How to Structure a Cap Table When Building with a Studio

In the fast-evolving world of startups, Venture Studios are becoming a powerful model for company building. Unlike accelerators or incubators, studios co-create startups from the ground up, offering resources, teams, and capital in exchange for equity. As more founders choose to build with studios, one question consistently emerges: how should the cap table be structured?

A well-balanced cap table (short for capitalization table) is not just about equity allocation, it’s a reflection of trust, clarity, and shared incentives between founders, studios, and future investors. In this article, we break down how to approach cap table structuring when launching a startup within a venture studio model.

Understanding the Studio-Startup Relationship

Venture studios usually initiate the idea, assemble the initial team, and contribute significant capital, operational support, and strategic guidance. As such, their role is much deeper than that of a passive investor. Their equity share often reflects this heavier involvement in the early stages.

Startups built with studios typically go through the following early stages:

1. Ideation & Validation – The studio identifies a market gap and develops a viable solution.

2. Team Formation – A founding team is recruited, often led by the studio.

3. MVP Development – Resources like engineering, legal, and marketing are provided.

4. Spinout & Fundraising – Once validated, the startup spins out and raises external capital.

Each of these stages affects the cap table, especially how equity is allocated between the studio, founders, and early team members.

Common Cap Table Structures in Studio Models

Although there’s no one-size-fits-all formula, most cap tables in studio-born startups follow a similar pattern during the spin-out phase:

1. Studio Equity (20%–60%)

Studios generally take a larger equity stake than a traditional investor due to their active role in the company’s creation. This stake typically ranges between 30% and 50%, depending on how much the studio contributed in terms of capital, resources, and risk.

Some models may go as high as 60% in early concept-phase startups, especially where the studio also provides the CEO or core leadership team. Over time, as the startup raises capital and scales, the studio’s ownership usually dilutes.

2. Founding Team Equity (20%–50%)

Founders joining a studio venture may receive 20% to 40% equity, depending on when they join and what responsibilities they take on. A technical co-founder joining post-MVP might receive less equity than one who joins at the ideation stage.

Founders often receive their equity through a vesting schedule, commonly over four years with a one-year cliff, aligning long-term commitment with ownership.

3. Employee Option Pool (10%–15%)

Like any startup, those born from studios need to attract and retain top talent. An option pool—typically 10% to 15% of the cap table, is reserved for employees, especially during the first fundraising round.

Early hires may receive larger chunks from this pool, particularly if they are taking on key operational or product roles in the earliest stages.

4. Investor Equity (5%–30%)

If the startup raises a pre-seed or seed round soon after spinning out of the studio, the new investors’ equity will also need to be accounted for. Early-stage VCs or angel investors may take 5% to 20% depending on the round size and valuation.

This dilutes all existing shareholders, including the studio and founders. Planning for this early ensures the cap table remains fair and balanced post-investment.

Best Practices for Cap Table Planning

● Model Scenarios Early

Before finalizing equity splits, it’s crucial to model various scenarios: What happens if you raise multiple rounds? What if key founders leave early? Having these projections gives clarity and avoids surprises.

● Align Equity with Value Added

The cap table should reflect the actual value contributed. A studio that provides engineers, designers, and growth experts deserves a larger stake than one offering only desk space and mentorship. Likewise, founders driving product and sales should be fairly compensated.

● Use Vesting and Cliff Periods

To ensure long-term commitment, both studios and founders often use vesting schedules. A typical 4-year vesting with a 1-year cliff protects the company from early departures and ensures equity is earned over time.

● Create Clear Operating Agreements

Equity is only one part of the relationship. Make sure legal documents (like operating agreements, term sheets, and founder agreements) clearly outline roles, responsibilities, and equity terms. Transparency builds trust.

How to Think About Studio Involvement Over Time

One unique aspect of cap tables in studio-led startups is the evolving role of the studio. In early stages, the studio is hands-on. But as the founding team grows, external funding is raised, and operations scale, the studio often steps back.

Some studios gradually reduce involvement or maintain board-level influence. This transition should be planned in advance and reflected in vesting or advisory agreements.

Conclusion

Structuring a cap table with a venture studio requires balancing contributions, expectations, and future growth potential. While studios may take a significant early stake, the cap table must remain attractive for future investors and fair to founders who take on operational leadership. By modeling scenarios, aligning value with equity, and using legal clarity, startups can ensure their cap table empowers, not hinders, their long-term success.

As venture studios continue reshaping how startups are born, a thoughtful approach to equity is essential. A well-structured cap table is not just a spreadsheet, it’s a roadmap for shared ownership, mutual accountability, and startup resilience.

Why Corporates Are Launching Their Own Venture Studios

In today’s fast-paced innovation landscape, large corporations are realizing that traditional R&D methods are no longer sufficient to keep up with disruptive startups. As a result, many are turning to venture studios, a powerful model that combines capital, strategic support, and entrepreneurial talent to build new businesses from scratch. But why exactly are corporates launching their own venture studios, and what outcomes are they expecting?

