This data is worthless because it shows nothing about the distribution of founder success. It gives no indication of expected value. Better data would provide

This data is worthless because it shows nothing about the distribution of founder success. It gives no indication of expected value. Better data would provide the average success of funded companies by the age of the founders. This would tell us whether or not younger or older founders are being under-funded. The expected value of older founders could easily be higher if they have a lower variance but greater average success. Or it could be that younger founders are severely under-funded because the top-heaviness of the winners vastly outweighs the higher number of failures. Who knows? The data in the article tells us nothing but how old people happen to be in this community.