee are the regional leaders. There could be a niche as a c2c marketplace but that’s probably much smaller.

Growing into 500m valuation?

Based on 2017 1.7m usd in revenue (Expenses are an estimated 30m in 2017), my guess is if via ASEAN mobile classifieds as a business, they will be lucky to be doing 10m ish usd advertising/fee type revenues (not some funky gmv type topline) this year.

That’s not enough to justify the  500m valuation now. 500m requires to hit at least 50m revenues. And those revenues better be high gross margin type (>75%) type and growing rapidly year on year. Product wise, they need to have users preferring to use them to search and get property or jobs or cars across asean. I don’t think they are anywhere near that now. 

The other possibility is to that it’s not too late to switch into marketplace. I don’t know enough on the competitive dynamics of this space. But a good mark of success here will be an improved platform that somehow offers sufficient value for carousell to earn a cut off the transaction value and which a significant percentage of users are willing to pay for. 

So what’s next? 

Even if Carousell fails to deliver on revenues, it is still valuable to a buyer. Great brand and traffic means it can end up being like Redmart. Founders get decent package but early investors will probably lose most money with latest investors losing less. Redmart gets to continue and consumers and staff benefit. 

Ecosystem wise, that may not be a bad thing. Poster boy does not and cannot mean sure win for everyone. Anyway, we have other poster boys like Garena/Shopee, Patsnap, Ninjavan, Razer, Justco etc and I would argue they have much firmer revenue positions.

Of course, am happy to be wrong and if Carousell manages to crack how to beat the various classifieds players and/or become a dominant marketplace, then it will become a sizable, sustainable unicorn for sure and our small indirect stake will be worth many times more!

Comments on Grabtaxi funding so far

This story caught my attention for a few reasons. First, i have heard much about Uber and how it has taken USA by storm. When i was in USA late last year, read an article about how Uber is able to price discriminate and set prices that reflect real time demand. Economic theory put into action finally!

Second is that i read about Grabtaxi a while back. Founder is the son of Tan Chong Motor family fame.
Anthony Tan, studied in harvard and started app in 2012 in Malaysia with about 500K USD funded entirely by family. Makes a lot of sense as it leverages on both the resources and equally important the network that the family already has in malaysia. Without knowing Anthony personally, i think this is a great model for 2nd generation to follow if they are keen in technology. Leverage on family business knowhow and tech to disrupt a space. Funding is a less an issue and they can do what i advocate which is to fund out angel round themselves.

Now they just raised more money from vertex. Previous round was also funded by vertex. Now some will ask why not just fund it all themselves? I think bringing on board a VC is a smart move. It forces discipline onto the company and founder and will also lend more credibility for subsequent rounds or acquisitions. And in this case, it also helps give them a good valuation benchmark to work on for future deals.

From what i can see, the number raised is not 10M as some tech news blog has mentioned but rather, this round is a further 3M USD raised which is far more consistent to a Series A round. I really wish our reporters can get their facts right before publishing. It distorts the industry unnecessarily and the company and founder usually will not want to or cannot (due to NDA) comment and such matters.To set record straight, it seems that the company Grabtaxi Holdings pl has raised 5.281M USD to date where Anthony and Family have funded the seed round of 518K and a further 4.7M USD from investors which includes themselves. Of this 4.7M, 20% came from vertex. So to date, Vertex has invested about 1M in GrabTaxi. The rest is all family money.

Based on above, it also means GrabTaxi is being valued at US$12-13M (using latest round 15+ per share x 800K+ shares) USD based on this April round. Of course, some may argue since founders self funded 80% of this round, this valuation is not accurate. I dunno, but at least Vertex agreed to it...

My guess is that most likely, family just wants a VC for credibility and discipline and connections but is unwilling to give up too much at this early stage. This is a UHNWI family based in Malaysia so while investing US$4M sounds like a lot, it probably is something they can afford to take risk with and aim for a much later exit.

Of course, i think their revenues are probably neligible at this stage. So looks like the ball is squarely in Anthony;s court now. I am rooting for them so succeed as a local ASEAN company as opposed to Rocket or Uber!

NB: So where did that 10M investment figure come from? That is the topic of my next post. Straits times and e27 quoted Anthony as saying it is 10m. I guess if in RM it is correct. Or maybe there are more tranches coming.

NB : to be rigorous, there is a myteksi sdn bhd which is a malaysian entity which Anthony and family funded 600K RM. Logically, this entity should be owned 100% by the SG holding company which Vertex invested in. However, i am unable to verify this since malaysian ACRA is slower and share updates are shown only 1 full year later.