Let’s explore how this shift is reshaping corporate innovation across Europe and beyond. 

What Is a Corporate Venture Studio?

A corporate venture studio (CVS) is an in-house or partnered entity that helps corporates build and launch startups aligned with their long-term strategic goals. Unlike accelerators or incubators that support external founders, a CVS usually creates startups internally, recruits entrepreneurs, and co-owns the ventures.

By leveraging internal resources (capital, data, customer base, infrastructure) and combining them with startup speed and culture, venture studios give corporates a faster, more agile way to explore new markets, technologies, and business models.

Why the Shift to Venture Studios?

Here are five key reasons why corporates are launching venture studios:

1. Faster Innovation Cycles

Corporates typically suffer from bureaucracy and slow decision-making. Venture studios allow them to test and launch ideas in months, not years. Studios build multiple MVPs (minimum viable products), iterate quickly, and kill bad ideas early, much like startups.

This agile experimentation drastically reduces time-to-market and enables corporates to stay ahead of disruptors.

2. Strategic Diversification

Many industries, from insurance and banking to manufacturing and healthcare, are undergoing digital disruption. Corporates can’t afford to stand still. Launching a studio lets them diversify their business models and experiment with innovations outside of their core business, all while maintaining ownership and oversight.

3. Access to Entrepreneurial Talent

Attracting and retaining top entrepreneurial talent within a corporation is notoriously difficult. But a venture studio structure is appealing to founders who want to build, scale, and exit without starting completely from scratch. Corporates are using studios to recruit founders-in-residence, giving them equity, autonomy, and a clear runway to build new ventures.

4. De-risked Corporate Innovation

Studios are designed to fail fast and cheap. Instead of risking millions on a single product that may not fit the market, corporates can spread risk across multiple experiments. When one venture succeeds, it can produce significant ROI. If others fail, they offer learning at a much lower cost than failed internal projects.

This portfolio approach is much more efficient than traditional R&D or M&A strategies.

5. IP Ownership and Strategic Alignment

Unlike investing in external startups or using accelerators, a corporate venture studio allows the parent company to retain full or partial ownership of IP, build ventures that complement their core operations, and align innovation with long-term strategy. This gives them better control over growth areas and exit options.

Real-World Examples of Corporate Venture Studios

Across Europe and globally, several corporates have launched successful venture studios:

• Allianz X (Germany) – A venture arm of Allianz, focused on building and investing in startups in insurtech and beyond.

• Engie Factory (France) – The venture studio of energy giant Engie, which co-creates cleantech startups.

• BCG Digital Ventures (Global) – Although not a corporate itself, BCGDV partners with corporates to co-found and scale ventures that fit their strategic needs.

• Bosch Startup Harbour (Germany) – Focuses on IoT and connected products that can extend Bosch’s innovation capabilities.

• Telefonica Alpha (Spain) – Launched by telecom firm Telefonica to build moonshot tech companies.

These studios often have dedicated teams of product managers, engineers, marketers, and venture architects who operate semi-independently but are strategically aligned with the parent company’s goals.

How Corporate Venture Studios Work

The typical CVS model includes the following steps:

1. Opportunity Identification: Studios analyze trends, gaps, and strategic goals to define promising venture ideas.

2. Venture Design: Teams prototype business models, develop MVPs, and test market traction.

3. Recruitment of Founders: Studios bring in experienced operators or domain experts to lead the startup.

4. Funding & Incubation: The corporate funds the startup’s early stages and provides access to distribution channels, customers, and infrastructure.

5. Spin-Out or Integration: If successful, the startup can either become a standalone company (with shared equity) or be integrated back into the corporate entity.

Common Challenges

Despite the potential, corporate venture studios face some pitfalls:

• Cultural Clashes: Corporate risk-aversion can conflict with the startup mentality.

• Decision-Making Bottlenecks: Too much red tape can slow progress.

• Talent Drain: Retaining entrepreneurial talent after a spin-out can be tough.

• Unclear Exit Plans: Without a clear commercialization or M&A strategy, studios risk building “zombie” startups that don’t scale.

That’s why successful studios build strong governance, KPIs, and incentives from the beginning.

Final Thought

As markets continue to evolve and competition intensifies, corporates can no longer rely solely on internal R&D or passive venture investments. Launching a venture studio offers a powerful way to own the innovation process, unlock new revenue streams, and drive cultural transformation.

For corporates serious about long-term growth, building a venture studio is no longer a luxury, it’s a strategic necessity.

Studio vs Accelerator: Which Model Drives Better Founder Outcomes?

In the fast-evolving startup ecosystem, founders face a fundamental question: Should I launch my startup through a venture studio or an accelerator? Both models offer unique advantages, but they cater to different founder profiles and startup stages.

This article explores the key differences between venture studios and accelerators, and which model ultimately delivers better outcomes for founders.

