Post by @sajithpai
92% credible (95% factual, 85% presentation). The claims about Union Square Ventures Fund III's 23x DPI returns from 2004-2015 are well-supported by credible sources like PitchBook and The Information. However, the presentation exhibits omission framing by selectively highlighting blockbuster returns and geographic success without acknowledging potential biases or broader context.
Analysis Summary
The post praises Union Square Ventures' (USV) early funds for their outstanding performance, particularly Fund III achieving 23x DPI from 2004-2015 investments. It highlights the impressiveness given USV's NYC location away from Silicon Valley, crediting key exits like Coinbase and Duolingo. USV's Funds I-III demonstrated exceptional returns, with Fund III at 23x DPI outperforming expectations for a non-Valley firm.
Original Content
The Facts
The claims align with reported high performance of USV funds from credible sources like PitchBook and The Information, which confirm top-quartile returns for their vintages. No major contradictions found, though exact DPI figures are from an ex-LP newsletter and may reflect net returns as of a specific date. Overall highly accurate with strong evidentiary support.
Benefit of the Doubt
The author advances an optimistic narrative on USV's success to inspire or inform the VC community, emphasizing geographic challenges overcome and blockbuster exits while crediting an ex-LP source for credibility. Key omissions include full risk details, management fees impacting net returns, and broader market context like the 2008 financial crisis affecting Fund II's negative IRR despite positive multiples. This selective focus shapes perception toward celebrating outliers in VC performance, potentially downplaying variability in fund outcomes.
Visual Content Analysis
Images included in the original content
VISUAL DESCRIPTION
A pink-highlighted table summarizing the performance of three Union Square Ventures funds, with columns for Fund, Vintage, Size, IRR, TVPI/DPI, and Value Drivers; rows detail each fund's metrics and key investments contributing to returns.
TEXT IN IMAGE
Fund | Vintage | Size | IRR | TVPI/DPI | Value Drivers USV Fund I | 2004 | $125M | -67% | 13x/13.8x | Twitter (returned -8x of the fund), Zynga (returned ~3.5x of the fund), Tumblr, Etsy USV Fund II | 2008 | $160M | -21% | 4.5x/4.1x | Twilio, MongoDB, Stack Overflow (each of them returned ~1x of the fund) USV Fund III | 2012 | $200M | -54% | 24.4x/23x | Coinbase (returned +20x of the fund), Duolingo
MANIPULATION
No signs of editing, inconsistencies, or artifacts; the table appears cleanly formatted and consistent with standard financial reporting styles.
TEMPORAL ACCURACY
The data covers fund vintages from 2004-2012 with performance likely as of 2015 or later, but the post is from October 2025; it accurately reflects historical performance without claiming current status.
LOCATION ACCURACY
The content references USV's NYC base, and the table does not contradict this; no spatial elements in the image, but it aligns with the post's emphasis on NYC vs. Valley.
FACT-CHECK
The metrics match reports from sources like PitchBook and Business Insider on USV's strong returns (e.g., top-quartile for these vintages, with hits like Twitter, Coinbase); TVPI/DPI figures are plausible for mature funds, though exact values may vary by reporting date—no evidence of fabrication.
How Is This Framed?
Biases, omissions, and misleading presentation techniques detected
Selective presentation highlights blockbuster returns and geographic success but omits critical context like management fees, investment risks, and the 2008 financial crisis impacting Fund II's performance, which could alter the perception of net returns and overall fund viability.
Problematic phrases:
"Extraordinary especially given they were based in NYC then""Sometimes, a blog can help!"What's actually there:
Fund II had negative IRR despite positive multiples due to market downturn
What's implied:
Seamless progression of high returns across all funds
Impact: Misleads readers into viewing USV's success as straightforward and replicable, ignoring variability and external factors that make such outcomes exceptional rather than normative.
Uses present-tense excitement for historical fund data from 2004-2015, framing old achievements as newly discoverable insights to build engagement.
Problematic phrases:
"wait till you see Fund III at 23x DPI"What's actually there:
Historical performance metrics
What's implied:
Fresh or ongoing revelation
Impact: Creates mild false urgency, making readers feel they're uncovering timely VC wisdom rather than reviewing established past data, enhancing shareability.
Focuses on top-performing funds (I and III) with high DPI multiples while neglecting underperforming aspects or average VC industry benchmarks, exaggerating the impressiveness.
Problematic phrases:
"Fund I at ~14x DPI was great, then wait till you see Fund III at 23x DPI"What's actually there:
Top-quartile but not universal VC success; industry average DPI lower
What's implied:
Exceptional as a standard for non-Valley firms
Impact: Leads readers to overstate the scale of USV's achievement relative to broader VC landscape, potentially inflating perceptions of opportunity in similar ecosystems.
Sources & References
External sources consulted for this analysis
https://pitchbook.com/profiles/fund/13357-81F
https://www.usv.com/about/
https://pitchbook.com/news/articles/union-square-ventures-275-million-fund
https://pitchbook.com/profiles/investor/11323-45
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/union-square-ventures
https://pitchbook.com/profiles/fund/12963-79F
https://www.usv.com/
https://www.coindesk.com/learn/union-square-ventures/
https://www.usv.com/people/
https://pitchbook.com/news/articles/union-square-ventures-275-million-fund
https://www.theinformation.com/articles/union-square-ventures-maintains-investing-edge-returns-data-show
https://www.businessinsider.com/vc-returns-union-square-ventures-sequoia-y-combinator-2023-1
https://www.usv.com/blog/
https://venturecapitaljournal.com/3356100-2
https://x.com/usv/status/1778158889805984214
https://x.com/sajithpai/status/1729503831724102065
https://x.com/sajithpai/status/1459391160707813377
https://x.com/sajithpai/status/1807948923857686779
https://x.com/sajithpai/status/1402955752331902979
https://x.com/sajithpai/status/1463333139015614464
https://pitchbook.com/profiles/fund/13357-81F
https://pitchbook.com/profiles/investor/11323-45
https://pitchbook.com/news/articles/union-square-ventures-275-million-fund
https://www.businessinsider.com/union-square-ventures-cut-value-of-vc-funds-2023-7
https://pitchbook.com/profiles/fund/12963-79F
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Square_Ventures
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/union-square-ventures
https://www.theinformation.com/articles/union-square-ventures-maintains-investing-edge-returns-data-show
https://pitchbook.com/news/articles/union-square-ventures-275-million-fund
https://www.usv.com/about/
https://privatefunddata.com/private-funds/union-square-ventures-2004-lp/
https://venturecapitaljournal.com/3356100-2
https://www.buyoutsinsider.com/fund-performance-union-square-ia-lead-late-decade-venture-portfolio-utimco/
https://www.venturecapitaljournal.com/fund-performance-union-square-ampersand-tcv-at-head-of-maturing-utimco-venture-portfolio/
https://x.com/usv/status/1778158889805984214
https://x.com/sajithpai/status/1729503831724102065
https://x.com/sajithpai/status/1459391160707813377
https://x.com/sajithpai/status/1463333139015614464
https://x.com/sajithpai/status/1807948923857686779
https://x.com/sajithpai/status/1736260130902012188
Want to see @sajithpai's track record?
View their credibility score and all analyzed statements