Get live statistics and analysis of Tony's profile on X / Twitter

Most VCs believe diversification reduces risk. But a decade of Latin American data tells a completely different story. I analyzed Series A performance from multiple VCs across a 10-year period (2014-2024) and found something that challenges everything we know about portfolio construction. The most successful investors aren't casting wide nets—they've mastered surgical precision. The numbers are striking: -@sequoia: 2 LatAm investments → 100% unicorn hit rate (@nubank , @RappiColombia) -GIC: 2 investments → 100% hit rate -@generalatlantic: 4 investments → 50% hit rate Compare to high-volume approaches: -Monashees: 81 investments → 4.9% conversion -@KaszekVentures: 63 investments → 9.5% conversion -@valorcapgroup: 57 investments → 5.3% conversion This challenges @credistick's research showing VCs need 50+ investments for optimal outcomes. His analysis works for mature markets but breaks down in emerging markets where opportunity scarcity changes everything. The math: LatAm produced 39 unicorns over 10 years (3.9/year) vs US producing 974 unicorns (88.5/year). When there are only 3-4 real opportunities annually, diversifying across 100+ companies becomes impossible. Plot twist: Even in mature markets, selection can outperform. @IndexVentures' concentrated approach (4.2 seed + 5.1 Series A investments/year) paid off with @RevolutApp generating 2,500x returns and @figma returning 18x their entire fund. @thielfellowship achieves 5.9% unicorn rates with just 20 fellows/year. In public markets, 7 companies (Mag 7) drove most S&P 500 returns while 493 barely moved. The question isn't whether selection beats diversification everywhere. It's understanding when each approach generates the best returns for the specific market structure. Ultimately, the market doesn't care about your thesis. It only cares about results. Full analysis: emergingfintech.co/p/the-selectio…

Founders should be as sincere and transparent about their journeys as @MarieMartens—sharing the wins, the "nos," and the quiet pivots that make building companies feel human again. Her latest update on growing @TallyForms to $4M ARR with a tiny team is a reminder that real moats aren't built on hype, but on simplicity and staying true to your people.

Most VCs believe diversification reduces risk. But a decade of Latin American data tells a completely different story. I analyzed Series A performance from multiple VCs across a 10-year period (2014-2024) and found something that challenges everything we know about portfolio construction. The most successful investors aren't casting wide nets—they've mastered surgical precision. The numbers are striking: -@sequoia: 2 LatAm investments → 100% unicorn hit rate (@nubank , @RappiColombia) -GIC: 2 investments → 100% hit rate -@generalatlantic: 4 investments → 50% hit rate Compare to high-volume approaches: -Monashees: 81 investments → 4.9% conversion -@KaszekVentures: 63 investments → 9.5% conversion -@valorcapgroup: 57 investments → 5.3% conversion This challenges @credistick's research showing VCs need 50+ investments for optimal outcomes. His analysis works for mature markets but breaks down in emerging markets where opportunity scarcity changes everything. The math: LatAm produced 39 unicorns over 10 years (3.9/year) vs US producing 974 unicorns (88.5/year). When there are only 3-4 real opportunities annually, diversifying across 100+ companies becomes impossible. Plot twist: Even in mature markets, selection can outperform. @IndexVentures' concentrated approach (4.2 seed + 5.1 Series A investments/year) paid off with @RevolutApp generating 2,500x returns and @figma returning 18x their entire fund. @thielfellowship achieves 5.9% unicorn rates with just 20 fellows/year. In public markets, 7 companies (Mag 7) drove most S&P 500 returns while 493 barely moved. The question isn't whether selection beats diversification everywhere. It's understanding when each approach generates the best returns for the specific market structure. Ultimately, the market doesn't care about your thesis. It only cares about results. Full analysis: emergingfintech.co/p/the-selectio…

Founders should be as sincere and transparent about their journeys as @MarieMartens—sharing the wins, the "nos," and the quiet pivots that make building companies feel human again. Her latest update on growing @TallyForms to $4M ARR with a tiny team is a reminder that real moats aren't built on hype, but on simplicity and staying true to your people.