What Is a Venture Studio?

also known as a startup studio, company builder, or venture builder, is an organization that ideates, builds, and launches startups internally. Unlike accelerators that assist external startups, venture studios create their own concepts in-house, test them for market fit, and then recruit co-founders or CEOs to lead these ventures.

Key characteristics of venture studios include:

• Idea Generation: Studios develop startup ideas internally, based on market gaps, trends, and research.

• Validation: These ideas are tested and refined before any company is formally created.

• Founder Recruitment: Once the idea is validated, the studio brings on founders to execute and scale the startup.

• Infrastructure and Capital: The venture studio provides initial funding, legal support, design, product, HR, and technology resources, removing much of the early operational burden from founders.

This model allows founders to focus purely on execution with much less risk. Instead of starting from zero, they’re stepping into a machine that’s already moving, with a pre-validated idea, seed capital, and expert support.

What Is an Accelerator?

A startup accelerator supports early-stage companies through fixed-term programs that typically last between three and six months. Unlike venture studios, accelerators work with startups that already exist and have a founding team in place.

Features of accelerators include:

• Founders Apply With Their Own Idea or MVP: Startups need to be at the idea or product stage to be considered.

• Mentorship and Training: Accelerators offer guidance through workshops, networking, and mentor matching.

• Seed Funding: Participating startups receive small amounts of funding (e.g., $100K–$150K) in exchange for equity.

• Demo Day and Investor Access: At the end of the program, startups pitch to investors for future funding rounds.

Well-known examples include Y Combinator, Techstars, and 500 Startups. These programs often boost visibility and credibility, opening doors to venture capital and strategic partnerships.

Key Differences

Which Drives Better Founder Outcomes?

  For First-Time Founders: Venture Studios

Venture studios de-risk entrepreneurship. Founders join validated projects with funding, a support team, and a clear go-to-market strategy. This is ideal for:

• Domain experts (e.g., engineers, marketers) new to startups

• Entrepreneurs who want operational backing

• Those who prefer execution over ideation

 Example: Antler and eFounders in Europe have helped dozens of first-time founders build multi-million-dollar SaaS and fintech companies with minimal prior startup experience.

For Experienced Founders: Accelerators

Accelerators work best for founders who:

• Already have a clear idea or MVP

• Seek exposure, mentorship, and network effects

• Can leverage the accelerator’s brand to raise funding

Accelerators can supercharge momentum and lead to large seed or Series A rounds, especially in hot sectors like AI and fintech.

Example:Flutterwave (a leading African fintech unicorn) emerged from the Y Combinator accelerator and rapidly scaled after launch.

A Hybrid Approach?

Some founders even benefit from a hybrid approach: building with a studio, then joining an accelerator to scale and raise capital. As startup ecosystems mature, the lines between the two models are beginning to blur.

Final Thoughts

Both venture studios and accelerators have their place in the startup journey. The key is knowing your stage, strengths, and support needs.

If you need structure, capital, and deep operational support, studios are the way to go.
If you already have traction and seek funding and connections, accelerators will help you scale faster.

The best model for founders depends on their experience, the idea stage, and the kind of startup they want to build.

How Venture Studios Are Redefining Early-Stage Investment in Europe

In recent years, the European startup ecosystem has witnessed a quiet revolution,one led not by individual entrepreneurs or traditional venture capitalists, but by venture studios. Also known as startup studios, company builders, or venture builders, these organizations are fundamentally transforming how startups are launched, scaled, and funded.

From Berlin to Stockholm, venture studios are redefining early-stage investment by creating startups from scratch, combining operational expertise, in-house resources, and capital, and this model is gaining significant momentum across Europe.

What Is a Venture Studio?

A venture studio is a company that creates new startups. Unlike accelerators or incubators that support existing startups, venture studios build their own ventures. They identify business opportunities internally, develop prototypes, and assemble teams to lead the new companies.

They typically provide:

• Business ideas

• Early-stage funding

• Design and development resources

• Marketing and go-to-market strategies

• Recruitment of founding teams

The goal is to reduce startup risk and increase the chances of success by providing hands-on support from day one.

The Rise of Venture Studios in Europe

While the model originated in the U.S. (with pioneers like Idealab and Rocket Internet), Europe has rapidly embraced the venture studio approach, adapting it to local contexts.

Some notable venture studios in Europe include:

• Founders Factory (UK)

• Antler (Pan-European)

• eFounders (France & Belgium)

• Zebra Labs (Germany)

• Rainmaking (Denmark)

The rise of these studios aligns with Europe's growing appetite for innovation, digital transformation, and scalable tech-driven solutions,particularly in sectors like fintech, insurtech, and AI.

