{"id":1385,"date":"2017-05-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2017-05-23T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www-staging.carta.com\/sg\/blog\/getting-funded-how-long-does-it-actually-take\/"},"modified":"2021-03-05T06:58:39","modified_gmt":"2021-03-05T06:58:39","slug":"getting-funded-how-long-does-it-actually-take","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www-staging.carta.com\/sg\/blog\/getting-funded-how-long-does-it-actually-take\/","title":{"rendered":"Raising capital for startups: how long does funding actually take?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
One of the most important jobs of a CEO is to make sure the company doesn’t run out of money. A CEO has to manage their available cash on hand strategically until the next VC funding round, keeping the monthly burn rate in line while hitting key milestones. Given the importance of this metric, one would think that industry statistics are routinely published about it for entrepreneurs and investors. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Data about the time between VC funding rounds is hard to come by. In this Carta<\/a> blog post, we will show data on how long it actually takes to get funded.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Objective<\/strong>: Present industry-level data on time between VC funding rounds.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n At a minimum, entrepreneurs should know the median time to the next funding round, and understand how this key metric varies for different rounds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Imagine it is May 1st 2017 and you have a list of three startups with their Series Seed and Series A funding dates. The following table presents this hypothetical data set:<\/p>\n\n\n\n The first two startups in your list have series Seed and Series A funding dates, but the third startup has only a Series Seed date. This particular startup (Machine Learning for Children, Inc.) raised Seed funding ten months ago but has not raised its Series A yet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Knowing this, what is the median time between funding rounds of these startups? The question, of course, is what to do with the third startup. The naive approach is to simply dismiss this data point and only use the first two observations. But this would be incorrect, as that strategy would answer a very different question, which is: \u201cWhat is the average time between funding rounds of the subgroup of startups raised funding within the first 16 months?<\/em>\u201d. Dismissing data points that are still \u201copen\u201d underestimates the time to the next round. So, how could you get an unbiased estimate?<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe naive\u00a0approach<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
A solved\u00a0problem<\/h2>\n\n\n\n