Angel Funders Report 2021

2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Letter from Our CEO ...............................................2
2021 Highlights ........................................................4
Introduction ..............................................................6
Angel Investing Today: 2020, A Year Like No Other ..........6
Key Findings ......................................................................8
2021 Investing by the Numbers .........................................9
Angel Groups Investing Patterns........................................9
Funding Rounds Insights ..................................................12
Valuation Trends .....................................................22
Portfolio Companies ...............................................26

Investment Types ..............................................................26
Company Tax Structure ...................................................27
Size Matters: Revenue and Employees ............................28
The Faces of Portfolio Company CEOs ............................32
Gender Diversity ............................................................33
Ethnic Diversity ..............................................................35
Angel Paydays: Focusing on Exits ...........................42
Angel Group Insights:

Building Economies, Together ................................45
Where Angels Invest: Industries .......................................45
Where Angels Invest: Reaching Beyond Home................45
How Angels Work: Team Differences ...............................51
ACA’s Most Active Angel Groups ....................................57
What’s Next ............................................................58
Appendix ................................................................60
The ACA Methodology ....................................................61
Participating ACA Member Groups .................................62
Glossary ............................................................................66
©2021 by Angel Capital Association. All rights reserved.
Angel Funders Report 2021 | 1

LETTER FROM OUR CEO
The Angel Funders Report:
Understanding Angels and Their Investments
The success of angel investing is based on identifying and capitalizing on
opportunities in changing, and often challenging, times. 2020 was a perfect
example, with the global pandemic impacting our lives and economies in
ways we could never have predicted.
When we published the 2020 Angel Funders Report, we were just

beginning to feel the pandemic’s impacts. We had a shaky first quarter and
didn’t know what to expect for the remainder of the year.
Today, we stand strong, with early-stage investing having grown in 2020.

ACA’s angel groups made more investments in more companies despite
the pandemic—continuing to risk personal capital to jumpstart businesses
and ignite economies. We can credit this resilience to the nature of angel
investors, who take calculated risks to support innovation and growth,
fueling the engine of our regional and national economies. The pandemic
brought its own opportunities, with companies developing new ways to
produce and deliver products and services. These start-ups captured our
support and investments, benefiting the entire entrepreneurial ecosystem.
Like the communities we represent and support, ACA as an organization also

had to respond to lockdowns, pivoting to a virtual world and withstanding a
challenging economic climate. Our goals of providing education, investment
insights, public policy support, and networking for angel investors didn’t
change, but our execution certainly did. Leveraging our members’ expertise,
we moved quickly to provide forums about how to cope, survive, and succeed
in the crisis. We also provided information and resources from the government
and others to help ensure that PPP loans and other funds were available to
entrepreneurs and start-ups.
One of the biggest, and ultimately most positive, moves was the transition
of ACA Angel University from in-person workshops to virtual classrooms,
2 | Letter from our CEO

which led to a 56% increase in the number of attendees. Educating angel
investors and all start-up ecosystem stakeholders leads to better investment
results and more successful start-ups.
Our 2020 data revealed important shifts in angel investments related

to ACA’s efforts in two key areas: expanding syndication and reach and
improving diversity. In the past year, more ACA angels invested outside
of their typical geographic reach, likely influenced by reduced physical
barriers due to virtual meetings and increased syndication between angel
groups. Deal syndication is very attractive because our angel groups have
very high standards of due diligence and when they share their portfolio
companies with other angel groups, powerful results happen for both the
investors and the companies.
On the diversity and inclusion front, another key ACA initiative, we are
pleased to report significant progress in 2020. The data shows an increase
in funding for companies led by women and Black CEOs. We will be
following these trends and working to ensure sustainable progress in the
coming years. Data we collect in the coming year about follow-on funding
will be a primary indicator of sustainability.
ACA’s Data Initiative, and its capstone publication, the Angel Funders
Report, provide data and insights on investment results over time. We
collect information directly from the actual investors, ensuring that we can
see and monitor trends as they happen.
We will continue to focus on measurement and analytics to help guide our

work. These insights are directly tied to the Angel Capital Association’s
mission of fueling the success of the angel investors and the overall
entrepreneurial ecosystem. We are committed to this mission, and we are
thankful for the opportunity to serve.
Patrick Gouhin
CEO, Angel Capital Association

ANGEL FUNDERS
2021 ACA Angel Groups invested
REPORT
FEATURES
Data from
$650M
participating angel in 2020
groups reporting
reflecting a growing
Angel portfolio companies
angel ecosystem
leveraged their angel
across North
America, where both
investments to raise
active investors and
promising startups
$4B TOTAL
benefit from angel
capital in every
state and region
Profiles and insights

from leading angel
investors, group This The median exit
leaders, and start-up represents multiple remains
company executives multiple of strong at
Analysis of group 6X 1.8X

investing structures
and their impact
on investments
4 | Highlights
REPORT 2021 HIGHLIGHTS
Each angel group invests about
$4.7M per year

across multiple companies
Angels are narrowing the gap, investing in
MORE DIVERSE FOUNDERS

than ever before
29% of Female CEOs Initial investments in Black-

led companies grew to
funded CEOs raised 93 cents
were female for every dollar 15% in 2020,
in 2020 raised by male CEOs a 5X increase
TOP INDUSTRIES FOR ANGEL GROUP INVESTMENTS

Clean
Medical/ Health Software Technology/
Biotechnology
Health Care Technology as a Service Green
Technology

INTRODUCTION
Angel Investing Today: 2020, A Year Like No Other
The Angel Capital Association (ACA) and its members have always known that
angel investing is not for the faint of heart. It’s an asset class built for risk takers,
innovators, and people with experience-based intuition about what it takes to
be successful. 2020, the year that will forever be known for the global pandemic,
demonstrated the fortitude necessary to be an angel.
The year began with strong growth for angel investors, quickly followed by
lockdown, confusion, re-examination, and eventually, resurgence. If 2020 taught
us nothing else, it demonstrated the incredible resiliency of both entrepreneurs
and early-stage investors.
As the largest association of angel investors in the world, ACA is committed to
providing essential data and analysis. Since angel investing often begins as an
informal relationship between entrepreneurs and angels, there is typically a data
gap at this important stage. There is little data about angel investing due to
the more intimate, less public nature of the asset class. We believe that angel-
collected and reported data provides more accurate and deeper insights. This
report represents the most comprehensive review of current investments from the
angel community available.
In 2018, ACA launched its data initiative to help early-stage investors make better
investment decisions, and to help the business community better understand
angel investing’s impact on new business formation, job growth, and economic
prosperity. The initiative also helps entrepreneurs gain a deeper understanding of
how and why angels invest, helping them prepare for raising capital and building
strong investor relationships.
The Angel Funders Report is based on direct investment data solicited from all
ACA member groups. We collect data directly from a broad spectrum of angel
investors, including leading angel groups across North America, so that we
can provide powerful first-hand information on the current state of early stage
investing. Our angel investing experts analyze and enhance the data with their
knowledge of trends and best practices, developing a comprehensive insider’s
view to share with the broader investment community. The ACA member
organizations that provide the information for this report take many forms—
6 | Introduction
groups of ACA members, angel networks, angel funds, networks with sidecar
funds, and more.
The Angel Funders Report, released annually, shows the impact that angel
investing has on innovation, the startup ecosystem, and the larger economy.
In 2021, we are happy to report that angel investing is strong and continues to
grow. Angels, and angel groups, invested more dollars in more companies than
prior years. During a year of constant change and uncertainty, angels continued
to provide unique support, funding, mentoring, and operational expertise to help
young companies survive and grow. Given the unparalleled breadth and depth
of the ACA networks, we estimate that ACA members volunteer more than one
million hours annually mentoring founders and their companies. With the help of
angels, portfolio companies pivoted to meet changing market needs and found
creative ways to keep their businesses afloat, including navigating the world of
PPP loans. Many portfolio companies reported that they applied for and received
these critical funds.
Funding from angels provided powerful leverage to startups, enabling companies
to raise $6 additional dollars for every dollar invested by angels. Overall, angel
portfolio companies raised more than $4 billion in 2020.
The pandemic also triggered changes in angel investing practices. After moving
to the world of “zooming,” angels expanded their investment radius. Almost half
of all deals in 2020 were done outside of the group’s local region. Angels also
increased their support of existing portfolio companies with more follow-on deals
after their initial funding.
In another key focus area for ACA, 2020 also saw an increase in the formation of
new angel organizations and ACA membership by women and people of color.
Women-led companies now represent almost one third of all investments, and
Black entrepreneurs captured a record 15% of first round angel dollars. Overall,
Black entrepreneurs captured 10% of all angel investment dollars, representing a
faster rate of change than venture capital diversity initiatives have been able
to produce.