Why Venture Studios Are Gaining Ground

1. De-risking Early-Stage Investment

Traditional early-stage investment is risky. Many startups fail due to team mismatches, lack of product-market fit, or execution issues. Venture studios address these challenges by:

• Carefully selecting problems worth solving

• Testing ideas before significant capital is deployed

• Bringing in proven operational teams

• Providing institutional knowledge and repeatable processes

This de-risks early-stage investment, making it more attractive for investors who want exposure to innovation without shouldering all the volatility.

2. Combining Capital and Execution

Venture studios provide more than just money, they bring in execution. Studios typically invest capital alongside deep operational support in product development, marketing, legal, and hiring.

3. Faster Time-to-Market

With in-house resources and processes, studios can launch startups in months rather than years. Time is money in the startup world , and venture studios know how to save both.

4. Stronger Founder Matches

Studios recruit and match founders to ideas after validating those ideas. This approach ensures founders work on something with traction, not just personal passion. It increases the likelihood of founder-market fit.

Case Studies: Success Stories from European Venture Studios

eFounders: Reinventing the Future of Work

Paris-based eFounders has launched over 30 companies in the SaaS space, including:

• Spendesk – a corporate expense management platform

• Front – a shared inbox for teams

• Aircall – cloud-based phone systems

With a portfolio now valued at over $2 billion, eFounders is a prime example of how studios can build repeatable, scalable, and high-value businesses.

Founders Factory: Partnering with Corporates

Founders Factory, headquartered in London, takes a collaborative approach by partnering with corporates like Aviva, L’Oréal, and easyJet to co-create new ventures. This model blends industry expertise with startup agility, resulting in better distribution and exit opportunities.

Challenges for the Venture Studio Model

While the benefits are significant, venture studios also face key challenges:

1. High Operational Costs – Running a studio with multiple teams, developers, and resources is expensive.

2. Talent Bottlenecks – Finding experienced, entrepreneurial founders is not easy, especially for niche industries.

3. Ownership Structures – Studios often retain significant equity in startups they build, which can sometimes discourage later-stage investors or founders.

4. Scalability Issues – Unlike VCs who can deploy capital across dozens of deals, studios require hands-on involvement, making scaling slower.

Yet, many of these challenges are being overcome with better models, diversified funding sources, and growing demand for startup building.

The Future: What’s Next for Venture Studios in Europe?

The next decade looks bright for venture studios in Europe.

1. Niche Studios Will Emerge

Expect to see industry-specific venture studios in areas like:

• HealthTech

• ClimateTech

• InsurTech

• Food and Agriculture

These studios will leverage sector expertise and regulatory knowledge to build highly targeted solutions.

2. More Corporate-Backed Studios

Corporations looking to innovate outside their core business are increasingly turning to studios. This trend will grow as legacy firms in banking, insurance, and logistics face digital disruption.

3. Studio-VC Hybrids

Some studios are evolving into studio-VC hybrids, combining the company-building model with traditional fund investing. This allows them to back external founders while still building in-house ventures.

4. More Government and EU Support

As European governments continue to promote entrepreneurship and innovation, expect more support for venture studios via grants, incubator partnerships, and regulatory incentives.

Final Thoughts

Venture studios represent a powerful shift in how startups are built and funded in Europe. By reducing risk, providing hands-on support, and accelerating time-to-market, they are making early-stage investing more efficient and effective.

As innovation becomes a priority across sectors, and the demand for high-quality startups continues to rise, venture studios are well-positioned to become a central pillar of Europe’s startup ecosystem.

Why Do Venture Studios Attract Investors?

Methodology: Understanding Investor Interest Through Models, Outcomes, and Market Signals

This article is based on an analysis of venture studio performance data, institutional investor trends, and commentary from founders and fund managers across Europe and the U.S. It examines why LPs and corporate partners are increasingly backing the venture studio model, and how it aligns with capital-efficient innovation and risk mitigation.

In Brief: What’s Driving Interest?

• Venture studios reduce startup risk through internal ideation, shared operations, and early product-market fit support.

• Investors are drawn to the repeatable nature of the studio model and its portfolio optionality.

• Studios often deliver higher ownership stakes, clearer paths to scale, and shorter time to value realization.

• The model aligns well with corporate innovation strategies and emerging markets.

• Studio economics are evolving to appeal to both traditional LPs and hybrid backers.

The Studio Model Offers a More Controlled Startup Building Process

Unlike traditional VCs that back external founders, venture studios originate and launch companies in-house, providing founding teams, initial capital, and operational resources. From day one, the studio has owned a significant equity position and maintains strategic oversight.

For investors, this structure reduces early-stage chaos. Ideas are pressure-tested before teams are formed. Hiring, product development, and GTM are handled with experienced operators.

This disciplined approach to entrepreneurship improves the odds of success and makes capital deployment more predictable.

Portfolio Construction: More Shots on Goal, Less Waste

Venture studios are built for portfolio logic. Instead of betting big on a single founder or product, they launch multiple companies in parallel, iterate fast, and shut down underperformers early.

For investors, this reduces downside risk. Studios can reallocate capital, reuse talent, and recycle insights across ventures. A single studio may create 10–20 startups over a few years, all from a shared knowledge base and infrastructure.

