Are long résumés still necessary for fundraising success?
Experience has long been a gatekeeper in venture capital. Historically, launching a fund was a privilege reserved for former partners, career VCs, or those with deep ties to the industry. But the landscape is changing. More emerging managers are entering venture without prior VC experience — and they’re performing better than many might expect.
While funds led by experienced GPs still make up the majority, the share of “inexperienced” teams — those without prior work experience in VC — has steadily grown. These managers are launching leaner, faster funds and are finding smart ways to close the gap in terms of performance outcomes.
This article draws on data from 600+ emerging funds that successfully completed Decile Group’s VC Lab accelerator program between 2022 and 2025, exploring how prior VC experience relates to who launches emerging funds, how those funds are structured and positioned, and the patterns observed in their early fundraising outcomes.
GP and Fund Demographics by VC Experience
Prior VC experience is no longer a prerequisite for launching a fund. More emerging managers without prior experience are entering the space, bringing a wide range of fresh perspectives and challenging traditional expectations of who becomes a GP.
Prior VC Experience Is Becoming Less Essential
Between 2022 and 2025, the proportion of emerging funds launched by managers without prior VC experience increased 1.3x from 31% to 40%. While most funds are still launched by managers with VC backgrounds, this trend signals a clear shift.
The rising numbers suggest that formal VC experience is no longer a hard requirement. A growing support system of accelerators, such as VC Lab, and AI-powered assistants and platforms, such as Decile Hub, are empowering more operators, angels, and startup builders to launch credible funds.
Men Are More Likely to Launch With Less Experience
Only 25% of funds launched by inexperienced managers included a woman GP, compared to a 1.4x larger share of 34% among experienced teams. Conversely, 75% of inexperienced fund teams were led by all-male GPs, compared to 66% of funds launched by managers with prior VC experience.
This suggests that men may be more comfortable to launch funds without prior VC experience, while women may prefer building more exposure to the industry first. It may also indicate that experienced managers are more attuned to the advantages of gender-diverse leadership. This is a theme explored further in “The Women Transforming Emerging VC” research article, which identified stronger fundraising outcomes among mixed-gender teams.
Age Does Not Directly Relate to More Experience
Age distribution is similar across both experienced and inexperienced fund teams, suggesting that prior VC experience is not confined to any particular age group. In both cases, 43% of GPs are aged 40–50, around 30% are over 50, and 27–30% are under 40.
It’s not just younger professionals entering VC without experience, and not all older managers have a background in venture. The age breakdown is surprisingly balanced across both experienced and inexperienced funds, suggesting that a wide variety of professionals from adjacent fields are entering VC at all career stages, often leveraging domain expertise or networks rather than prior roles in VC.
Fund Structure and Strategy by VC Experience
Fund experience relates to subtle differences in structure and strategy — most notably in solo versus team launches, with only modest variation in stage and sector focus.
Less Experienced Managers Prefer to Launch Solo
Among funds launched by managers without prior VC experience, 70% are solo-led, compared to 53% of those launched by experienced managers — making solo-led structures 1.3x more common among newcomers to the VC industry. This trend among less experienced managers may reflect fewer established connections to potential co-GPs or a strategic preference for speed, control, and streamlined decision-making. Launching solo may help to act quickly, define a clear thesis without compromise, and avoid the added coordination required in team-led structures.
More Experienced Managers Prefer Seed Stage Investments
Both groups target seed stage primarily, but experienced managers are 1.2x more likely to focus on seed (56% vs. 46%), while inexperienced managers are 1.3x more likely to focus on pre-seed (37% vs. 29%). Series A focus is minimal across both groups. This trend may reflect differences in risk tolerance or exposure. Experienced managers may lean toward companies with early traction, drawing on prior pattern recognition and investor expectations. In contrast, inexperienced GPs may be more embedded in founder networks at the ideation stage, leading them to back companies earlier, often before product-market fit.