KEY FINDINGS
Key findings from ACA’s 2020 data collection and analysis include:
Angel investors increased their investments in both initial rounds and follow-on
rounds, investing more dollars and investing in more companies than prior years.
The total amount invested in 2020 represents the highest total since we began
tracking this data.
ACA member groups invested approximately $650 million in 2020*. On
average, angel groups invested a total of $4.7 million per group, an increase of
15% from 2019.
Portfolio companies raised a total of more than $4 billion, leveraging their
initial angel investments by 6X.
Individual angels spread their investments among more deals in 2020,
investing in an average of 19 deals vs. 14 deals in 2019. The investment
amount per deals decreased about 15% vs. 2019 to $245K.
Diversity in angel investing increased significantly in 2020, with funding
gaps between male and female CEOs and between White and Black CEOs
narrowing. 29% of funded CEOs were female in 2020, and for all deals across
all stages, women raised 93% of the capital raised by men. Black CEOs have
significantly increased their proportion of funded deals and reduced the per-
deal funding gap, accounting for 10% of all CEOs receiving initial funding and
nearly 15% of all initial round capital.
Investments in the life sciences (health tech, medical tech, biotech) and in
enterprise technologies dominated other industries, consistent with prior
years with the added interest due to the drive to find societal level solutions to
COVID-19 challenges and pandemic remote working initiatives.
As reported elsewhere, pre-money valuations continued to increase in 2020
across all financing rounds.
Angel exits remained consistent with long-term angel and venture-backed
trends. 90% of exits are mergers and acquisitions, while less than 6% are a result
of IPO. The median exit multiple of invested capital remained strong at 1.8X.
*based on sample set weighting
8 | Introduction
INVESTING BY THE NUMBERS
Despite widespread turmoil and uncertainty, angels continued to invest in 2020,
which is significant given that unlike venture capitalists and other investors, angels
are investing their own personal funds. While VCs shifted their investment dollars
to later stage deals, angels doubled down to invest more dollars per group
in early-stage companies solidifying their role as the primary support for seed
stage investing. Angels invest in this asset class to leverage their experience and
expertise to help startups grow. They work with early-stage entrepreneurs closely,
often investing significant time and energy before investing dollars. Early-stage
investing is inherently risky — more than 50% of all businesses fail in their first five
years — and angels mitigate their risks by investing smaller amounts in multiple
investments across a variety of companies over time. Angel investors also balance
risk by investing with other angels.
Angel Groups Investing Patterns

On average, angel groups invested $4.7 million per group in 2020, 15% higher
than 2019 totals and more than 40% higher than 2018 totals. As shown in Figures
1 and 2A, B, and C, angel groups engaged in more deals in 2020, but the average
investment per deal was lower than 2019. Angels were mitigating their risks by
spreading their dollars across more companies.
Note: Figure 1 tracks the number of deals. Figures 2A and 2B track investments
by company. There can be multiple deals in one company, so the numbers do
not match.
FIGURE 1. Angels Engaged in More Deals in 2020
Per Group 2018 2019 2020
Average Investment $3.3M $4.0M $4.7M
Average # of Deals 16 14 19
Average Investment per deal $220K $293K $245K

FIGURE 2A. Angel Investment/Company Decreased
FIGURE 2B. # of Companies Invested In Grew
10 | Investing by the Numbers

The investments angels made in early-stage companies in 2020 powered local
and regional economies by giving entrepreneurs time to build out their products,
develop their business models, and refine their go-to-market strategies. Angel
investors are one of the very few sources of capital available to these early stage
companies. Nearly 50% of deals were $100K or less, and all but a few of the deals
were under the $1 million mark, as shown in Figure 2C. These critical investments
do not often get the attention they merit because the relative size of each
investment is considered small, but these dollars enable startups to meet key
milestones that will provide essential foundations for later investment by venture
capitalists and others.
FIGURE 2C. Most Angel Deals are Small
While the per-deal investment amount may be small, angel groups invested more
capital total in 2020, and increased their participation in larger deals. Angels are
one source of capital participating with others, including VCs, in early rounds of
funding, and 28% of angel investments in 2020 were part of a larger deals ($2.5
million–$5 million). This is a marked increase over 2019, when only 11% of angel
investments were part of a $2.5 million–$5 million deal. Angels actively participate
in early-stage follow-on funding. Their participation declines in later stage rounds
(Series D, E, etc). ACA analysts note that this may be a result of early-stage
companies creating more follow-on rounds sooner than usual, because they
needed more funds to survive the pandemic. Figure 3 shows that rounds valued

at less than $2.5 million, which are typically the dominant rounds for
angel investment, decreased from 2/3 of all investments to about half in 2020.
FIGURE 3. Groups Shifted Focus to Larger Deals
Funding Rounds Insights

Initial vs. Follow-on Rounds
As startup businesses become more mature, they advance through funding
rounds; typically, a company begins with a small seed round and raises
progressively larger Series A, B, and sometimes C or even more funding rounds.
The terms “Initial vs. Follow-on” fundings are defined by the action of the angel
investor. The first investment an angel makes in a company is that angel’s “initial”
investment. All subsequent investments made by that same investor in the same
company are called “follow-on investments.” Therefore, an initial investment by
one angel may be a follow-on investment for a different angel. Many groups tend
to make a smaller initial investment, then track the company’s progress, investing
again as the company makes progress against its milestones and needs to raise
additional funding.

Seed and Series A rounds remain the most common activity points for angel
investors. In this early stage, companies are typically raising smaller amounts
of money, but this is the vital capital that will help them refine their products,
establish product/market fit, achieve milestones needed for higher valuations at
the next round, build connections, and prove viability. Angel investors, with their
mentorship and experience-based advice, generally have the greatest influence
on the company during this stage of its development.
In terms of the amount invested in each deal, the range is similar for initial
and follow-on deals. Figure 4 shows that in 2020, the average follow-on deal
size increased by more than 25% to $283K. Angels continued to invest in new
opportunities and, at the same time, increased their support of existing
portfolio companies.
FIGURE 4. Follow-on Deals Attached More $ Per Deal in 2020

CANDOO TECH LEVERAGES
PANDEMIC PIVOT capitalize
on $56 Billion Market
Candoo Tech, launched as an in-person service in 2019, provides
tech support and training to help older adults more easily use
personal technology. Founder Liz Hamburg, a serial technology
entrepreneur, was inspired by watching her aging father go from tech
lover to someone struggling to use technology independently.
Hamburg’s original business model was face-to-face interaction with
consumer customers. A key differentiator was help desk support experts,
including former Apple Geniuses, as “Tech Concierges” and training
them to address the needs of older adults using geriatric doctors, vision
and hearing impairment specialists, and enrichment therapists.
Candoo Tech was able to raise some investment by early 2020. It
was a challenge because in-person services are hard to scale.
Then, the pandemic forced client interactions online, totally disrupting
their model. Hamburg saw this as a major opportunity, pivoting to remote
services enabling nationwide expansion. They could reduce costs, expand
customer reach, and concierges to work remotely from anywhere in the US.
The pandemic also revealed how critical using technology was to
combatting senior social isolation. Senior living facilities, Area Agencies
on Aging (AAAs) and other social service agencies needed help in getting
their clients ˮconnected.” Candoo Tech had what they needed.
After a March 2020 New York Times article, Candoo Tech was flooded with calls.
Liz leveraged her prior senior services connections and the expertise of her team
to pivot to a B2B model providing a tech-enabled service platform on a national
basis. The main business became multi-user contracts, providing remote one-
to-one support and group lessons, as well as setting up and managing devices.
According to Hamburg, “as terrible as the Pandemic has been, it’s given
us the tailwinds to scale significantly. The need for older adults to be able
to use technology to stay safe, connected and engaged has become even

As terrible as the Pandemic
has been, it’s given us
the tailwinds to scale
significantly.”
clearer and Candoo has become the leading Liz Hamburg

expert in understanding the needs of older
adults to get comfortable with their technology.”
Candoo Tech was part of the inaugural Techstars’
Future of Longevity cohort. and has been
featured by AARP and others. Vodia Ventures
were the first investors, followed by Techstars,
Rockie Venture Club (RVC) and others including AAA of Washington.
According to Doug Mandic, who led the investment team at RVC, “The
opportunity to invest in Liz was a key factor for us. As angel investors,
it’s rare to have the chance to invest in a founder with the experience,
maturity and pedigree that Liz brings to the mission. Helping the aging
community be less fearful of technology is also a problem we want to
solve, an important dimension for impact-oriented investors.”
Through the end of 2020, Candoo Tech raised a series seed of $750K and
booked $150K in revenue. In 2021, the company is on track to generate
$500K in revenue, with their client base doubling with thousands of users
today, across 32 states. Candoo Tech is winning contracts against major
players in the space and attracting the attention of more investors.
In the long term, Hamburg envisions using the data they collect to
provide feedback to technology manufacturers on how to better equip
their products for aging populations. And now, health plans are also
recognizing need for payors to support tech-enabled solutions for their
clients and reaching out to Candoo Tech. This story has just begun.

FIGURE 5. Groups Increased Both Their Initial and Follow-on Deals
In 2020, angel groups increased the number of both their initial and follow-on
investments, reflecting their commitment to support companies throughout the
pandemic, as shown in Figure 5. The typical group executed over 30% more deals
in spite of 2020 being a challenging year.
Given the focus on early-stage investments, it is less common for angels to make
an initial investment in a later stage, larger round when a company is raising more
than $10 million. Most angel deals are done during smaller, earlier rounds, when
angels have more leverage in setting the terms and positively influencing the
companies since their investments represent a larger portion of the total shares.
With impact far beyond their investment dollars in these early rounds, angels
make sure companies are well managed and mentor CEOs to help them grow
successful companies (Figure 6).

FIGURE 6. Most Initial Deals Are In Smaller Rounds
Seed vs. Later Stage Investments

While the preponderance of angel investing activity is in the earliest funding
rounds, Figure 7 shows an increase in funding through later rounds, with more
than 40% of angel capital going into Series A deals. Series B & C deals represent
a small sample size within this study, resulting in some of the annual variation, but
it is noteworthy to recognize that about 25% of angel funding in 2020 occurred
during Series B and Series C rounds.

FIGURE 7. Series A Funding Grew in 2020
In 2020, deal size for seed rounds was around $100,000 and deal size for Series A
rounds was around $120,000. Although there is not a huge difference in the size
of investments, the number of Series A+ and later deals increased significantly,
reflecting the angels’ continued support for companies as they progress and
continue to reduce risks (Figure 8).

FIGURE 8. Later Stage Deals Gathered Larger Median Investments
Angels are often active investors, not passive investors, and dollars alone fail to
tell that story.
While angels are often the first professional money in many seed deals, they
are seldom the only investors in the deal. Angels have their greatest influence
in the earliest rounds; as shown in Figure 9, angels contribute 43% of the total
amount invested during these rounds. Building the “right” structure and creating
relationships with other investors, including venture capitalists, is critical to the
future success of the angel investments. The ability to invest in later rounds is often
related to the terms set in the seed rounds, giving investor participation rights in
future rounds. This demonstrates the importance of the role angels need to play in
building relationships and setting deal terms in those early initial rounds.
The initial angel investors often play a critical role in bringing in other angels
and other investors via deal syndication. In the earliest rounds, the trust
built among ACA member groups driving syndicated deals is critical to a
company’s long-term success.

