Slide 16 — Our Offering (Portfolio Construction)

What this slide is

The fund-model page. Left: three commitments describing how capital is deployed (30 category-defining startups, Seed + follow-on, 1/3 reserved for follow-on at Series A). Center: the construction table (Pre-Seed / Seed / Series A columns × Role / Ticket / Init. Ownership / Init. Invest Volume / Strategy rows). Bottom: the return thesis answering “How will we return the fund?” — secondaries + M&A, no IPOs needed.

Why it’s here

This is the slide LPs spend the most time on. The three questions LPs need answered:

1. What will you do with the money? → Construction table.
2. What ownership do you target? → 10–12% at Pre-Seed.
3. How do I get my money back? → Secondaries + M&A.

This slide answers all three in one frame. It’s also where the fund construction discipline from slide 4 pillar 5 (“small fund by design”) and slide 7’s closing argument (“not a giant but a small specialist, by design”) finally becomes specific numbers.

The math: 30 portcos × €1M average ticket = €30M deployed at Pre-Seed/Seed. That’s 60% of a €50M fund. The remaining €20M (~1/3 of fund) is for Series A pro-rata. Tight, disciplined, no slop.

What’s most important to surface

“How will we return the fund?” — and specifically the “Secondaries from Series C onwards (no IPOs needed for Fund Model)” line — is the single most important sentence on this slide and arguably one of the most important lines in the entire deck. No IPOs needed is huge. Most VCs structurally need IPOs to return funds; Calm/Storm explicitly designed the fund model to work via M&A and secondaries. This is the structural advantage that makes a small fund work.

10–12% Pre-Seed ownership is the alpha proposition. Most generalist or larger funds can’t justify that ownership at €0.5–1.5M ticket. This number tells LPs: at exit, Calm/Storm gets meaningful percentage points, not crumbs. Worth highlighting.

The 60% / 40% Pre-Seed/Seed split is the disciplined-allocation claim. Slide 8 says they’re 60/40; slide 16 confirms with deployment math. The two slides should reinforce each other.

M&A buyers named — Pharma / Medtech / Insurances / US-Tech — is sophisticated. Naming the buyer categories says we know exactly who buys our portcos at exit. Many VCs hand-wave at “strategic acquirers”; Calm/Storm names four specific industries. Visually emphasize this list.

The “30 category-defining HealthTech startups” headline number is the firm’s portfolio commitment. 30 is a tight count for a €50M fund — disciplined. Lower number = higher per-deal ownership. This is a feature.

Slide 7’s closing line (“not a giant but a small specialist, by design”) is answered on this slide. Slide 7 said “the right fund size for these exits is small”; slide 16 shows what “small” actually means in deployment. The two slides are a pair.

Composition risk

This is the highest-information-density slide in the deck. A table + three commitments + a return-thesis paragraph is a lot. The source uses a clean two-column split with the table on the right and three icon-led commitments on the left, then a centered footer for the return thesis. The visual challenge: the table cannot be small. LPs need to read it. If it shrinks too much, the slide fails.

Visual hierarchy I’d suggest

1. Headline + subhead
2. The construction table — the structural anchor of the slide; readable, generous spacing, clear rows
3. Three commitments — left column, equal weight, with bolded keywords (30 category-defining, Seed, 1/3, follow-on, Series A)
4. “How will we return the fund?” question + three return-thesis lines — visually pulled out as a quote block or footer band
5. No IPOs needed for Fund Model — italicized or emphasized within the return thesis