April 22, 2016

Cracking into the Top 5 Fastest Growing Startup Cities

What factors determine the success rate of a population of venture-backed startups? And how is success measured? We can learn something by looking at the Top 5 fastest growing cities whose startups are collectively raising at least $200M.

Many people look at funding rounds (Series A, B, C, etc) as a measure of success, and it is to a degree, but that is more of a process metric. Success for investors is an exit, or liquidity event. In the eyes of economic development folks, it is often measured as the number of people employed.

A diverse set of outcomes and activities at the top and bottom of the proverbial funnel is important to long-term entrepreneur community growth. Ideally, we would see more than one significant company outcome (IPO) in combination with a healthy amount of new startup activity.

I wanted to test this hypothesis, so I began investigating the latest data from the National Venture Capital Association (“NVCA”) on venture funding in various regions around the country. Specifically, let’s look at the data that breaks out every Metropolitan Statistical Area (“MSA”) in the U.S. by five year Compounded Annual Growth Rate (“CAGR”).

I sorted the MSAs by the fastest growing (CAGR) and then by funding levels for the most recent year, 2015. The following chart shows the top 10 Fastest Growing and Biggest (most $ raised)  regions.

Top 10 Fastest Growing Cities
Top 10 Fastest Growing Cities

Obviously, the New York region is an outlier in a number of ways. Provo, UT is doing amazingly well at $444.7M raised in 2015 and 73.6% CAGR. You can read more about the biggest regions, and specifically the Utah experiment, in this Inc. article last year by Ilan Mochari “Move Over, Silicon Valley: Utah Has Arrived”.

The next thing I noticed is that the top five regions by dollars raised are all above $220 million and then there is a big gap down to Cincinnati at $96.6 million. What’s going on here?

To understand this, I then looked at regions similar in size and geography. In this analysis I’ve highlighted the Ohio cities. Now what do you see?

Great Lakes Region
Great Lakes Region
  • Total raised by startups in Ohio in 2015 was $262.7 million, similar in size to each of Ann Arbor, Boulder, Charlotte and St. Louis.
  • Within Ohio, Cincinnati and Cleveland are similar in dollars raised, however Cleveland’s CAGR is -4.9% and Cincinnati is 31.1%.
  • Within the Ohio cities, the average amount raised per company is $4.9 million, below the group average of $7.7 million. If you take the average dollars raised per company for the cities above $220 million, the result is $11.48 million, over double the average for Ohio.
  • Pittsburgh raised twice as much as Cincinnati, but was only growing at a 3.9% rate, and average dollars raised per company was only $2.4 million.

The detailed data shows the growth in the Cincinnati region occurs in 2014 and 2015 of the CAGR calculation. It is the direct result of The Brandery, Cintrifuse, CincyTech, Queen City Angels and others working together as a community. The largest financing events driving the numbers were for Ahalogy, AssureX, Everything But The House and LISNR.

In Boulder, there were 9 companies that each raised $10 million or more in each of the last two years.

So what does it take to see a community of startups join the top group of over $200 million annually and sustain an annual growth rate above 30%?

From Verne Harnish’s book “Scaling Up”: There are 28 million companies in the U.S. and only 4% of them have $1 million in revenue or more. One-tenth of them, or 0.4%, make it to $10 million in revenue and only 17,000 reach $50 million or more in revenue. I wondered how these broad business metrics applied to a population of venture backed startups.

My suspicion is that it has to do with the number of companies raising larger Series B rounds. If you look at the data, that’s the gap. You can’t get there by simply funding more seed-stage startups. Companies need to make real progress in order to attract those larger rounds of capital. They need investors and advisors who can help them achieve that growth.

I’m assuming the existence of larger rounds of funding is supported by substantial growth in the company. How can we increase the percentage of startups that earn a Series B round? What are the key drivers?

It takes a strong network within and outside of the community to increase outcomes, including smart investors with direct experience growing companies from concept to tens of millions in revenue or more. These benchmarks will help us navigate our path to success and join the $220M+ cities. Of the 254 startups that are Cintrifuse members, we need to see 5 to 10 raising $10M+ rounds each year, or about 4%.

Once we know where we want to go, we need to be smart about how we navigate our way there. This data offers us some clues along our way. I’d like to find more data that would compare startup growth by region, and also look at exit data. If you have interest in helping me find the answers let me know!

Let’s not end up lost backstage like the members of Spinal Tap…”Rock and Roll! …. Hello Cleveland! … Hello Cleveland!”.

  • Jeffrey Shepard

    Tim,

    This a great blog and I enjoyed reading it and more importantly this week the statistics that you presented.

    Interesting to see how we “stack up” here in Cincinnati. I couldn’t agree more, we need more seed investments, more companies raising money, more companies failing fast, and more support of services that entrepreneurs need to be successful, more, more, more… we can handle it!