This portfolio optionality is appealing to LPs looking for high upside with downside protection.

Ownership and Exit Potential Are More Attractive

Because studios are co-founders, they often retain 25–50% equity stakes in their startups at launch, significantly higher than typical VC-backed models.

This concentrated ownership means that when a studio-backed company succeeds, the returns are larger and more direct. For investors in the studio itself, this structure translates into more meaningful exit participation per win.

Moreover, studios often guide startups to exit-readiness faster. With shared legal, hiring, and product resources, time-to-Series A (and beyond) is compressed.

Alignment with Corporate and Institutional Capital

Studios are also uniquely suited for corporate venture partnerships and family office co-building.

Corporates like the model because it offers them a front-row seat to innovation without the risk of internal R&D. For family offices, studios provide a way to co-create meaningful, values-aligned businesses without needing to incubate from scratch.

The model’s transparency, governance, and strategy-first approach make it easier to manage risk while fostering long-term engagement.

Studios Are Building in Emerging and Underserved Markets

Studios are increasingly being used to catalyze innovation in emerging markets, where capital is scarce but talent is abundant.

By controlling startup formation centrally, studios reduce the operational risk of building in fragmented or early ecosystems. They also attract LPs interested in impact investing, climate solutions, and regional development without sacrificing returns.

This makes the model a compelling vehicle for mission-aligned funds, development finance, and global innovation networks.

Final Thought: Studios Offer a New Kind of Investor Alignment

The rise of venture studios isn’t just about better startup outcomes. It’s about better alignment between capital, creators, and customers.

Studios combine the creativity of entrepreneurship with the structure of private equity. For investors, this means fewer surprises, more visibility, and a clearer path from idea to exit.

As more LPs rethink how they allocate to early-stage innovation, the venture studio model will continue to gain traction not as a trend, but as a tool for sustainable, scalable company building.

Venture Studio vs. Incubator vs. VC Fund: What Are the Differences?

In the startup world, founders have more pathways than ever to launch and grow their businesses. Venture studios, incubators, and VC funds are some of the most common models, but they’re often confused. Each plays a different role in a startup’s journey, and understanding how they work can help you choose the right support at the right time.

After reviewing real-world examples, startup reports, and founder experiences, this article breaks down how each model works, how they differ, and when they are most useful.

Venture Studios Create Startups From Scratch

Venture studios don’t wait for external founders to pitch them ideas. Instead, they come up with startup concepts internally and build them in-house. The studio handles early research, product development, branding, and even hires founding team members.

The goal is to create multiple startups each year, test them quickly, and scale the most promising ones. Studios usually retain a large share of equity in the companies they build and stay involved long term. This model offers strong support but less ownership for incoming founders.

Example: Atomic is a top venture studio that co-founded companies like Hims and Bungalow. It provides full support, from engineering to legal, giving startups a strong foundation.

Venture studios are still relatively new compared to incubators and VC funds. Globally, there are estimated to be 500–700 venture studios, while there are thousands of VC funds and incubators. This model shows how investors are moving earlier into the startup lifecycle, often building startups from scratch so that investment and company creation happen simultaneously. Venture studios also reflect a growing trend of investors getting involved earlier in the innovation process, from the ideation phase onward. Unlike traditional VC funds that invest after a product or business model is validated, venture studios combine capital and company creation at the same time. This trend shows how the line between ‘builder’ and ‘investor’ is increasingly blurred.

Incubators Help Early-Stage Founders Shape Their Ideas

Incubators are designed for individuals or teams that already have a startup idea and need help turning it into a viable business. They typically offer mentorship, training sessions, office space, and sometimes small amounts of seed funding.

Most incubators run structured programs that last a few months. Founders join a cohort, attend workshops, get access to experienced mentors, and leave with a more developed product and pitch. The equity taken is usually minimal, and the focus is more on growth than ownership.

Example: The Founder Institute helps first-time founders get started by providing a step-by-step curriculum, access to a network of mentors, and feedback from experienced entrepreneurs.

VC Funds Invest in Startups That Are Ready to Grow

Venture capital funds work differently. They invest money into startups that already have a product, some traction, or a proven business model. VC funds are made up of pooled capital from outside investors called Limited Partners (LPs), and they typically take minority ownership in startups.

VCs don't build startups or run structured programs. Instead, they provide funding, advice, and connections to help companies grow faster. Founders usually seek out VC funding when they need to scale operations, expand into new markets, or hire aggressively.

Example: Andreessen Horowitz is a leading VC firm that has invested in companies like Airbnb and Coinbase. It provides both capital and high-level strategic support.

Key Differences Between Venture Studios, Incubators, and VC Funds

When they get involved:

• Venture studios come in at the idea stage. They build startups from zero, often without an external founder involved at first.

• Incubators support startups that are just beginning and need help shaping their ideas.

