The results — not publicly reported before — will likely cement Sequoia’s reputation for generating top-notch returns in good times and bad. PeHUB obtained the performance data from the University of California through a California Public Records Act request.
Sequoia raised three funds in 1999 and 2000. The best performer is the Sequoia Capital Franchise Fund, a $350 million late stage vehicle raised in 1999, which has generated an internal rate of return of 11%, as of December 2010, according to the University of California.
Sequoia Capital X, a $695.14 million early stage fund raised in 2000, boasts a 6% IRR, while Sequoia Capital IX, a $351.29 million early stage fund raised in 1999, has a 3% IRR.
Sequoia’s funds have outperformed typical funds from the dot-com period. The average 1999 fund has an IRR of -4.29% and the average 2000 fund has an IRR of -2.51%, according to performance data from Thomson Reuters, publisher of this blog.
The Franchise Fund benefited from exits of Zappos and Green Dot, according to data from Thomson Reuters. Sequoia’s IX fund saw exits of PayPal, Red Envelope and diCarta, and the 2000 X fund had Aruba Networks, Netezza, Isilon Systems and A123 Systems exit, Thomson Reuters reports.
Hit Me Two More Times
Separately, the University of California revealed that it recently made investments in two more Sequoia funds — the 2011 late-stage Sequoia Capital U.S. Growth Fund V and Sequoia U.S. Venture 2010, a $451 million balanced stage fund. It did not disclose the size of the commitments. The LP said last month that it had made a $30 million commitment to the $1.36 billion early stage Sequoia Capital 2010 fund.
(Update: Sequoia Capital 2010 Fund is an umbrella fund for three separate Sequoia funds. Included are the $451 million U.S. Venture Fund 2010, mentioned above, the $301 million China Venture Fund and the $603 million China Growth Fund. The three funds add up to the $1.36 billion total. It is not clear whether the University of California invested in all three funds or just the U.S. Venture Fund 2010.)
The University of California now has positions in at least 1
32 Sequoia funds with vintages spanning three decades.
The commitments to the three new Sequoia funds are the first the LP has been able to make with Sequoia since 2003. That was the year that a California court ordered public institutions with venture investments to publicly disclose fund performance data. The University of California has said it wasn’t allowed to invest in Sequoia funds after that period. The LP has not explained why it is now allowed to invest in Sequoia funds.
The 2010 performance data show that the LP’s investments in prior Sequoia funds have improved since 2003, the last time it publicly released performance numbers.
The biggest gainer was Sequoia Capital VIII, a vintage 1998 fund, which has produced an IRR of 117%, up from the 90.4% IRR reported in 2003.
The following graphic shows updated IRRs for six Sequoia funds provided by the LP, as well as the IRRs as of 2003. The LP did not provide peHUB with a detailed performance report for all of its Sequoia funds.
The University of California provided peHUB with the updated IRRs after Thomson Reuters sued the LP to compel it to release performance data for all of its Sequoia and Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers funds.
(Update (see above): Sequoia Capital 2010 Fund is an umbrella fund for three separate Sequoia funds. Included are the $451 million U.S. Venture Fund 2010, mentioned above, the $301 million China Venture Fund and the $603 million China Growth Fund. The three funds add up to the $1.36 billion total. It is not clear whether the University of California invested in all three funds or just the U.S. Venture Fund 2010.)
Image credit: Photo of crown courtesy of ShutterStock
- Reuters Suit Seeks Performance Data on Kleiner, Sequoia Funds from University of California
- Sequoia Capital Reopens Door to University of California
- Exit Machine Sequoia Raises $1.35B — Without Mark Kvamme: UPDATED
- How UC’s Distributions from Kleiner and Sequoia Have Slowed Since 2003 (slideshow)
- Distributions from Kleiner and Sequoia Have Noticeably Slowed Since 2003: peHUB Analysis