    I also enjoyed seeing the comparison to cities that in my opinion have had strong ecosystems for years and are starting to hit their stride as real hotbeds. Spending time in both New York and Toronto it was interesting to see folks that had nice exits go right back into the cycle as investors, mentors or entrepreneurs starting up new companies only to be more successful the second and third time around. Raising seed money and series A-C rounds gets easier when you have a ecosystems with people that have done it, build great teams, and exits. Its something that we will see here as we are just starting to see the exits beginning and the leadership in the ecosystem emerge. Not too many ecosystems our size can boast an epicenter like Union Hall, dedicated seed investors, mentors or great supporters of entrepreneurship like some of the “BigCo’s” we have. Its something to build on. We just need more of it! We are fighting really well in our weight class right now and I see us moving up quickly and being more competitive.

    Keep up the great blog… I enjoy it.

    • Tim Schigel

      Thanks Jeffrey! You’re right on. We’re off to a great start and have a lot of opportunity. I found it helpful to see how we stack up. It gives us some milestones to shoot for.

  • Chris Rizik

    Good article, Tim. Your point about the series B rounds is dead on. Last year was the first in which we had 4-5 really major rounds in Southeastern Michigan, ranging from $10 million to $60 million, and it was a huge milestone. We have already had another huge one this year. Cincy seems to be putting together the pieces the right way, and the growth over the past couple of years is a great sign

    • Tim Schigel

      Perfect. Is there a pattern that you observe with those companies that raised bigger rounds? Background of founders, investors, etc?

  • Bob Gilbreath

    Very encouraging data, Tim. Everyone in the world is struggling with a Series B crunch. I think they investors are out there, and willing to invest between the coasts, but they are holding firm to certain expectations. These investors are not going with gut, belief in leadership, or falling in love with some categories. Rather, they want more of the proven stories with “no brainer” metrics. For our region to get more of these companies, I think we need to fuel growth with more talent, more big company customers, and more teaching/training from experienced entrepreneurs like yourself who have been there.

    • Tim Schigel

      Thanks Bob!

  • Austin

    Great insights Tim. Thanks for sharing.

  • Matt Lenahan

    Really great post Tim!

    What stood out to me was the total raised by all three OH cities in 2015…when combined OH rivals for the #3 spot behind NYC & Provo which is a pleasant surprise.

    Having moved from NYC to Cincy three years ago I’m continually impressed with the progress of our local ecosystem with my company being the product of Cintrifuse, The Brandery, CincyTech, and now a startup-in-residence at 84.51. My team and I feel privileged to be riding this local wave of momentum. With that said, as a tech community we still have a lot of room to grow.

    Since our region hasn’t yet experienced the volume of exits others have I’d like to challenge the biggest companies in our area to jump into the mix. 84.51 has stepped up with their SIR program, P&G has with their Brandery Fellowship, Scripps has with some venture funding, but we could really use more. These companies could offer the bridge our community needs from venture to IPO. I know Cintrifuse has been a big part of leading this charge but what else can our community be doing to encourage more collaboration, more funding, etc.?

    Once we define that model in the greater Cincy area we’ll be able to scale it to Columbus and Cleveland. That cross-pollination of resources, talent, and funding will drive innovation and ultimately jobs across the state.

    As startups we’re constantly being pushed to find “product market fit” and prove to VCs that our companies have “founder market fit”. What I’d challenge the greater Cincinnati area to do is find “startup enterprise fit”. We have great talent, great resources, and now we just need those in the position to support to make it a priority. As startups we’re not looking for charity or a handout, we’re looking to create new business opportunities that will add value to the core business of these large companies. Cincinnati is off to a great start and now we have to just keep pushing to crack into that Top 5 spot!

    • Tim Schigel

      Thanks Matt. We’re glad you’re here!

  • We’re on the precipice for sure, Tim. Second-time founders going big will be a critical component. The Cintrifuse corporate connections effort is such a powerful differentiators for the region too, Cintrifuse has done a lot more than most people think. Thanks for all your help 🙂

  • Andy Nielsen

    Great post, Tim. I completely agree with the notion of more B-rounds being a strong catalyst. We have a lot of solid momentum in the region, but companies reaching this point is critical.

  • Timothy Holcomb

    Well said, Tim. It also takes local members of the ecosystem working together to help “connect” later stage startups with demonstrated longevity and traction to investors outside the region as well. Your work at Cintrifuse is a really big part of #StartupCincy’s string of recent successes.

    • Tim Schigel

      Thanks Tim. My observation is that the companies that have demonstrated traction have a far easier time raising the later stage rounds. So the question is what needs to happen to get more of our earliest stage startups to achieve significant market traction?

      • To often, simple execution is key. Too often, I’ve seen founders take early indications of product-market fit to mean, “run and run fast,” which may be important in some cases when the startup finds itself in the middle of a land grab. In the end, knowing how to scale the business without killing it is the difference between an entrepreneur with a really cool idea and one that is tuned in to what it takes to manage-through the complexity of growth. Another issue that I commonly see in he transition from early/seed stage startups to maturing/emerging growth businesses is the inability to adjust customer acquisition processes to accommodate a shift from early adopters that tend to fall in love with anything new to the larger pool of customers that aren’t interested in being part of a passing fad and would rather ‘wait-and-see’ how the new business is making out before buying in … It’s the group that Geoffrey Moore (Crossing the Chasm) characterizes as the early majority. My $0.02.