FIGURE 9. Angels Play Their Strongest Role in Seed Rounds
As round sizes increase, it becomes progressively harder for angels to invest the
amount of capital required to obtain meaningful equity in that round. When an
angel group invests $100,000 in a $1 million round, they represent 10% of the
total capital invested. In terms of the post-funding actual equity in the company,
this may be only 2-3% of the total equity. When the round is $10 million, their
investment equals only 1% (and only 0.2-0.3% of the post funding total equity), so
their financial impact is significantly less.

FIGURE 10. VCs Decreased Their Role in Early-Stage Investing in 2020
As shown in Figure 10, venture capitalists invested 5X more than angels in 2019,
but only 3X more than angels in 2020. This is due, in part, to the flight of venture
capitalists to much later stage opportunities and a significant reduction of venture
capitalist funding of Seed and Series A round companies. This trend, reported
extensively by other organizations, is confirmed in our report.

VALUATION TRENDS
Pre-money valuations continued to increase in 2020 across all financing rounds.
As shown in Figure 11, seed stage valuations saw the smallest increases at
8%, while later stage deals dominated by venture capitalists saw much more
dramatic increases of more than 20%. This data is consistent with other reports,
highlighting the strong activity in IPOs and SPACs that is driving up overall
valuations. Valuations are also being driven up by the willingness of investors to
pay more for what they perceive to be less risky, more “mature” companies. This
is a trend that will be followed closely in the coming years.
FIGURE 11. Valuations Are Rising Especially in Later Stages
Despite these growing valuations, angels continue to show the greatest interest
and participation in lower, more reasonably valued rounds. Historically, the
amounts angels invested per deal did not vary greatly based on the overall deal
valuation. Angels invested between $100-$150K per deal, whether the valuation
was under $2.5 million or up to $20 million. Investments only increased to more
than $200K when valuations hit the $20 million+ level. In 2020, this behavior
changed, and angels demonstrated a strong preference for rounds valued at less
22 | Valuation Trends
than $5 million. Angel investments in rounds under $2.5 million increased almost
70%, to $224K, as shown in Figure 12. Median angel investments in $5 million+
rounds decreased. This data will be analyzed in coming years to determine if this
is a one-time response to an uncertain economic environment or part of a longer-
term trend.
FIGURE 12. Angels Invested More at Lower Valuations

This valuation sensitivity may also be seen in the regional valuation information.
As seen in Figure 13, across regions, there was not an increase in valuation over
2019, with most regions pricing rounds between $5 million and $7 million as
compared to $6 million in 2019. The New York and California markets have higher
valuations ($8 million-$10 million), but these numbers stayed steady from 2019.
ACA analysts also noted the higher caps on notes seen in most regional markets
and hypothesize that entrepreneurs may have wanted to delay pre-money
valuations in the hopes that post-pandemic valuations would be higher.
FIGURE 13. Valuations Varied More by Region in 2020
As shown in Figure 14, valuations continue to vary significantly by sector. The

highest seed valuations were seen in financial technology (one of the most
competitive sectors) and clean technology (one of the most capital-intensive
sectors with $10 million-$15 million) and the lowest seed valuations were seen in
educational technology and food technology ($4 million). These two industries
were negatively impacted by the pandemic, perhaps leading to lower valuations.
Retail technology valuations increased, perhaps driven by an influx of innovative
solutions in a rapidly changing marketplace and by the change in consumer
behavior favoring new at-home delivery services driven by the pandemic. Health
care valuations, despite strong deal activity, did not increase in 2020.
24 | Valuation Trends
FIGURE 14. Fintech and Clean/Greentech Lead Valuations

PORTFOLIO COMPANIES
Investment Types
The type of investment is a critical factor in making an investment decision.
Preferred equity deals consistently attract the most capital, representing 46%,
followed by convertible debt at about 40% (Figure 15). Together, these two
securities represent more than 85% of all deals. This trend is consistent over time,
with a slight increase in convertible debt during 2020. ACA analysts note that
companies may be delaying priced rounds in the hopes of increasing pre-money
valuation. This is explored further in the valuation section of the report.
The greatest change in security type was the increase in the use of SAFE notes.
In 2020, they accounted for over 8% of all deals, more than doubling their share
from 2019. Historically, “pre-money” SAFE notes have been favored by some
incubators and accelerators as a low-cost and fast way to execute many small pre-
seed deals. Newer, “post-money” SAFE notes are now competing with traditional
priced rounds and convertibles for seed and Series A deals. This should concern
angels as these SAFE notes lack most of the investor protections of traditional
convertibles and priced rounds. While preferred shares and convertible notes
are used broadly, SAFE usage is found more in select regions. ACA analysts will
discuss this further in the regional investments section of the report.
FIGURE 15. Preferred Equity and Convertible Debt Dominate Angel Deals
26 | Portfolio Companies
Company Tax Structure
While the business model and management team of each startup are the most
essential factors in early-stage investment decisions, deal terms and company
tax structures are also important considerations because both can impact angel
investment returns. Investor preference for C corps has not changed in several
years, representing almost 90% of all deals. While there is increasing discussion
among ESG focused investment groups about impact/mission driven investing,
this has not translated to broad adoption by angels of the often-publicized B corp
structure*, as shown in Figure 16.
FIGURE 16. C Corp Dominate Company Structures
* To learn more about the purpose and structure of B Corps, see:

www.uschamber.com/co/start/strategy/b-corp-advantages-and-requirements

Size Matters: Revenue and Employees
While angels prefer early-stage companies for initial investments, they still favor
companies that have begun to generate revenue, even if that revenue is very
small. Nearly 50% of revenue stage companies funded by angels had less than
$1 million in revenues, with most having revenues under $500K, as shown in
Figure 17. There was a 50% increase in the funding of pre-revenue companies,
representing one third of angel investments in 2020, perhaps a reflection of
unusual market conditions. Many of these pre-revenue companies were in health
care and information technology sectors.
FIGURE 17. Angels Continue To Invest Early in the Revenue Cycle
Many angels’ portfolio companies have very few employees at time of investment.
Figure 18 shows that 75% of companies have 5 or fewer employees at time of
funding. Often, angels play a unique role in providing essential expertise in the
early stages of company growth, in addition to their financial investment. One
important use of seed funding is building out management teams and other key
positions needed to drive company growth.
Company maturity, as indicated by number of employees, did correlate with the
amount of capital that angels invested. Figure 18 shows that companies with
more than 5 employees received 20% more funding and that companies with 50
or more employees received double the funding of less mature businesses.
It is likely that companies with smaller teams were still in product development or
pre-revenue stages, while larger teams indicate a need for significant investment
in sales, marketing, business development, people, and programs, requiring much
more capital.
FIGURE 18. Most Companies Have 5 or Fewer

Employees When Angels Invest

FINDING INVESTORS THAT
“GET IT” Leads to Success for
Sevetri Wilson and Resilia
Being an entrepreneur is never easy, but it’s especially challenging when
you’re a Black female in New Orleans, raising money to build a for-
profit company whose customers are non-profits. That’s what makes the
Resilia story so interesting—its founder and CEO, Sevetri Wilson, has
raised more capital than any other female founder in Louisiana history,
and, like the name of her company, is a shining example of resilience.
Founded by serial entrepreneur Sevetri Wilson in 2016, Resilia’s mission is to
democratize innovation for the entire nonprofit industry, where Wilson spent
her early career as a consultant. Resilia harnesses the power of technology and
human connection to bridge gaps between those deploying capital and those
on the receiving end, Sevetri recognized there was a huge opportunity to using
technology to simplify the back office for both non-profits and their funders.
The company’s two-sided SaaS platform provides excellent “land and expand”
customer building opportunities. Non-profits use Resilia to simplify their
back office and grant application processes. Grantors use the platform to
manage their grantees. This naturally leads to a flywheel effect which has
fueled the company’s growth. And the increase in grant funding by both
NGOs and government agencies fueled by Pandemic-related spending
presents future opportunities to expand into the government space. While
traditional angel investors did not recognize the potential early on, JumpFund
and Next Wave Impact Fund, two angel funds that focus on women
entrepreneurs did. From providing essential early capital and introductions
to expand the company’s investor base to follow-on investments throughout
later rounds, the two funds have helped fuel the company’s success.
Kristina Montague, managing partner for JumpFund, has served as a board
director since that initial funding and has guided Sevetri and the company.
“We recognized the potential early on. And have given her the guidance and
We focus on staying resilient,
paying attention to the
investors who ‘get it,’ and
supporting our clients. Lots of
‘no’s’ will lead to a
'yes' if you stay committed.”
Sevetri Wilson
introductions to help the company grow. Early

investors introduced the Resilia leadership
team to some of their most powerful Series
A investors, including Mucker Capital,Callais
Capital, Cultivation Capital and Softbank. The
company has benefited from further angel
involvement, citing interest from newer angels
focusing on underrepresented founders.
To date, Resilia has raised $11 million, has
44 employees and boasts 2,800+ customer
including small to mid-sized nonprofits,
government offices, private foundations,
and corporations. Notable customers
include Oxfam America, Kellogg, The
United Way, and Stem Library Lab.
“We focus on staying resilient, paying
attention to the investors who ‘get Kristina Montague
it,’ and supporting our clients,” said
Wilson. “Lots of ‘no’s’ will lead to a
'yes' if you stay committed.”

