They did well but that loss was bad because of knock-on effects to the market. CalPERS lost some half of its value back then. But exposure to VC is very small (

They did well but that loss was bad because of knock-on effects to the market. CalPERS lost some half of its value back then. But exposure to VC is very small (1-2% of fund size). They've marked down a lot of investments by more than the GFC losses but it barely affects CalPERS because <15% is in private markets and a small fraction of that is in venture. That fund alone is over half a trillion so that's still a lot of money to allocate.