Artificial Intelligence (AI) Infiltrates Megacap Tech
Both Alphabet and Microsoft announced new AI-driven search engine upgrades.[1] Microsoft is building off its $10 billion investment in OpenAI while Alphabet reportedly invested almost $400 million into Anthropic, an OpenAI competitor.[2]
ARK’s take
Language model-based AI systems do pose a competitive threat to Google’s search engine business, a high margin $160 billion per year near-monopoly.[3] At the very least Bing’s entry into the market should pressure margins given the expense of querying an AI language model. The larger threat to Google, however, is the potential for a structural shift in user behavior as AI begins to natively integrate into endpoint software. Why go to a search engine to find a stock photo for your graphic design, when you can ask your graphic design software to source or generate that image directly via a natural language interface?
Venture Capital[4] Assets Begin to Reflect Market Reality
Stripe is reportedly raising $2.5 billion in new equity at 40% off the valuation it commanded when it raised money in 2021.[5] Over the same timeframe Adyen, a comparable publicly traded company, traded down a similar amount.[6]
ARK’s take
Stripe’s high-profile down round[7] is indicative of valuation markdowns sweeping across the venture landscape. This is true even for companies that have sufficient cash reserves to avoid raising additional money as reflected by secondary market transactions occurring at a discount to previous rounds. We believe valuations that reflect current market conditions are healthy for venture as they allow investors to put new money to work and should increase deal flow liquidity throughout the first half of 2023.
Do Capped Upside Rounds Reflect a New Fundraising Strategy?
Microsoft’s $10 billion investment in OpenAI was heavily structured. Microsoft enjoys a disproportionate share of the profits upfront but reportedly can not reap more than a rough 10x return on its capital.[8]
ARK’s take
Though for Microsoft and other strategic investors structured investments that cap the ultimate upside could make sense, venture funders will need to think carefully about how they underwrite these deals. The venture capital model relies on high returns concentrated in a very small number portfolio companies. According to ARK’s research, uniformly capping upside potential at 10 times across a large sample of individual venture investments with measured exit or bankruptcy outcomes could have potentially reduced gross returns by 20%. This return reduction can be accommodated within the venture framework, but it requires careful diligence to do so.
Investors should carefully consider the investment objectives and risks as well as charges and expenses of the ARK Venture Fund before investing. This and other information are contained in the ARK Venture Fund’s prospectus, which may be obtained by visiting www.ark-ventures.com. The prospectus should be read carefully before investing.
To view the top 10 holdings in the ARK Venture Fund, click here. To view the most up to date portfolio, click here.
An investment in the ARK Venture Fund is subject to risks and you can lose money on your investment in the ARK Venture Fund. There can be no assurance that the ARK Venture Fund will achieve its investment objectives. The ARK Venture Fund’s portfolio is more volatile than broad market averages. The ARK Venture Fund also has specific risks, which are described below. More detailed information regarding these risks can be found in the ARK Venture Fund’s prospectus.
Foreside Fund Services, LLC, distributor.
ARK Investment Management LLC (“ARK Invest”) is the investment adviser to the ARK Venture Fund.
ARK’s statements are not an endorsement of any company or a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security. ARK and its clients as well as its related persons may (but do not necessarily) have financial interests in securities or issuers that are discussed. Certain of the statements contained may be statements of future expectations and other forward-looking statements that are based on ARK’s current views and assumptions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance, or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in such statements.