The Faces of Portfolio Company CEOs
Angel investors often stress the importance of the management team when
making investment decisions. Interestingly, this does not mean that the CEO of
the prospect company must have prior CEO experience, although a strong track
record may enable companies to raise more capital. In fact, angels are very willing
to fund first time CEOs. Figure 19 shows over 60% of CEOs funded by angels
were led by first-time CEOs. This has been consistent over the years.
FIGURE 19. Angels Consistently Back New CEOs
Gender Diversity FIGURE 20. Female-
led Companies Are
2020 showed continued growth in the number of
Gathering More of
angel-funded female-led companies, with an increase
the Investment Pie
of 10%. As shown in Figure 20, female CEOs now lead
29% of all angel funded companies.
Women-led companies also made significant progress
in closing the overall funding gap in 2020, raising
an average of $224K vs. an average of $240K for
male CEOs, as shown in Figure 21. In 2019, women-
led companies raised only 75% as much capital as
male-led companies. In 2020, female CEOs raised 93
cents for every dollar raised by a male CEO. Funding
differences by gender follow similar trends whether it
is an initial or follow-on round.
FIGURE 21. Female CEOs Are Closing the Funding Gap

There are no significant differences in the top sectors where CEOs build their
companies, as shown in Figure 22. The top three sectors of medical/health care,
health technology, and software as a service align.
The data shows increasing gender diversity over the years, reflecting the active
focus this area has received and the development of specific programs from ACA
and others over the past few years. Several women-focused angel funds have
been created over the last several years, including Golden Seeds, Next Wave, and
Portfolia, which has driven many of these deals. These initiatives are showing
very positive results, outpacing gender diversity results seen with later stage
venture capitalist investments.
FIGURE 22. Medical and Healthcare Are Leading Sectors
Ethnic Diversity
The angel community is also making progress on increasing the ethnic diversity
of funded companies, albeit at a slower pace than progress made in gender
diversity. 2020 was a great year for Black entrepreneurs, whose first-round funding
increased to 15% of total dollars, higher than their percentage of representation
within the population*, as seen in Figures 23 and 24. This marks a major increase
from prior years. Funding for Asian CEOs declined slightly in 2020 from past years
at 6% of total funding. Historically, Asians have been the largest ethnic segment
outside of Whites. Share of capital raised by White CEOs fell 15% from more than
90% of first round dollars to less than 78% in 2020. This figure is in line with the
percentage of Whites within the US population.
FIGURE 23. Initial Funding for Black CEOs More Than Doubled in 2020
* Blacks represent 12% of U.S. population

INVESTORS OF COLOR
NETWORK: New Models to
Close the Racial Funding Gap
Several years ago, ACA Board member Eli Velasquez was managing an
angel investor network made up of mostly older White men, located in a
town on the border between the US and Mexico. The population of the
community, with almost 1 million people, was 80% Hispanic—but not even
one of the angel group’s investments backed entrepreneurs of color.
On the opposite side of the diversity spectrum, Velasquez also
spent time working in a West Texas community with 80% White
residents. He recalls meeting a young, White male with interest
in angel investing who couldn’t connect with the right people
and didn’t feel he had an avenue for making investments.
“At that point, I realized we need to improve access to angel networks
for all demographics, and we need purposeful programs to find investors
of color and connect them with entrepreneurs of color. That’s why
we founded the Investors of Color Network,” says Velasquez.
The Investors of Color Network (ICN) exists to bridge the funding gap
for diverse founders, including members of the Black, Latinx, and Asian
communities. The group invests in the health, wealth, and social mobility of
communities of color by investing directly in companies and as limited partners
in emerging diversity focused funds. Within the ACA, ICN addresses the
need to expand by engaging new, diverse investors and mobilizing capital.
In the wake of racial unrest in the United States, the Investors of Color
Network is gaining more traction, with interest from the community,
individual investors, and investment funds. The group currently has 50
active members and 15 fund managers, with 600 people in their database
who’ve expressed interest in learning more about their programs. Deals
Our aspiration is to activate
10,000 investors of color to
invest $10K each, deploying
$100M into the ecosystem
by 2025."
Eli Velasquez
have ranged from seed funding to Series B opportunities, with a total

funding deployed of over $4 million to companies and emerging funds.
The group spends significant time and effort on outreach, hand curating
and vetting prospective investments and members. “Our aspiration
is to activate 10,000 investors of color to invest $10K each, deploying
$100M into the ecosystem by 2025,” said Velasquez. “Together,
we’re working to eliminate the silos in capital and improve deal flow
across the ecosystem by creating a trusted community of accredited
investors of color that are actively syndicating and investing.”
The Investors of Color Network also features ACA Chair Marcia Dawood
on its advisory board, reflecting the importance and alignment to the ACA
to the group’s mission to increase the diversity of founders and funders.

FIGURE 24. $ Invested by Ethnicity (Initial vs. Follow-on)
The progress made in ethnic diversity did not come at the expense of one group
over another and total investments grew for all segments.
More diverse profiles of leadership did not trigger a change in the top investment
sectors, with more than 90% of dollars going to the top three segments: medical/
healthcare, health care technology, and software as a service, as seen in Figure 25.
FIGURE 25. Top Markets by Race of CEOs
Investors are attracted to certain industries based on the underlying sector

opportunities. The gender or ethnicity of the CEO is not a factor in this. Industry
investment interest is generally consistent with prior years although 2020 saw a
slight increase in life science/medically related industries.

DISCOVER ECHO:
Powerful Product Combined with a
World-Class Team Drives 5x Return
Pitch competitions, like those held at ACA events throughout the
year, are a great source for new and promising deals. Tech Coast
Angels’ San Diego network met the founder of Discover Echo at its
2016 Quick Pitch competition, kicking off a successful relationship
that resulted in a big payday for the company and its investors.
Tech Coast Angels were very impressed with the technology and the team
behind Discover Echo’s Revolve microscope—the company was awarded
the Grand Prize at the competition, with a cash prize of $15,000.
TCA went on to generate one of the largest initial funding seed rounds in the
network’s history for Discover Echo (then called Echo Labs): $2 million in less
than two months, leveraging the deep life sciences expertise from TCA members
during due diligence. Dean Rosenberg (the TCA member that lead the diligence)
joined the Board to help guide the success of the company. “In the early days,
we were really excited about Eugene and his vision,” said Dean Rosenberg, who
also served as TCA deal lead across all three investment rounds. “As time went
on, we saw that vision turn to execution as Discover Echo’s expanded product
line was adopted by some of the most respected names in the industry.”
“The core of our team is based around sales experience in this industry.
When we saw this market opportunity, we were able to pull together a
great engineering team, which built a great product. Once we started to
showcase it, it was a very easy value proposition,” said CEO Eugene Cho in an
interview. “You have to have a real, keen understanding of how the product is
commercially viable, and have a commercialization strategy to be successful.”
Over the past five years, Discover Echo has gone from strength to
strength, launching two more innovative microscopy products and
raising two additional rounds of funding in 2018 and 2020. In total,
TCA members invested $2.9 million across the three financing rounds,
but helped raise a total of over $14 million in those rounds.
Introducing new, disruptive
products to an entrenched
market is hard enough—but
macro events also required
the team to navigate other
challenges, like the China tariffs
and the COVID pandemic."
Eugene Cho
“We were also impressed with Eugene and his
team. Introducing new, disruptive products
to an entrenched market is hard enough—
but macro events also required the team to
navigate other challenges, like the China tariffs
and the COVID pandemic,” said Rosenberg.
Cellink approached them in late 2020. At the
time, the company wasn’t for sale. “Eugene
and our board of directors almost dismissed
Cellink’s initial interest, but that interest turned
into action and we were able to complete a
transaction that was a win for all,” explained
Rosenberg, selling the company to Cellink
(now BICO Group AB) for $110M in July 2021.
TCA members who invested received an all-cash return, earning up
to 5x their investment. With a total of $2.9 million invested by TCA
members, that translates into a combined gain for TCA members
across all rounds of over $9.4 million (or 4.2x overall). The company
will retain its local office San Diego office and Eugene Cho will
continue to drive the business, a sure sign for a bright future.

ANGEL PAYDAYS:
FOCUSING ON EXITS
While angels invest in early-stage companies for many reasons, generating a
financial return via a successful exit is an essential part of the investment equation.
One of the key functions of the Angel Funders Report and the ACA Data Initiative
is to gather information on exits, with a goal of building data over time so that we
can provide meaningful, actionable insights on what drives successful exits.
Exit data from 2020 consistent with past FIGURE 26. M&A Dominate Exits
years shows that about 2/3 of exits are
the result of an exit transaction, and 1/3
of businesses do not survive. Nearly
90% of the intentional transactions
are mergers and acquisitions (which
is consistent with exit trends over the
past 20 years) as shown in Figure 26.
Many entrepreneurs have IPO dreams,
but IPOs are a rare exit mechanism
for most startups, with less than 6% of
businesses achieving IPO status. These
trends are consistent over time and will likely continue given the preference for
large companies to acquire rather than innovate from within. However, ACA
analysts note growing use of Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs) and
increased focus on anti-trust regulations for larger companies as two factors that
may lead to more IPOs in the future. ACA will continue to monitor these trends
over time.
Companies with the most exits continue to be from the life sciences and
enterprise software/software-as-a-service sectors. Life science companies also
tend to produce the most IPOs, as shown in Figure 27.
The success of an exit is typically measured as a multiple of the dollars invested,
and in 2020, the average multiple was relatively high at 9.6X the invested capital.
This average was likely influenced by several large exits, so it’s important to look
at the range of exits in addition to the average. Merger and acquisition exits
42 | Angel Paydays: Focusing on Exits

ranged from 0 to 1,000X, as shown in Figure 28. We must remember that IPOs
serve different purposes for technology and life science companies. IPOs are an
“exit” for technology companies. For life science companies, mid-stage IPOs are
fundraising events and are part of a longer journey.
FIGURE 27. SaaS and Health Care Lead Exits; Life Sciences Lead IPOs
FIGURE 28. Exit Multiples for Ongoing Businesses
Type of Group # of Exits % Minimum Median Maximum
IPO/RTO 18 5.9% 0.5 3.2 234.7
M&A 274 89.3% 0.0 1.6 1,000.0
Secondary Market 15 4.9% 0.1 3.1 31.1
Total 307 100.0% 0.0 1.8 1,000.0

Additional insights from this data give us a broader perspective on the wide range
of results. ACA analysts note that 7 out of the last 10 years, 50% or more exits
made investors money over and above their initial investment. The past decade
has been a more profitable one than the prior decade for angel investors, likely
due to recent exit exuberance in public markets. ACA’s ability to interpret exit
information will grow significantly over time, given these factors:
There is a significant time span between initial angel investments and exits—
often, 5-7 years (and ACA’s Angel Funders Report is now in its third full year),
which is consistent with both venture capital and angel statistics for many
years.
Angels tend to report more positive exits and underreport investments that
become “zombies” (still existing, but barely) or those that go out of business—
some angel investments just languish or fade away over time
Gathering and interpreting exit data will continue to be a focus for ACA’s Data
Initiative.
44 | Angel Paydays: Focusing on Exits