• VC funds invest in startups that are already operating and need capital to grow.

How they operate:

• Venture studios act like co-founders. They are deeply involved in building the company and typically stay long term.

• Incubators act as mentors and program hosts. They guide founders through the early stages but usually step back after the program ends.

• VC funds act as investors. They fund startups, join boards, and provide access to additional resources.

What they offer:

• Venture studios provide internal resources, team members, capital, and strategic direction.

• Incubators offer mentorship, training, and sometimes small funding or services.

• VC funds offer larger amounts of capital and help with scaling strategies, fundraising, and hiring.

Equity expectations:

• Venture studios usually take a significant equity stake, often ranging from 30 to 80 percent depending on how much they contribute.

• Incubators take a small equity stake, often around 5 to 10 percent.

• VC funds typically take between 10 to 30 percent, depending on the round and valuation.

Which Model Is Right for You?

The right model depends on where you are in your startup journey.

If you want to build a company but don't yet have an idea or team, a venture studio could be your best option. You’ll get full support, but you’ll share more equity.

If you have a startup idea but need help turning it into something real, an incubator is a great choice. You'll learn, build, and grow with peers, while keeping most of your ownership.

If your product is live and you're looking for funding to expand, a VC fund is the natural next step. You’ll raise larger sums in exchange for equity and get access to high-level strategic support.

Final Thoughts

Venture studios, incubators, and VC funds all aim to build successful startups, but they approach that goal in very different ways. Choosing the right one depends on your stage, goals, and how much ownership or involvement you’re willing to trade for support.

For founders who understand these differences, the startup journey becomes clearer and more strategic, and the chances of building something meaningful increase significantly. As more investors move upstream, the choice of partner; whether studio, incubator, or VC, is more strategic than ever.

Les KPIs clés pour mesurer la performance d’un venture studio

Les venture studios gagnent du terrain dans l’écosystème entrepreneurial, en créant des startups de manière itérative et structurée. Contrairement aux fonds d’investissement ou aux incubateurs, leur modèle repose sur la création interne d’entreprises. Un studio n’est pas qu’une machine à startups, c’est aussi un acteur de transformation. Mais comment mesurer leur réussite ? Quels indicateurs permettent d’évaluer leur performance au-delà des simples sorties financières ?

Dans cet article, nous explorons les principaux KPIs (indicateurs clés de performance) qui permettent de suivre et d’analyser l’efficacité d’un venture studio.

Le taux de création de startups est un indicateur fondamental

Un premier KPI essentiel est le nombre de startups créées sur une période donnée (souvent annuelle). Ce chiffre reflète la capacité du studio à générer, valider et transformer des idées en projets réels.

Il ne s’agit pas seulement de quantité. Le ratio entre idées explorées et startups réellement lancées permet de mesurer l'efficacité du processus de validation en amont.

Le taux de survie des startups montre la solidité du modèle

Créer une startup, c’est bien. Mais assurer sa survie dans les 12 à 36 mois, c’est mieux. Le taux de survie mesure le pourcentage de startups du studio toujours actives après une période définie. Il témoigne de la qualité de l’accompagnement, de la pertinence du produit, et de l’adéquation au marché.

Un bon venture studio ne se contente pas de lancer des projets : il les structure pour qu’ils tiennent la route.

La vitesse de mise sur le marché reflète l’agilité du studio

L’un des grands atouts des venture studios est leur capacité à aller vite. Le time-to-market — soit le temps entre l’idéation et le lancement public du produit — est un KPI clé.

Un cycle de développement court indique que le studio sait mobiliser ses ressources (design, produit, développement, juridique) pour accélérer la croissance des projets.

Les levées de fonds externes mesurent l’attractivité des projets

Lorsque les startups issues d’un studio réussissent à lever des fonds externes, cela valide non seulement leur potentiel, mais aussi la crédibilité du studio aux yeux des investisseurs.

Le montant levé, le nombre de tours de financement réussis, et la qualité des investisseurs impliqués sont autant d’indicateurs de la valeur créée par le studio.

Le retour sur investissement global reste un KPI incontournable

Même si les studios ne fonctionnent pas comme des fonds VC classiques, ils doivent générer un retour sur investissement (ROI) à long terme. Cela peut inclure les exits (reventes), les dividendes perçus, ou encore l’augmentation de la valorisation du portefeuille global.

Ce KPI est souvent analysé sur un horizon de 5 à 10 ans, le temps que les startups atteignent leur maturité.

L’efficacité opérationnelle interne fait aussi la différence

Au-delà des performances des startups, la productivité de l’équipe du studio est aussi un KPI à suivre. Combien de projets un chef de produit ou un développeur peut-il gérer par an ? Le coût moyen par startup créée est-il optimisé ? Ces données permettent de piloter le modèle comme une entreprise à part entière.

