Last Money in is Powered by Sydecar

Sydecar empowers syndicate leads to manage their investments more effectively. Organize, manage, and engage your investor network effortlessly with Sydecar’s management and communication tools. Their platform also automates banking, compliance, contracts, tax, and reporting, freeing up syndicate leads to focus on securing deals and strengthening investor relations. Elevate your syndicate operations with Sydecar.

Maximum Flexibility: Why SPV Syndicate Managers Have the Ultimate Investment Freedom

I personally love the flexibility syndicates provide (as a GP) versus a traditional venture fund. Assuming you have the backing/LP-base to support you, you have the freedom to invest exactly how you want, when you want, and in what you want. 

While traditional venture capital has more rigid structures and constraints, SPV leads have carved out a uniquely flexible path that offers both autonomy and genuine investment opportunity. Let's explore why this flexibility can make SPV syndicate management so attractive.

Breaking Free from the Fundraising Treadmill

Traditional fund managers face a massive task: they must raise institutional funds—often $50 million to $1 billion or more—all upfront. This process typically requires years of relationship building with limited partners, years of a track record to show, extensive legal documentation, formal fund terms, and multi-year capital commitments before making a single investment.

SPV leads operate in a different paradigm. They raise capital deal-by-deal, allowing them to start with much smaller amounts and build their track record incrementally. Want to start with a $200k SPV for an exciting seed company? Perfectly feasible. Feel confident enough to raise $1 million for a Series A opportunity? Also entirely within reach. This approach means new syndicate managers can begin investing immediately without needing to secure massive initial commitments or spend years courting institutional LPs.

The beauty of this model extends beyond just getting started. Each successful SPV becomes a building block for the next, creating a natural progression where track record and investor relationships grow more organically rather than requiring a massive leap of faith from institutional backers (important to note though that many institutional LPs will not be looking to participate in SPVs).

Investment Autonomy

Traditional VCs operate under formal investment committee processes that can feel more like corporate bureaucracy than nimble investing (of course there is a ton of value in this rigorous process too). These committees come with predetermined investment criteria, strict sector focus requirements, and approval hierarchies. Interesting opportunities can be shot down because it doesn't fit the fund's narrow mandate.

SPV leads enjoy complete investment autonomy. If you're excited about a fintech startup one week and discover a unique biotech opportunity the next week, you have the freedom to pursue both. There's no investment committee to convince, no fund mandate to navigate, and no need to justify why this deal fits your predetermined thesis.

This autonomy extends to deal evaluation as well. SPV managers can take risks on unconventional opportunities, back founders who might not fit traditional VC patterns, or explore emerging sectors that larger funds might consider too niche or risky. The only constraint is your ability to articulate the opportunity to your syndicate members.

Opportunistic Investing Without Portfolio Pressure

Traditional VC fund managers face constant pressure around portfolio construction. They must deploy capital across a diversified portfolio within specific timeframes, hit certain ownership targets, and maintain sector balance. This creates scenarios where fund managers might pass on great opportunities because they've already invested too heavily in a particular sector, or conversely, feel pressured to invest in mediocre deals to meet deployment schedules.

It is typically more black and white with syndicate leads. If you only see two genuinely exciting deals all year, you can invest in just those two. If you discover ten amazing opportunities in the same quarter, you can pursue them all. There's less pressure to achieve portfolio balance or meet deployment targets. 

The flexibility extends to deal size and stage as well. One week you might raise an SPV for a $100,000 pre-seed investment in a two-person startup, and the next week you could organize a $3 million growth-stage investment for a decacorn. This range is nearly impossible for traditional VCs, who typically become locked into specific check sizes and stages based on their fund size and return requirements.

Volume & Timing Control

One of the most personally appealing aspects of SPV management is control over your investment volume and timing. I’d argue SPV leads have greater control than traditional funds over their investment pace. 

Want to be highly active and evaluate 10 deals per month? You can do that. 

Prefer a more selective approach with just 3-4 investments per year? Also perfectly fine. 

Need to take three months off in the summer for family time or personal projects? Technically, there's nothing stopping you (but I do not recommend it)—unlike traditional VCs who have committed capital to deploy and LP expectations to manage.

This flexibility extends to deal timing as well. If you're not seeing quality opportunities, you can simply wait. If a particularly exciting deal comes along that requires quick action, you can move rapidly without IC meetings/committee approvals or fund constraint concerns.

The Tradeoffs

Of course, all this flexibility comes with meaningful tradeoffs that aspiring SPV managers should understand clearly. The same deal-by-deal fundraising that provides flexibility also means less predictable deal flow. While traditional VCs can count on having committed capital to deploy, SPV leads must continuously market each opportunity to their syndicate members.

Resource constraints represent another significant challenge. Traditional VC funds typically have dedicated teams for due diligence, portfolio support, and operational assistance. SPV managers often operate with much leaner resources, which can limit their ability to conduct comprehensive due diligence or provide extensive post-investment support to their portfolio companies. As an LP in a syndicate, you cannot expect the same level of due diligence and operational support as an institutional fund. 

The continuous fundraising requirement also means SPV leads spend considerable time on investor relations and deal marketing rather than pure investment activities. Each SPV requires building a compelling investment case, securing an allocation into a marketable deal, managing the fundraising process, and coordinating with multiple individual investors rather than having a committed pool of capital ready to deploy.

Finally, the lack of a traditional fund structure can sometimes make it harder to access the very best deals, as some founders and lead investors prefer working with established institutional funds that can provide more predictable follow-on capital and extensive support networks. I will say this does not come up much, especially once there is an institutional lead and they are looking to round out the round with other types of capital, but it depends on the round dynamics and the founder interests here. 

Summary

The flexibility that makes syndicate management so appealing—the ability to invest opportunistically without rigid mandates or deployment pressures—ultimately represents both its greatest strength and a fundamental limitation. While SPV leads enjoy unparalleled investment freedom, they typically don't provide the built-in diversification that traditional funds offer to LPs, meaning investors are essentially making concentrated bets on individual companies rather than benefiting from a diversified portfolio approach. I personally think this distinction is crucial for LPs to understand when evaluating investment opportunities. Traditional venture funds, despite their constraints, force a disciplined approach to portfolio construction that can often lead to better risk-adjusted returns over time.

If you enjoyed this article, feel free to view our prior posts on adjacent topics 

• Why Syndicate Leads Don’t Survive 

• The Syndicate LP Churn Problem 

• What Really Drives Investment Interest in SPVs

Last Money in is Powered by Sydecar

Sydecar empowers syndicate leads to manage their investments more effectively. Organize, manage, and engage your investor network effortlessly with Sydecar’s management and communication tools. Their platform also automates banking, compliance, contracts, tax, and reporting, freeing up syndicate leads to focus on securing deals and strengthening investor relations. Elevate your syndicate operations with Sydecar.

If you enjoyed this post, please share on LinkedIn, X (fka Twitter), Meta and elsewhere. It goes a long way to support us!

Follow the Last Money In authors on LinkedIn

✍️ Written by Zachary and Alex