adayinthelifeofanintmkter: Angel-Backed Companies More Likely to Succeed, Says Harvard Study

A new study published by professors at the Harvard Business School shows that angel-backed companies are more likely to succeed and show more growth than those funded by venture firms alone. Researched and written by William Kerr and Josh Lerner, the report found that companies with angel funding see between 30% and 50% higher growth figures in terms of website traffic, are more likely to survive for four years, and are also in a better position to receive further rounds of funding.

Sponsor

Angel investing itself has seen large growth over the last several months with the creation of various organizations, events, firms and legislation to spur it on. We've discussed the Open Angel Forum series of events, the creation of "Super Angel" firms, the curated Venture Hacks AngelList, as well as current legislation both helping and hurting angel investments.

Angel investing has become more common, and as this report shows, this is largely due to the value and success it tends to breed. But why are angel investments the secret sauce for some companies? As the report points out, its the intangibles that angels bring to the table that could be playing a large role in company success.

"Access to capital per se may not be the most important value-added that angel groups bring. Some of the 'softer' features, such as angels' mentoring or business contacts, may help new ventures the most," the report says.

One of the other reasons that companies could tend to be more successful with angel funding is because of the human face placed on the investments. Angels are usually investing in companies at an early stage, and are investing their own capital in the company. Entrepreneurs may be more likely to work that extra bit harder when they know they are playing with the personal cash of an actual person, not the collected funds of an entire firm without a human name.

The reputation of the angel could play a large role as well, both for the attitude of the people running the company, and for the audience they are looking to attract. Most angels tend to be successful entrepreneurs themselves, and thus are likely well known in the startup scene. The chance to sit and talk with these investors, let alone receiving funding from them, is likely a treat for most entrepreneurs, so they may be more likely to be more careful with their money.

Additionally, when the public hears of a new startup that may not immediately interest them, the mention of particular angel investors can change their mind. As angel investors mature, they build their own personal portfolio of companies they noticed and provided early funds for, so when company XYZ launches with angel funding from an influential angel investor, that alone can attract people to the product. I know personally that I have looked into startups I otherwise would have largely ignored simply because an important angel investor was certain they'd be a hit.

"Some of the 'softer' features, such as angels' mentoring or business contacts, may help new ventures the most." - Harvard Business School report

Since some companies receive early financing rounds from angels, it is also logical to assume that when working with a limited amount of cash, the entrepreneurs may be more focused on doing more with less. A company that bursts out of the gate with large amounts of VC firm funding may spend it slightly more haphazardly, whereas a company running on limited angel funds may adopt leaner practices and take baby steps toward success and future funding.

As the report mentioned above, the "softer" features provided by the angels are also a large help to the companies. In his email newsletter yesterday, angel investor Jason Calacanis discussed loyalty and how he goes to bat for the people who are loyal to him and his companies. He mentioned that whenever he invests in a company, he immediately becomes an evangelist for that company and it's founders, doing all he can to promote it. This may not be the same for all angels, but when influential investors like Jason get behind your company, they do their best to make sure good things happen.

I would be interested to see similar data from this report that compares companies with solely angel funding versus those with more traditional VC firm funding mixed in. The influence of angel investors is significant, but I would think the angels alone are not enough to create more successful businesses at a higher rate. But the lesson here is, if your startup has the opportunity to include some angel investors (especially at the early stages), it would seem like a wise decision to go ahead with.

Photo by Flickr user Brooke Anderson.

Discuss