Le réseau d’experts et de talents est un levier stratégique

Enfin, un KPI souvent sous-estimé concerne le réseau activé par le studio. Cela inclut les fondateurs recrutés, les experts impliqués, les partenariats industriels ou commerciaux. La richesse et la diversité de cet écosystème renforcent l’effet de levier du studio.

Un studio performant attire des talents de qualité, mobilise des mentors engagés et crée des synergies entre les startups.

L’impact sectoriel ou thématique : un KPI à considérer

Certains venture studios choisissent de se spécialiser dans des secteurs clés comme la santé, le climat, ou la tech sociale. Dans ce cas, il peut être pertinent de mesurer leur influence spécifique sur ces écosystèmes, par exemple à travers le nombre de brevets déposés, les partenariats noués avec des grands groupes industriels, ou encore leur contribution à la transition numérique ou écologique. 

Conclusion : mesurer, c’est piloter

La performance d’un venture studio ne se mesure pas uniquement à travers les succès visibles. Derrière chaque startup lancée, il y a des processus, des paris, des ajustements. En suivant des KPIs adaptés, à la fois quantitatifs et qualitatifs — les studios peuvent affiner leur stratégie, prouver leur impact, et construire un modèle durable.

Dans un écosystème en constante évolution, les venture studios qui savent se mesurer sont ceux qui savent durer.

How Bending Spoons is Rebuilding Digital Classics: A Blueprint for European Innovation Powerhouses

Case Study: Exploration into Bending Spoons’ Acquisition Strategy and Product-Led Growth Model

This case study draws from verified public sources, press coverage, product updates, and leadership statements surrounding Bending Spoons’ acquisition of Evernote and other well-known consumer apps. The analysis highlights strategic patterns, core principles, and actionable insights for ecosystem builders, founders, and digital product operators exploring innovation through acquisition.

In Brief: What You’ll Learn

• Bending Spoons is a Milan-based tech company building world-class digital products through strategic acquisitions and operational excellence.

• In 2023, it acquired Evernote, one of the most recognizable productivity apps, and has since rebuilt it from the ground up.

• Its model combines deep product expertise with centralized operational infrastructure.

• The company manages a portfolio of widely-used apps like Remini and Splice, reaching over 200 million monthly users.

• This case offers a proven roadmap for scaling software companies through bold acquisitions and thoughtful integration.

---

Bending Spoons quietly built one of Europe’s most downloaded app portfolios, then acquired Evernote

Founded in 2013 and headquartered in Milan, Bending Spoons spent years outside the spotlight building a portfolio of globally used mobile applications. Known for hits like Remini (AI photo enhancement), Splice (video editing), and 30 Day Fitness, the company had become a quiet juggernaut in the consumer tech world.

Then, in late 2022, Bending Spoons made a bold move: it acquired Evernote, the note-taking pioneer that helped define modern productivity. The acquisition was completed in early 2023, marking a turning point, not just for Evernote, but for Bending Spoons’ position in global tech..

It acquired Evernote to reimagine a product millions still rely on

By the time of acquisition, Evernote was no longer top of mind for many users. Once a category-defining app, it had suffered from technical issues, lagging updates, and rising competition from Notion, OneNote, and others.

Bending Spoons didn’t see a legacy product; they saw a foundation worth rebuilding. They immediately began reengineering Evernote’s infrastructure, launching performance upgrades and revamping the user experience. It wasn’t a brand reboot, it was a full product overhaul aimed at returning Evernote to form.

Bending Spoons combines product obsession with an operator-first model

What sets Bending Spoons apart is its ability to operate like a modern tech company and a disciplined acquisition firm all in one.

Its Milan-based team is engineering-led, product-centric, and deeply analytical. When it acquires a product, it doesn’t just rebrand or bundle it reinvests. From core code to monetization mechanics, the company takes ownership of every layer. It centralizes operations, HR, marketing, and infrastructure, to allow product teams to focus.

It’s this blend of operational control and creative freedom that has made it possible to run multiple high-performing apps with small, efficient teams.

Evernote was just one move in a bigger playbook, and more are coming

The Evernote acquisition wasn’t a one-off bet. It was part of a larger strategy. Bending Spoons now manages a portfolio with more than a dozen active products and over 200 million monthly users. These include:

In 2024, Reuters reported that Bending Spoons had raised capital at a $2.55 billion valuation and was considering a U.S. IPO. It now sits among Europe’s most valuable and profitable consumer app builders.

Bending Spoons moves quickly, reinvests deeply, and builds for longevity

Key advantages of the Bending Spoons model:

• Centralized operations: Core functions like finance, HR, and data science are shared across apps.

• Deep product refactoring: Legacy apps are rebuilt to perform like new.

• Cohesive team culture: Hiring is rigorous, and most team members work from the Milan HQ.

• Focus on long-term retention: Rather than chase installs, apps are optimized for subscriber lifetime value.

• Selective M&A: The company acquires only when it sees lasting product potential.

This model gives acquired products like Evernote a true second life, not just a rebrand, but a re-foundation.

