The Ultimate Guide to Web3 VC: Which VC to Follow to Make Money?

Author: Sege (@EvanCrypto17)

After 48 hours of intense organization, a must-see data collection for Web3 players.

Among so many VCs in Web3,

Which VCs have the best vision? Which VCs have the highest return on investment for their projects? Which VCs offer better cost-effectiveness for ordinary players to invest early? Which projects should we focus on? What are the domestic and foreign VCs? Do foreign VCs invest in projects with greater potential?

These questions are of utmost concern to retail investors and are what primary market players (those looking for quick profits) want to focus on.

In this article, we will let the data speak for itself and reveal the answers to these questions one by one.

All data is sourced from publicly available information. We have filtered a total of 65 VCs, including 23 foreign VCs, 34 domestic VCs, and 8 exchange-affiliated VCs.

The best result for VC investment is when a token is listed on a major exchange.

Although we know that some projects can be very profitable without issuing tokens, this is not a game that ordinary players can participate in.

Therefore, we provide the following dimensions for judgment:

Quantity:

Total investment count by VC - Number of projects that issued tokens - Number of projects listed on Binance - Number of projects listed on OKX - Number of projects listed on Coinbase

Listing Success Rate:

Project listing rate on Binance = Number listed on Binance / Total investment count - Project listing rate on OKX = Number listed on OKX / Total investment count - Project listing rate on Coinbase = Number listed on Coinbase / Total investment count

Judgment Criteria:

Comprehensive Score = 2 * Binance listing rate + 1 * OKX listing rate + 1 * Coinbase listing rate

Binance has the largest volume, so its weight is 2.

Average Return on Investment (ROI) = 15 * Binance listing rate + 10 * OKX listing rate + 10 * Coinbase listing rate

The ROI assumes an average profit of 15 times for early investments listed on Binance, 10 times for OKX, and 10 times for Coinbase. Each project varies, and here we take the average.

Conclusion First

Based on the differences in comprehensive scores, we categorize VCs into five levels: T0, T1, T2, T3, T4. The higher the rank, the better the vision of the VC, making it more cost-effective for us to invest our efforts in the primary market alongside these VCs.

VC Levels:

T0 level VCs include YZi Labs (formerly Binance Labs), Continue Capital, IOSG Ventures, Bain Capital.

T1 level VCs include Multicoin, Pantera, 1Confirmation, Smrti Lab, Zonff Partners.

T2 level VCs include Polychain, ParaFi Capital, Dragonfly, Sequoia China, Delphi Digital, Electric Capital, Mint Ventures, CoinFund.

T3 level VCs include Framework Ventures, NGC Ventures, SNZ Holding, Coinbase Ventures, OKX Ventures, etc.

T4 level VCs include Animoca Brands, GSR, Hashkey Capital, Waterdrip, LD Capital, etc.

Regional VC Investment Output and Return Ranking:

Foreign VCs > Exchange-affiliated VCs > Domestic VCs

T0 Level VCs

T0 level VCs include YZi Labs (formerly Binance Labs), Continue Capital, IOSG Ventures, Bain Capital.

Comprehensive score > 1, average ROI between 8 - 12. By investing our efforts in the projects these VCs invested in early, we can generally achieve significant results, with a high probability of making substantial profits.

Detailed data is shown in the figure.

T1 Level VCs

T1 level VCs include Multicoin, Pantera, 1Confirmation, Smrti Lab, Zonff Partners.

Comprehensive score between 0.7 - 1, average ROI between 6 - 7.5. Investing our efforts in the projects these VCs invested in early also yields good returns, with A6.5 being a very good result.

Detailed data is shown in the figure.

T2 Level VCs

T2 level VCs include Polychain, ParaFi Capital, Dragonfly, Sequoia China, Delphi Digital, Electric Capital, Mint Ventures, CoinFund.

Comprehensive score between 0.5 - 0.7, average ROI between 4 - 6. Investing our efforts in the projects these VCs invested in early may yield somewhat unstable returns, but it's worth a try for potential opportunities.

Detailed data is shown in the figure.

T3 Level VCs

T3 level VCs include Framework Ventures, NGC Ventures, SNZ Holding, Coinbase Ventures, OKX Ventures, etc.

Comprehensive score between 0.3 - 0.5, average ROI between 2.5 - 4.5. Investing our efforts in the projects these VCs invested in early yields somewhat unstable returns and lower rates of return.

Detailed data is shown in the figure.

T4 Level VCs

T4 level VCs include Animoca Brands, GSR, Hashkey Capital, Waterdrip, LD Capital, etc.

Comprehensive score with average ROI between 0 - 0.3, average ROI between 0 - 2.5. Investing our efforts in the projects these VCs invested in early yields rather pessimistic returns and a low probability of being listed.

Detailed data is shown in the figure.

Bonus:

Projects invested by Binance and OKX have a higher probability of being listed on their own exchanges.

Projects invested by Coinbase have a similar probability of being listed on the "big three."

Summary

From the data, we find that well-known VCs, such as a16z, Coinbase, Dragonfly, Polychain, etc., actually hold little reference value for ordinary people.

Some projects that flaunt their "VC backing" may actually be "traps" for ordinary players.

In our analysis, only the projects participated in by T0 and T1 level VCs are what we should truly focus on and invest in.

Foreign VCs have a higher output compared to domestic VCs, while exchange-affiliated VCs rank in between.

When considering whether a project is worth early investment, we should look at the levels of the participating VCs and make a comprehensive judgment based on the listed data, which provides significant reference value for us in the primary market.

Once again, this article only discusses the output ratio of ordinary players following VCs for ranking purposes. It does not involve the overall strength and other aspects of the companies and brands represented by the VCs!