ANGEL GROUP INSIGHTS:
BUILDING ECONOMIES,
TOGETHER
Where Angels Invest: Industries
Angel investing tends to follow the trends of venture capital investments, and
2020 was no exception, with health care and IT segments representing more
than 70% of deals (Figure 29). ACA analysts attribute this continued dominance
to increased needs for work-from-home technologies and associated security,
network, and storage solutions. Life sciences, including medical care, healthcare
technology, and biotechnology together accounted for more than 40% of all
deals, with an increased focus on health care delivery, telehealth, and other
remote services. Pandemic-related technologies for diagnosis, remediation, and
treatment, including protective equipment and mental health services, have also
increased. Many young companies started or pivoted to address these unique
challenges and opportunities.
It is worth noting that although medical care and health care technology
segments dominated the number of deals, these were not the segments that
garnered the highest valuations (see Figure 16 earlier in this report).
Where Angels Invest: Reaching Beyond Home

Historically, angels tend to invest close to home, in their local communities and
regions. However, in 2020, angels increased their out-of-region investment dollars
by more than 30%. Rather than staying close to home during the pandemic, angel
investors cast a wider net, doing 19% more deals outside of their home regions
than in 2019. ACA analysts attribute this change to a shift in the way angels meet
and network. Virtual meetings have broadened the visibility of out-of-region deals
for angel groups, and the ease of evaluating opportunities over Zoom and other
platforms has enabled more investment. Figure 30 shows that angels from six out
of the eleven regions tracked invested in more out-of-area deals than they did
in 2019, and eight regions invested more dollars outside of their region than the
previous year. The Mid-Atlantic region led the way in out-of-region deals, followed
by California, New York, and the Southwest. The Mid-Atlantic and Southwest
regions invested more than 60% of total dollars outside of their home regions.

FIGURE 29. Healthcare Segments Continue to Lead
46 | Angel Group Insights: Building Economies, Together

FIGURE 30. Mid-Atlantic, New York & California Lead With Out of Area Deals

BAYLOR ANGEL NETWORK:
A Win-Win Partnership for Investors,
Entrepreneurs, and Students
The Baylor Angel Network (BAN) collaborates with Baylor University to
provide funding to entrepreneurial ventures and offers an innovative
experiential education program to top university students. BAN and
their portfolio companies have a strong track record built on combining
education, mentorship, and data - a story with a fascinating twist.
The BAN was launched in 2008 to engage alumni and offer a hands-
on educational opportunity for Baylor students. Through the Hankamer
School of Business, students work as analysts to help identify, research,
and screen prospective companies. BAN members are primarily, but not
exclusively, Baylor alumni. Companies funded do not need to have a
university connection. When investments generate returns, angels often
gift a portion of the profits back to the Hankamer School of Business.
“Baylor Angel Network’s differentiator for investors and entrepreneurs is the
devoted student analysts. The differentiator for students from other Baylor
business organizations is the real-world experience,” explains Steven Diedrich,
BAN Executive Director. “Employers recognize the value of this innovative
program, with our students often receiving higher salaries than most MBAs.”
Diedrich himself was a student analyst in the program’s early years and
came back as lead in 2019. When Diedrich took the reins, the angel network
membership had dwindled to 31. He focused on improving several key areas:
Deal flow quality through personal outreach and relationship networking
Cultivating mentoring relationships between students and entrepreneurs
Leveraging promising deals to recruit more angel members
Recruiting younger accredited investors to bring new energy to the group
Members of BAN have also launched a separate sidecar fund to
attract new investors and help members diversify their portfolio. It
aims to invest $5 million across 20 companies over three years.

Baylor Angel Network’s
differentiator for investors
and entrepreneurs is the
devoted student analysts. The
differentiator for students
from other Baylor business
organizations is the real-world
experience." Steven Diedrich
Today, the Baylor Angel Network boasts 90 members

and has invested $24 million in more than 70 companies.
Most BAN members live in Texas, and about half of the
deals are Texas-based. The average investment per deal is
around $250K. In 2020, the group invested $3.7 million in
11 deals—eight of them new and three follow-on. Through the university,
87 students have been through the BAN analyst program from a variety
of backgrounds and degree programs—finance, engineering , and the
sciences. The current analyst class includes five women and three men.
2020 was a banner year for the BAN—not just because of investment activity,
but rather from a very successful exit—Modern Message, a residential
engagement platform for multi-family properties was acquired by RealPage.
Angels generated a greater than 30x return after seven years. Overall,
members of the Baylor Angel Network received over $9 million from
three positive exits in 2020, with an average holding time of 6-7 years.
The Baylor Angel Network is an innovative model of collaboration
between academia and business leaders. While being an active angel
network that also provides opportunities for students to get hands-
on investing experience. This is definitely a model to be watched.

Investment rounds varied greatly by region in 2020. New England saw a median
investment over $1M, while the Southeast has the smallest median investment,
perhaps reflecting the large number of active angel groups in the region
(Figure 31A).
FIGURE 31A. East Coast Regions Have the Largest Median Investments
Investment vehicles also vary by region, although preferred shares and convertible
notes dominate overall. The mix of these instruments is different across regions.
For example, Figure 31B shows that convertible notes represent more than 50%
of deals in the Mid-Atlantic region. SAFEs represent about 8% of deals across
regions, except for California and Texas, where they are more popular.
FIGURE 31B. SAFEs Are Used More in West Coast and Texas

How Angels Work—Team Differences
ACA often refers to angel investing as a team sport and understanding how angel
groups operate is key to understanding the investing ecosystem and what’s on the
horizon. ACA is comprised of investor groups of all sizes, but most groups (more
than 80%) have fewer than 100 individual members. Half of all ACA angel groups
have fewer than 50 members. Only ten groups have more than 200 members, and
the median group size is 69 members.
FIGURE 32. Larger Groups Drive Larger Investments
There are some key differences between differently sized groups, and for the
purposes of analyzing data, we’ve split the groups into categories: large groups
(more than 50 members) and small groups (fewer than 50 members). Large groups
invest more dollars overal (Figure 32). They also do almost double the number of
deals per year, because they have greater deal capacity with more staff and more
members to conduct due diligence, arrange meetings to discuss opportunities,
etc. Smaller groups invest in around 11 deals per year, at a lower dollar amount
than larger groups, as shown in Figures 33, and 34A.

FIGURE 33. Large Groups Invest More in More Deals
FIGURE 34A. $ Invested in 2020 by Size of Angel Group

Larger angel groups also tend to use SAFEs more often as their investment
vehicle, as seen in Figure 34B. ACA analysts are evaluating whether this is a
function of size or a result of the location of the angel groups, as California and
Texas have large angel groups and they are in a region where SAFEs are more
common.
FIGURE 34B. Larger Groups Use SAFEs More Than Others
In addition to group size, the length of time the group has been in existence is
also a key factor influencing deal flow. Groups that have been operating for fewer
than five years invested significantly fewer dollars annually. The average deal size
was also substantially smaller for these younger groups, as shown in Figure 35.
The trend line indicates a positive correlation between the dollars invested and
the age of the group, which makes sense because it can take angel groups several
years to coalesce and embrace best practices. Larger and more active ACA angel
groups, who are also major contributors to ACA’s Data Initiative, can help newer
groups accelerate their learning curves and establish smart practices. Shared
learning from reports like this one, along with ACA Angel University and other
educational opportunities, can add essential value for newer groups.

FIGURE 35. Total Annual $ Invested by Age of Angel Group
While total investments may vary greatly based on group size or age, Figure 36
shows that individual member participation does not vary. No matter the size or
age of the group, most deals have 5 or fewer members participating and 75%
have fewer than 10 investors. This pattern is consistent with prior years.

FIGURE 36. Most Deals Have 5 or Fewer Members Participating
As discussed in earlier sections of this report, angel investors often provide advice
and mentorship to portfolio companies, in addition to dollars invested. It is not
unusual for angel investors to join the board of directors of portfolio companies.
Figure 37 shows that angels join the board in about 30% of deals. This seems to be
a win-win scenario, with portfolio companies benefiting from additional guidance
and more capital. Since the dominant investor group tends to receive the board
seat and to exercise greatest influence over the term sheet, it is not surprising that
groups receiving board seats invested 2X more than those that did not.