Sector Preferences Are Broadly Similar
Roughly two-thirds of funds in both groups focus on a single sector. However, experienced managers are 1.5x more likely to target multiple specific sectors (22% vs. 15%). The top 10 sectors are consistent across both groups — AI (10-12%), fintech (9-10%), software (4-9%), B2B (4-9%), deeptech (8-9%), healthcare (7-10%), impact (6-8%), diversity (5-6%), and climate tech (3-4%). Only slight differences emerge: experienced managers are 2.3x more likely to focus on B2B and software (9% vs. 4%). This suggests that sector strategy may be influenced more by personal interests and market trends rather than prior VC experience in particular. However, broader industry exposure may be helping experienced managers to identify emerging market intersections and interconnected themes across multiple sectors.
Fundraising Targets and Performance by VC Experience
Funds led by experienced managers tend to raise more in absolute terms — but inexperienced managers are more efficient relative to their targets.
Inexperienced Managers Set Leaner Targets
On average, funds launched by experienced managers choose 1.5x larger target sizes of $11.4MM, compared to $7.7MM targeted by less experienced managers.
Experienced GPs may feel more comfortable aiming higher, either due to track record or stronger networks. Inexperienced GPs appear to be setting leaner, more realistic targets — better matched to early LP appetite. This aligns with broader fundraising trends explored further in the “Shifting Check Sizes in Emerging VC” research article, which identified that the majority of LPs now write checks under $100K-$150K, and found that smaller soft commitments tend to convert faster and into larger LPAs.
Experienced Funds Raise More In Absolute Terms
Within comparable timeframes, funds launched by experienced managers on average:
Receive 1.8x more soft commitments
Obtain 1.4x more LPAs
Close 1.7x more capital
This reflects a clear advantage for experienced GPs in early traction. Prior VC roles may offer reputational lift, built-in LP networks, or confidence from institutional backers.
Less Experienced Funds Raise More In Relative Terms
Despite raising less in total, funds led by less experienced managers on average:
Attain 1.4x larger proportions of their fund sizes in soft commitments
Reach 1.3x larger proportions of their fund sizes in LPAs
Close the same proportions of their target fund sizes as funds led by experienced managers
This suggests that inexperienced GPs are more efficient fundraisers relative to the target sizes they set. Their leaner targets and tighter LP alignment help them execute just as well — if not better — on a proportional basis.
Key Takeaways
Prior VC experience has long been viewed as a prerequisite for launching a successful venture fund. But that perception is shifting. An increasing number of emerging managers are entering the field without formal VC backgrounds — and many are achieving strong results by making smart strategic decisions.
Experienced fund leaders tend to raise more in absolute terms and aim for larger targets. But funds led by those without prior VC experience are matching their peers in key performance metrics relative to fund size. First-time managers are also more likely to launch solo, take focused approaches, and set targets better aligned with today’s LP check size trends.
Both groups bring valuable approaches to the table — experienced GPs with established networks, and newer entrants with fresh perspectives from adjacent industries. Together, they reflect a broadening of who leads in venture, and the varied paths they take to get there.
Key takeaways include:
Don’t wait to get started. Nearly 40% of emerging funds are now launched by managers without prior VC experience — showing that strong strategy and execution can outweigh résumé.
Lean targets, strong conversion. Inexperienced-led funds receive smaller checks, but convert faster and close similar proportions of their fund size.
Solo can be strategic. 70% of funds without prior experience are solo-led, reflecting both urgency and a desire for control in early fund formation.
Diversity matters. Experienced-led teams are more likely to include women — highlighting the importance of fostering inclusive leadership at all levels of experience.
Venture is becoming more open to new paths. As more professionals enter the field from adjacent roles, prior VC experience is no longer the only entry ticket — and a growing number of emerging managers are proving that what matters most is how well they commit and execute once they get started.
VC Lab, the leading venture capital accelerator, empowers new and emerging managers worldwide to close ethical, high-performing funds in under six months. The program provides cutting-edge tools, expert mentorship, and a global network to raise more money in less time. Apply if you want to build a meaningful venture capital firm.
