Slide 14 — Numbers

What this slide is

A dashboard. Twelve stats in a 3×4 grid covering: assets, portfolio shape, follow-on quality, co-investor density, LP base, and SP network. Closes with the “largest group of HealthTech entrepreneurs / investors / experts in Europe” claim.

Why it’s here

The receipts page. After ten slides of narrative argument, this is the LP-committee take-away: here are the numbers in one place, take what you need for your memo.

The stats fall into roughly four categories:

1. Assets & portfolio shape — €>50M AuM, 60+ portcos, 120+ founders / 18 countries, >1,500 FTEs.
2. Portfolio quality — >80% follow-on rate, 15 Series A + 4 Series B from Tier 1, €>515M follow-on raised, €>3B combined enterprise value.
3. Network density — 1,000+ co-investors, 111+ LPs, 60+ Supporting Partners.
4. LP-side activity — 100+ co-investments from/with LPs (LPs investing alongside Calm/Storm at company level — strong LP signal).

What’s most important to surface

€>3B Combined Enterprise Value is the single number that goes into LP-committee investment memos. This is the headline of the slide. Visually it should dominate. Most slides have one keystone number; this slide’s keystone is €3B.

>80% follow-on rate is the most LP-relevant quality metric. It says: of every 10 portcos we back at Pre-Seed/Seed, 8+ raise a follow-on round. That’s the funnel signal — proof that other VCs see what Calm/Storm sees.

15 Series A & 4 Series B from Tier 1 VCs is the empirical version of slide 9 column 3 (the Tier-1 VC follow-on logos). These are the actual graduations.

100+ Co-Investments from / with LPs is a quietly important stat. LPs co-investing at the company level (alongside the fund) means the LP relationships are deep — LPs pick up additional exposure when they like a deal. This is a major signal of LP satisfaction with prior funds.

The 12-stat layout will be visually messy if every number is the same size. The slide needs visible hierarchy within the grid — the keystone (€3B), three or four secondary stats (60+ portcos, >80% follow-on, €515M follow-on), and the rest as supporting. Source slide treats them all roughly equally, which makes the slide feel like a wall of numbers; deliberately weighting could improve readability.

Composition risk

12 stats is a lot. The temptation is “make all the numbers big” — that creates noise, not signal. Better: pick 3-4 hero stats, render them dominant, and let the other 8 be a supporting matrix. The footer-claim (“largest group of HealthTech entrepreneurs, investors and experts in Europe”) is a strong line that gets buried if the slide is just a number grid.

Visual hierarchy I’d suggest

1. Headline + subhead
2. Hero stat — €>3B Combined Enterprise Value, dominant
3. Secondary stats — €>50M AuM / 60+ Portcos / >80% Follow-on / €>515M Follow-on raised — large but smaller than hero
4. Supporting stats — the remaining 7 — equal-weight matrix
5. Footer-claim — the largest group of HealthTech entrepreneurs / investors / experts in Europe — visible, italic or bordered
6. Caution: if the slide feels like a wall, drop two or three of the supporting stats — not every number on the source slide has to come along.