FIGURE 37. Board Participation Leads to Larger Investments

ACA’s Most Active Angel Groups
ACA is thankful for its angel groups support of the ACA Data Initiative. Among
the groups submitting their data in 2020, Figures 38 and 39 show the 15 most
active groups based on total dollars invested and the number of deals funded.
FIGURE 38. 2020 Top 15 Groups by Investment Dollars
INVESTED MORE
THAN $15M
INVESTED BETWEEN
$10-15M
INVESTED LESS
THAN $10M
FIGURE 39. 2020 Top 15 Groups by Number of Investments
INVESTED IN
MORE THAN
40 DEALS
INVESTED IN
31-40 DEALS
INVESTED
IN 30 OR
FEWER DEALS

WHAT’S NEXT
The Angel Funders Report is a snapshot of the state of angel investing and a
foundation for continued analysis and exploration of trends. In last year’s report,
we highlighted six major areas for additional exploration:
The role of syndication
Initial vs. follow-on funding
The role of gender and ethnicity in portfolio company performance
Changing industry trends
Variables affecting angel group performance based on size and lifecycle
Emerging investing models
Exit factors
This year’s report provided a deeper dive into initial vs. follow-on funding, the role
of gender and ethnicity, changing industry trends, and angel group performance
differences. We will continue to build on this work in the coming years. This includes:
Facilitating syndication and understanding its impact on investment
performance will continue to be an ACA priority.
Closely monitoring gender and ethnic performance trends to determine if the
ethnic and gender gains seen in 2020 are sustainable. It will be important to
track follow-on funding to ensure continued progress toward the elimination of
the funding gaps.
Providing more granular exit analysis by working with our angel groups to get
more detailed information.
Increasing information requests on alternative investing models. ACA
educational programs and insights publications have noted a significant
increase in new funding models and organization structures. In the coming
years, we will work to expand our outreach and collect more information to
augment our Angel Funder’s Report data, including Revenue Based Investment
Funds (RBI's) and SPACs.
58 | What's Next
We also need to expand our focus to address changing markets, including
more international investors now that the ACA has expanded its membership
to international members. One of the most interesting developments in 2020
has been the increased awareness from the government and others on the
importance of start-ups in driving job growth and the overall economy.
ACA will continue to monitor the impact of these trends, including:
Understanding and influencing the impact of potential tax changes to
ensure an increasing flow of critical early investment dollars to entrepreneurs.
Identifying new funding sources for start-up investments and investment
models. Significant new funding is being offered to help drive the creation
of new angel organizations as part of these new initiatives. ACA will continue
to play a leadership role in these activities. Tracking these new investors and
their investments will increase in the years to come as the ACA and the Angel
Funders Report expands their reach.
ACA’s Data Initiative has grown significantly, and we continue to strive for greater
impact. To provide the most actionable and helpful data, we need to expand
our database. All ACA members are encouraged to participate in the ACA Data
Initiative—after all, our members are the most definitive source of early-stage
investing information.
With strong support from our member community, we will continue to provide
perspective and analysis that helps demonstrate how start-ups can be more
successful when they are backed by the expertise, commitment, and dollars of
ACA members.
ACA remains steadfastly committed to providing the information and insight
needed to ensure that start-ups are the engine of innovation, job growth, national
competitiveness, upward mobility, and social justice. We are proud to represent
the angels who are the fuel for that engine.

APPENDIX
60 | Appendix
THE ACA METHODOLOGY
The Angel Capital Association invited its North American angel groups to
participate in an in-depth analytics-sharing initiative. ACA and its committee
of experts received the raw data, combining and enhancing data from multiple
reporting groups using publicly available analytics. All financials are reported
in U.S. dollars. The 2021 Angel Funders Report reflects data collected from 71
angel groups about investments made during calendar year 2020. Where noted,
the analysis includes comparison data from 2019 and 2018, as seen in Figure 40.
External sources and acknowledged experts were interviewed and their insights
are included as part of the commentary within the report.
FIGURE 40. Reporting Group Details

Participating ACA Member Groups
OVERALL NUMBERS
8,458 ACROSS 72 GROUP SIZE:
> 50 Members: 22
MEMBERS GROUPS
50 – 99 Members: 23
Located in 30 STATES + 2 PROVINCES
100 – 299 Members: 21

INVESTMENT Network w/
STRUCTURE Network Sidecar Fund Fund
35 16 14 300+ Members: 6
ACA Reporting Groups
Group Name Location Year Est.
757 Angels, Inc. Virginia Beach, VA 2015
Accelerate Venture Partners Wichita, KS 2005
The Angel Roundtable Johnson City, TN 2012
Anges Quebec Quebec City, QC 2008 
Arizona Tech Investors Mesa, AZ 2006
Astia Angels San Francisco, CA 2013
Band of Angels San Francisco, CA 1994
Baylor Angel Network Waco, TX 2009 
BELLE Michigan Impact Fund, LP Grosse Point Farms, MI 2012 
Bellingham Angel Investors Bellingham, WA 2005
Investment Structure: Network  Network with a Sidecar Fund  Fund  Other
62 | Appendix
Bluegrass Angels Inc Lexington, KY 2005 
BlueTree Allied Angels Pittsburgh, PA 2003 
Buffalo Angel Network Buffalo, NY 2003 
Bulldog Angel Network Huntsville, AL 2017
CAV Angels Charlottesville, VA 2016
Centennial Investors Columbia, MO 2006
Central Illinois Angels Peoria, IL 2009
Central Texas Angel Network Austin, TX 2006
Charlottesville Angel Network Charlottesville, VA 2015
Delaware Crossing Investor Group Warrington, PA 2005
Desert Angels Tucson, AZ 2000 
E8 Angels Seattle, WA 2006 
Florida Funders Tampa, FL 2013 
FrontierAngels Bozeman, MT 2004 
gANGELS/N29 Capital Partners Manitowish Waters, WI 2019 
Golden Seeds LLC New York, NY 2004 
HBSA-NY New York, NY 2010
Houston Angel Network Houston, TX 2001
IrishAngels Chicago, IL 2012 
The JumpFund Chattanooga, TN 2013 
Keiretsu Forum - MidAtlantic Wayne, PA 2011
Lateral Capital Sarasota, FL 

Launchpad Venture Group, LLC Wellesley, MA 2000
Life Science Angels Sunnyvale, CA 2005
Lubbock Angel Network Lubbock, TX 2015
Maine Angels Portland, ME 2003 
Michigan Angel Fund Ann Arbor, MI 2012 
Mid-Atlantic Bio Angels (MABA) Scotch Plains, NJ 2012 
Nebraska Angels Omaha, NE 2006
New Dominion Angels Warrenton, VA 2008 
New Louisiana Angel Fund Shreveport, LA 2014 
New World Angels Inc Boca Raton, FL 2004
New York Angels New York, NY 2004 
Next Wave Impact Denver, CO 2018 
NO/LA Angel Network New Orleans, LA 2014 
North Coast Ventures Cleveland, OH 2006 
Northern Ontario Angels Thunder Bay, ON 2006
Ohio TechAngel Funds Columbus, OH 2004
Oregon Sports Angels Portland, OR 2017
Portland Seed Fund Portland, OR 2011 
Potential Energy DC Angels Falls Church, VA 2020
Queen City Angels Norwood, OH 2000 
Reno Seed Fund Reno, NV 2019
Robin Hood Ventures Philadelphia, PA 1999
64 | Appendix
Rockies Venture Club Denver, CO 1985 
RTP Capital Associates, Inc. Research Triangle Park, NC 2010
Sacramento Angels Sacramento, CA 1998 
Sage Growth Capital Boise, ID 2019 
SideCar Angels Somerville, MA 2012 
Sierra Angels Incline Village, NV 1997
Sofia Fund St. Paul, MN 2013 
South Dakota Enterprise Institute Brookings, SD 2008
Southeast Minnesota Capital Fund LLC Rochester, MN 2017 
Southwest Angel Network Austin, TX 2015
St. Louis Arch Angels St. Louis, MO 2005
Tamiami Angel Fund Naples, FL 2004 
Tech Coast Angels Laguna Niguel, CA 2011 
The Launch Place Danville, VA 2011 
TiE Angels Boston Cambridge, MA
Triangle Angel Partners Chapel Hill, NC 
VentureSouth Greenville, SC 
Wolfpack Investor Network Raleigh, NC

GLOSSARY
A
Accredited Investor – A classification currently defined by the U.S. Securities & Exchange
Commission as an individual who meets one or more of the following criteria:
$1 million or more in net worth excluding primary residence;
Personal income in excess of $200,000 in each of the last two years; or
Joint income with a spouse exceeding $300,000 in each of the last two years.
As of the publication date of this report, the SEC has communicated future plans to
expand the pool of eligible investors by considering a measure of “sophistication” but
details have not been released.
Angel Groups – Organizations, funds, and networks formed for the specific purpose of
facilitating angel investments in early-stage companies (see also Angel Network).
Angel Investor – An individual who makes direct investments of personal (after tax) funds into a
venture, typically early-stage businesses.
Angel Fund – An aggregation of angels or angel money pooled together into a single check-
writing entity.
Angel Network – An aggregation of angels working together (often in the context of a defined
“membership” and referred to as an Angel Group) to share deal flow, diligence, deal term
development, experience, and company supervision.
B
B corp – B corporations are a legal structure and designation for a company focusing on its
societal impact in addition to shareholder value. B corporations are intended to be businesses
that meet the highest standards of verified social and environmental performance, public
transparency, and legal accountability to balance profit and purpose. B corps form a community
of leaders and drive a global movement of people using business as a force for good.
Back Loaded Revenue Models – A business plan which assumes the majority of the revenue
for the startup, or for a given customer of the startup, will not come in the early years of the
startup, or not in the part of the relationship with a given customer, but rather later on in the
company’s development or later on in the relationship with a given customer. Back Loaded
Revenue Models require some source of financing of early company activities while waiting for
the revenue to come in.
Bridge Financing – A small financing intended to carry a company over until its next major
financing event. Often effectuated with simpler deal structures such as convertible debt.
66 | Appendix
C
C corporation – A legal structure and form for a company. C corporations are separate taxable
entities, with legal existence apart from its owners, the stockholders.
Cap on Note or Valuation Cap – When a convertible note is used as the investment vehicle for
an investor, a maximum conversion valuation for the conversion of the note amount into shares
may be set at the time of entering into the note.
Cap Table – A table describing the capitalization of a company including the names and
number of shares owned by each principal and investors. This table is often segmented to
describe each of several funding rounds in the company and clearly differentiates preferred and
common shareholders.
Capital Intensity – The relative amount of capital a company will require to grow to scale.
A capital-intensive company would require tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars of
investment to reach scale, whereas a capital efficient company might require as little as a few
million dollars in total capital to reach scale.
Common Stock – Is the baseline equity of the company. In case of bankruptcy, it is entitled
to all assets and cash of the company after the payment of obligations such as bank debt,
corporate debt, taxes, trade creditors, employee obligations, and preferred stock. Founders
and employees almost always own shares or options for common stock.
Conversion Rights – Rights by which preferred stock “converts” into common stock. Usually,
one has this right at any time after making an investment. Company may want rights to force a
conversion upon an IPO; upon hitting of certain sales or earnings’ targets, or upon a majority or
supermajority vote of the preferred stock. Conversion rights may carry with them anti-dilution
protections.
Convertible Note – Convertible notes are structured as loans with interest and repayment
provisions. However, if the borrower completes an equity financing prior to the maturity date,
the loan amount converts to common or preferred stock at an agreed-upon rate, usually at
the option of the investor. Interest on convertible notes is often deferred. The conversion
rate is typically expressed as a discount to the valuation of that next round of funding and is
negotiated at the time of making the note.
Convertible Preferred Stock – Most common security for venture capital investments.
Holders of this class of stock have “preference” over the common shareholders in the event
of a liquidation of the company. Preferred shareholders can receive dividends, exercise voting
privileges, and retain the option to convert to common stock.
Cram Down – A round of financing at a valuation less than the previous round of investment. In
this case, the earlier investors are said to have been “crammed down,” that is, to have suffered
substantial dilution in ownership percentage at the expense of the current investors. (See also
Down Round)

