2 ms·
Note that, for better or for worse, relative performance after three years has a lot to do with how the tech market overall happened to be performing at that ti
by jashkenas 14y ago
Note that, for better or for worse, relative performance after three years has a lot to do with how the tech market overall happened to be performing at that time.
For example, the companies that I.P.O.'d in 1996 and 1997 tend to do well using this particular timeframe, and the ones that I.P.O.'d in 2006 would be affected negatively.
- metamatt 14y agoYup, it's just one metric, and "after 3 years" is pretty arbitrary. Still interesting if you keep this in mind. But I'd argue the most relevant time (for comparison of how well these companies built stable long-term value) is now, and it would be interesting to see numbers for % growth from IPO to now, or better yet, that measured per year (CAGR).