Bending Spoons offers a powerful case for European tech leadership

In a world where most top consumer apps are based in the U.S. or China, Bending Spoons is a standout. It's proving that European tech companies can scale globally without leaving their principles or their headquarters behind.

Its approach is neither flashy nor growth-at-all-costs. It's deliberate, product-led, and relentlessly operational. For other tech ecosystems looking to nurture world-class innovation, Bending Spoons offers a blueprint grounded in smart talent, long-term thinking, and conviction around product excellence

Conclusion: Bending Spoons isn’t chasing headlines; it’s rewriting playbooks

What’s most impressive about Bending Spoons isn’t just what it’s built, it’s how quietly and intentionally it has done it.

While others chase blitz-scaling or viral hype, this Milanese firm is quietly transforming well-known software products and returning them to best-in-class quality. And it’s doing so while building a company that’s profitable, disciplined, and increasingly global.

The future of consumer software doesn’t belong only to Silicon Valley. And if Bending Spoons has anything to say about it, the next great productivity revolution may just start in Milan.

How Kevin Ryan Built AlleyCorp: A Venture Studio Blueprint Powering NYC’s Startup Ecosystem

Methodology: A Deep Dive into the Venture Studio Model and Kevin Ryan’s Track Record

This case study draws from verified public records, interviews, press releases, and market reports covering Kevin Ryan’s business ventures, the operational structure of AlleyCorp, and outcomes from the startups it has helped launch. The analysis highlights strategic patterns, shared methodologies, and actionable insights for ecosystem builders, founders, and early-stage investors.

In Brief: What You’ll Learn

• Kevin Ryan’s approach to building companies, not just funding them, has reshaped New York’s tech scene.

• AlleyCorp combines in-house innovation with hands-on operational support to reduce risk and accelerate startup success.

• The studio has produced breakout companies like MongoDB, Business Insider, and Nomad Health.

• With a $250M fund, AlleyCorp is proving that the venture studio model is more than a trend, it's a system.

• This case offers a clear framework for replicating the venture studio model in emerging ecosystems.

Full Article

Kevin Ryan scaled his first startup into a billion-dollar exit then built an engine for more

In the late 1990s, Kevin Ryan helped transform DoubleClick into a digital advertising giant. That journey ended in a $1.1 billion sale, later folded into Google for $3.1 billion. But Ryan didn’t walk away after one success. He asked a bigger question: What if we could build high-potential startups systematically?

He launched AlleyCorp to make entrepreneurship repeatable and infrastructure-driven

Unlike traditional investors who wait for promising founders to pitch them, AlleyCorp starts at zero with original ideas, internal teams, and shared resources. This model allows it to move quickly from concept to execution, while minimizing the typical startup risks. It’s not just capital. It’s co-creation.

AlleyCorp combines a venture studio’s rigor with a seed fund’s agility

AlleyCorp operates on two complementary tracks:

• Studio arm: Generates startup ideas internally, recruits founding teams, and offers full-stack support.

• Seed fund: Invests in external startups, often as the first check in.

This dual model allows it to both create and accelerate companies, maintaining long-term involvement across the board. In 2024, AlleyCorp raised $250 million in its first fund with outside LPs, a strong endorsement of both its results and model.

The model is validated by some of NYC’s biggest startup wins

AlleyCorp’s portfolio reads like a greatest hits list in New York tech:

Each of these companies was either co-founded or backed early by AlleyCorp, and each addressed a real market inefficiency with bold, tech-enabled solutions.

How AlleyCorp builds smarter, faster, and with more support than typical startups

Key advantages of the AlleyCorp model:

• Centralized services: Legal, HR, design, and tech resources are shared, reducing startup friction.

• Speed to market: In-house teams move faster than founder-led ideas alone.

• Operator involvement: Kevin Ryan and senior leadership stay hands-on throughout each startup’s lifecycle.

• Market-first mindset: Instead of chasing trends, AlleyCorp tackles real gaps with measurable demand.

This ecosystem helps new founders avoid classic early-stage pitfalls—while giving investors better odds of success.

The venture studio model offers a clear roadmap for other startup ecosystems

The AlleyCorp story isn’t just about one founder, it’s about what’s possible when innovation is treated as a process, not luck. And that has big implications for other cities and regions.

Startups don’t need to emerge randomly. With:

• A structured ideation process

• Access to senior operators

• Pooled resources across ventures

• Localized industry knowledge

Venture studios can help emerging markets replicate success whether in East Africa, Southeast Asia, or mid-sized U.S. cities.

Final Thought: Kevin Ryan didn’t wait for unicorns, he designed a system to build them

AlleyCorp shows that startup creation doesn’t have to be chaotic or founder-dependent. When experienced builders partner with talent early, and provide structure at every step, great companies can be built more predictably.

For anyone looking to nurture a stronger innovation ecosystem, this model offers a roadmap, and a reason to believe that big success can come from focused, local effort.