D
Deal Flow – The flow of opportunities an investor, group, or fund learns about or has access to.
Good deal flow means the investors regularly see very interesting deals that are still early and
attractive, whereas bad deal flow might mean not seeing enough deals or seeing only low-
quality deals that have been rejected by other investors or seeing deals too late to be a fit for
their stage of investment.
Deal Structure – An agreement made between the investor and the company defining the
rights and obligations of the parties involved; the process by which one arrives at the final terms
and conditions of the investment.
Dilution – The reduction in percentage ownership of the company that investors suffer due to
subsequent funding rounds.
Discount on Conversion Price – The discount is the agreed-to price per share that the
noteholder can buy shares at once the subsequent Series A funding is obtained. The price of
the shares after financing will be discounted to a lower price for the noteholder since they took
the greatest risk by providing funding early on. While discounts can vary, 20% is quite typical.
Down Round – Price per share is less than in the previous round of financing. (See Turnaround
Financing)
Due Diligence – Process of validating a potential investment. Usually involves the study of six
areas of a company’s business plan: market structure, competition, and strategy; technology
assessment; management team; operating plan; financial review; and legal review. Checking
the references of the principals is a critical portion of this process.
E
Entrepreneurial Ecosystem – The community and support structures natively surrounding
entrepreneurs and founders in each city or region. May typically include incubators,
accelerators, university programs, entrepreneur education, demo days, panel discussions, and
other activities of interest to and in support of entrepreneurs.
Equity – Ownership interest in a company, usually in the form of stock or stock options.
Exit – A liquidity event in which the ownership of a company changes or the company winds
down and dissolves. Positive exits typical involve either IPOs (initial public offerings involving
selling the company to the public markets) or strategic acquisitions in which the company
is sold to another company. Negative exits typically refer to the failure, wind-down and
dissolution of the company or a sale to another company at a valuation too low to repay
investors fully.
Exit Strategy – A planned action taken by a company that results in liquidity of the company’s
stock, often in the form of an acquisition by a publicly traded company or a public offering.
68 | Appendix
F
Fair Market Value (FMV) – An acceptable selling price to an independent third party.
First Close – An early close of part of a round of financing upon the agreement of all parties.
Follow on Investment – An investment into a company by an investor who has previous

invested in that company.
Founder Vesting – A term imposed on founders of seed and early-stage deals in which the
founder’s ownership is subject to a vesting schedule with nothing up front and linear vesting
over, typically, four years. The first twelve months’ ownership is often “cliff ‘ vested after the
first year with monthly vesting thereafter. For more mature companies, vesting credit can be
applied at the time of investment. The purpose of this term is to protect investors from an early,
unplanned exit by the founder and to provide investors with the equity necessary to attract a
new management team.
Fully Diluted – Total number of common shares outstanding. Includes all securities that could
be converted into common shares, such as warrants, stock options, convertible bonds, and
preferred stock.
Funding Rounds – Funding round is referring to the rounds of funding that startups go through
to raise capital. They often begin with a “seed” round and then move to a letter, such as
A Round, B Round, C Round, etc., because each round follows another. The letter identifies
which number of rounds they’re on. Sometimes “Pre-Seed” is used for very early rounds.
H
Harvest – Reaping the benefits of investment in a privately held company by selling the
company for cash or stock in a publicly held company; also to execute the exit strategy.
Holding Company – A corporation that owns the securities of another, in most cases with
voting control.
I
Industry Sectors – The Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) is used for Industry
Sectors. Access detailed definitions here.
Initial Investment – An investor’s first investment in the company (may also refer to the first
investment taken by a company).
Initial Round – The first investment round by non-affiliated investors. Often preceded by a
“friends and family round” of money raised from affiliates of the founders.

Initial Public Offering (IPO) – The regulated process by which a private corporation registers its
shares for trading in public markets.
Intellectual Property – Right or non-physical resource that is presumed to represent an

advantage to the firm’s position in the marketplace, including patents, trademarks, copyrights,
and licenses. IP is priced into valuations done by angels.
Internal Rate of Return (IRR) – The interest rate received for an investment consisting of
payments (negative values) and income (positive values) that occur at regular periods. IRR is
the discount rate at which the present value of the future cash flows of an investment equals
the cost of the investment. The most accurate IRR calculations come when holding periods are
determined for each company rather than using a blended or averaged holding period.
L
Limited Liability Company (LLC) – A company owned by “members” who either manage the
business themselves or appoint “managers” to run it for them. All members and managers have
the benefit of limited liability, and, in most cases, are taxed in the same way as a subchapter S
corporation without having to conform to the S corporation restrictions.
Lead Investor – Leader among the investors in a round of equity investment in a privately held
company. Usually also the leader of the due diligence efforts related to the same investment
round.
Liquidity Event – A transaction returning some or all an investor’s money. It might be an exit
(see Exit) or it might be an investment transaction where later investors offer to buy the shares
of earlier investors.
Liquidation Preference – The right for preferred shareholders to be paid before common
shareholders upon liquidation of the ownership of the company.
M
Market Capitalization (MC) – The total dollar value of all outstanding shares, computed as
shares multiplied by current price per share.
Multiples – A means of expressing the ratio between two numbers. For example, a “4X
revenue multiple” would mean a valuation of a company that is set at four times the annual
revenue, a 2X exit multiple might mean a deal where an investor makes a return of two times
her initial investment, and a 3X growth rate might mean a company which tripled its annual
revenue year over year.
70 | Appendix
N
Net Income – The net earnings of a corporation after deducting relevant costs such as selling,
depreciation, interest expense, and taxes.
P
Paycheck Protection Program Loans – An SBA-backed loan that helps businesses keep their
workforce employed during the COVID-19 crisis.
Post-Money Valuation – The valuation of the company immediately after an investment, most
simply calculated by adding the amount invested to the pre-money valuation. Alternatively, in
situations where debt is converting or other complications exist, it can be calculated by dividing
the amount invested by the percentage ownership (fully diluted) in the company the investors
receive for their investment.
Priced Equity – A type of investment round in which the investors are buying stock as part of
the transaction for an understood per share price (i.e. the company has an agreed-upon total
Pre-Money Valuation).
Pre-Money Valuation – The valuation assigned to the company through negotiation between
investors and founders immediately before an investment.
Preferred Stock – Preferred stock is a type of security that has certain rights that are senior to
common stock (though junior to debt at law). The most fundamental right for preferred stock
is to be paid before common in the event of a liquidation of the company. Many other rights
and features can be added to preferred stock, but those rights are required to be recorded in a
public document (typically called articles of incorporation or a charter) filed with the secretary of
the jurisdiction of incorporation. Because of its customization, preferred stock is very commonly
used by investors in private exempt deals.
Private Placement – The sale of stocks, bonds, or other investments directly to institutional or
accredited investors. A private placement does not have to be registered with the SEC, as a
public offering does, if the securities are purchased for investment as opposed to resale.
Proof of Concept – The product has been proven to work through analysis of the science or
acceptance by the marketplace.
Pro-Rata Ownership – Pro Rata is a Latin phrase referring to proportionality. In the investment
context, that proportionality typically refers to each investor’s respective percentage ownership
in a company. For example, a dividend might be paid out pro rata, which means proportionally
to all the shareholders according to their respective percentage ownership in the company (i.e.
if you own 10% of the company, you receive 10% of the dividend payout). Or it might mean the
proportional right to participate in a future financing according to the percentage ownership
(i.e. if you own 10% of the company, you are entitled to purchase up to 10% of the new
investment). “Pro Rata Rights” is a nickname typically given to that right to participate in future
financings.

R
Registration (Public Offering) – The process by which a company is authorized by the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to offer shares for sale to the public. This generally
involves the disclosure of substantial information on the operations and plans of the company.
Return on Investment (ROI) – The return on invested capital without regard for the timing
of the return. ROI is expressed as a multiple of the invested capital. For example: Harvesting
$150,000 on an initial investment of $50,000 within five years is 3X ROI. (Since time is not a
consideration when computing ROI, harvesting $150,000 on that $50,000 in 10 years still yields
3X ROI).
Reverse Merger – A merger structured in such a way that the acquired company is the
surviving entity, and the acquiring company ceases to exist (for tax reasons or due to the
relative strength of the respective brands, etc). A reverse triangular merger is a deal in which
the acquirer creates a subsidiary and then the target company is merged into the subsidiary
with the subsidiary being the surviving company.
Rounds of Capital – A round of capital is a fundraising in which all investors receive

substantially the same equity security on substantially the same deal terms at roughly the same
time. Rounds are typically given a name such as Series A or Series B or Series Seed.
S
S corporation – A small business corporation designed to operate as a pass-through tax entity
in which the owners personally pay the corporation’s income taxes.
SAFE Note – A SAFE note is a Simple Agreement for Future Equity convertible security that,
like an option or warrant, allows the investor to provide money now in exchange for the right
to buy shares in a future priced round. SAFEs were intended to address many of the drawbacks
and challenges posed by convertible notes and serve as an equitable option for investors and
founders. Because they contain so little by way of investor protections, many investors dislike
them, and they have begun to take on some of the complexities common with convertible
notes such as price caps, conversion price discounts, maturity dates, interest rates, and other
investor rights such as information, governance, and participation in future rounds. Startups
may prefer SAFE notes because, unlike convertible notes, in their simplest form they are not
debt and therefore do not accrue interest nor do they have a predefined time horizon as they
do not have an expiration date. (www.upcounsel.com)
Screening Deals – The process used to sift, rate, or grade the opportunities presented by new
ventures to determine which opportunities to spend additional time examining. Those that do
not pass the screen are rejected. An outline of the screening process can often be found on the
website of the angel group.
72 | Appendix
Seed Funding – This is the first institutional/not friend and family equity funding stage. It
typically represents the first professional or semi-professional money that a business venture or
enterprise raises; some companies never extend beyond seed funding into Series A rounds or
beyond. Some common names for funding rounds include:
Pre-Seed
Seed
Series A
Series B
Series C (and onwards in the alphabet)
Sidecar Fund – A sidecar fund is a pooled investment vehicle associated with a principal
investor (such as a fund or an angel group) that facilitates investments by “riding alongside”
the principal investor. This method is often used by angel networks to provide for a fund for
diversification for its members. (venturesouth.vc)
Start-Up Financing – Financing that is provided to companies completing product

development and for early marketing. Companies may be in the process of organizing or may
already be in business, but usually have not sold their product commercially.
Step Up Valuations – A fund accounting term referring to the practice of updating the valuation
of a fund’s holdings in a company based on a subsequent financing that company has done or
other market-based adjustments. It is a method of attempting to more accurately reflect the true
market value of a fund’s holdings, but it can involve a significant degree of subjectivity.
Stock Option – Grants the right to purchase securities (usually common stock and usually in the
context of employee compensation) at a stated exercise price over some future period.
Syndication – Syndication is the process of coordinating multiple investors to invest together

into one round, whether they be individuals, angel groups, VC funds, etc., to provide the
funding resources needed by one company under a consistent set of processes and terms. Trust
and credibility between investors fuels syndication opportunity. (https://seraf-investor.com/)
T
Target Multiples – The desired return on investment of private investors in early-stage
companies defined in a multiple of the original investment.
Terminal Value – The projected value of the venture at the time of exit. For early-stage
ventures, project revenues and earnings at exit point and use industry metrics (e.g. multiple of-
revenues or PIE ratio) to determine terminal value.
Term Sheet – Document that memorializes and summarized the agreed-upon terms for a
financing round. Term sheets allow prospective investors to evaluate a potential deal and guide
lawyers in preparing the definitive investment agreements. Term sheets typically include all the
material deal terms.

Turnaround Financing [or Down Round – A financing where the pre-money valuation of
the financing is lower than the post-money value of the previous round. May be provided to
companies which still show promise although they have gone through or are currently in a
problem period. Often referred to as “Down Round,” since the new valuation is lower than the
previous valuation.
V
Valuation – Valuation is the analytical process of determining the current (or projected) worth of
an asset or a company.
Valuation Models – The techniques used vary by stage of company, but with startups, common
approaches include the Burkus Method, The Paine Method, the Seraf Method, and the
Required Return Method.
Venture Capitalist (VC) – A financial institution specializing in the provision of equity and other
forms of long-term capital to enterprises, usually to firms with a limited track record but with the
expectation of substantial growth. The venture capitalist may provide both funding and varying
degrees of managerial and technical expertise. Venture capitalists do not generally use their
own after-tax dollars to invest.
Vertical Market – A market definition, specialty, or niche, such as “enterprise software,”

“cancer diagnostics,” or “fabless silicon design.” It is a subset of a “sector.”
Vesting Schedule – Used in stock options to describe the number of shares that the option
recipient can purchase at a defined price and at given dates in the future. Also defines the
expiration of said options.
Voluntary Conversion – The optional rights of Series A Preferred shareholders to convert

shares of Series X Preferred into shares of common stock of the company at the then applicable
conversion ratio, which initially may be one-to-one (Initial Conversion Ratio) and subsequently
subject to adjustment.
Voting Rights – A shareholder’s rights to vote for the board of directors and other important
events such as sales and mergers. Sometimes divided upon the following lines:
Full – Vote with common stock on each matter as if the preferred shares had been
converted into common.
Class – Corporate statute or certificate of incorporation provide a class vote allowing
certain preferred stock to vote separately on matters such as sales or mergers. It may be
that a particular class of preferred stock votes alone or that all classes of preferred stock
vote together.
Right to Elect Director(s) – Guaranteed right to elect one or more directors to the board.
Special – Vetoes over certain matters or super share voting. More common in venture
investments.
74 | Appendix
Sources
The definitions listed in this glossary were obtained from a variety of resources, including:
Business Angels: A Guide to Private Investing, Robert H. Keeley, Jeffrey M. Cooper, and Gary
D. Bloomer, authors, Colorado Capital Alliance, Inc., Publisher
Plain English Guide to Select Investment Terms by P. Mitchell Woolery
The Portable MBA in Entrepreneurship: Second Edition, William D. Bygrave, editor, John Wiley
& Sons, Inc.
Glossary from the “earlycapital.com” website. https://seraf-investor.com/compass/article/

approximations-assumptions-and-aspirations-methods-valuing-startups-part-ii
Investorpedia.com
vcexperts.com

ABOUT THE AUTHORS
RICK TIMMINS ELAINE BOLLE RON WEISSMAN
Central Texas Portfolia / RTP Capital Band of Angels
Angel Network Associates ACA Board of
ACA Data Analytics ACA Marketing and Directors Vice Chair
Committee Chair Membership Committee Chair
Editor-In-Chief
ACA DATA PARTNER:
ACA DATA ANALYTICS COMMITTEE
Steve Flaim Raymond Luk

Tech Coast Angels Hockeystick,
Former ACA Board Member Founder and CEO
Dr. Suho Han Christopher Mirabile

Professor, Syracuse University Launchpad Venture Group
ACA Chair Emeritus
John Harbison
Tech Coast Angels Yaniv Sneor
ACA Director Member,
Mid Atlantic Bio Angels (MABA)
Joe Heller
Tony Shipley
Member,
Queen City Angels Queen City Angels
ACA Chair Emeritus
Liz Lindsey
Member, Dr. Dawn Tolonen
New York Angels Professor, Xavier University
76 | Appendix
ANGEL CAPITAL ASSOCIATION
ACA STAFF AND CONTRACTORS
Pat Gouhin, Chief Executive Officer
Emily Angold, Marketing Manager
Sarah Dickey, Membership Director
Heather Krejci, Operations Director
Chiara Renella-Brooks,
Partnership Director
Annie Wong, Administrative Assistant
Mackenzie Miller,
Creative Director, Pop! Creative Design
Jennifer Halsey,
Copywriter and Content Developer
ACA would like to recognize and thank all of

our ACA group leaders and participating angel
groups who contributed their valuable time to
advance the community we serve.
2021
©2021 by Angel Capital Association. All rights reserved. No part of this publication
may be reproduced in any form or by any means—graphic, electronic, or mechanical,
including photocopying, recording, taping, and information storage and retrieval
systems—without the express written permission of Angel Capital Association.

Angel Funders Report 2021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Angel Funders Report 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2021

2021 Highlights ........................................................4

Valuation Trends .....................................................22

Portfolio Companies ...............................................26

Angel Group Insights:

What’s Next ............................................................58

©2021 by Angel Capital Association. All rights reserved.

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 1

When we published the 2020 Angel Funders Report, we were just

Today, we stand strong, with early-stage investing having grown in 2020.

Like the communities we represent and support, ACA as an organization also

2 | Letter from our CEO

Our 2020 data revealed important shifts in angel investments related

We will continue to focus on measurement and analytics to help guide our

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 3

 Profiles and insights

 Analysis of group 6X 1.8X

$4.7M per year

Angels are narrowing the gap, investing in

MORE DIVERSE FOUNDERS

29% of Female CEOs Initial investments in Black-

TOP INDUSTRIES FOR ANGEL GROUP INVESTMENTS

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 5

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 7

Angel Groups Investing Patterns

FIGURE 1. Angels Engaged in More Deals in 2020

Per Group 2018 2019 2020

Average Investment $3.3M $4.0M $4.7M

Average Investment per deal $220K $293K $245K

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 9

FIGURE 2B. # of Companies Invested In Grew

10 | Investing by the Numbers

FIGURE 2C. Most Angel Deals are Small

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 11

FIGURE 3. Groups Shifted Focus to Larger Deals

Funding Rounds Insights

12 | Investing by the Numbers

FIGURE 4. Follow-on Deals Attached More $ Per Deal in 2020

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 13

14 | Investing by the Numbers

clearer and Candoo has become the leading Liz Hamburg

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 15

16 | Investing by the Numbers

Seed vs. Later Stage Investments

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 17

18 | Investing by the Numbers

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 19

20 | Investing by the Numbers

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 21

FIGURE 11. Valuations Are Rising Especially in Later Stages

FIGURE 12. Angels Invested More at Lower Valuations

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 23

FIGURE 13. Valuations Varied More by Region in 2020

As shown in Figure 14, valuations continue to vary significantly by sector. The

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 25

FIGURE 16. C Corp Dominate Company Structures

* To learn more about the purpose and structure of B Corps, see:

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 27

FIGURE 17. Angels Continue To Invest Early in the Revenue Cycle

FIGURE 18. Most Companies Have 5 or Fewer

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 29

introductions to help the company grow. Early

Angel Funders Report 2021 | 31

Profiles and insights

Analysis of group 6X 1.8X

757 Angels, Inc. Virginia Beach, VA 2015

Accelerate Venture Partners Wichita, KS 2005

The Angel Roundtable Johnson City, TN 2012

Arizona Tech Investors Mesa, AZ 2006

Astia Angels San Francisco, CA 2013

Band of Angels San Francisco, CA 1994

Bellingham Angel Investors Bellingham, WA 2005

Investment Structure: Network  Network with a Sidecar Fund  Fund  Other

Bulldog Angel Network Huntsville, AL 2017

CAV Angels Charlottesville, VA 2016

Centennial Investors Columbia, MO 2006

Central Illinois Angels Peoria, IL 2009

Central Texas Angel Network Austin, TX 2006

Charlottesville Angel Network Charlottesville, VA 2015

Delaware Crossing Investor Group Warrington, PA 2005