Research indicates that investors rely on various criteria to evaluate early-stage companies. However, past research in this area has focused on subsets of factors and does not distinguish between the predictors and causal determinants of start-up valuation. In our study, we applied machine learning and causal discovery to analyze a comprehensive dataset with 57 independent variables and 2,366 valuations of start-ups in the United Kingdom. The results show a strong relationship between good predictors and causal determinants of valuation. However, noncausal variables may still be useful for prediction, and inversely, some observed causes may not help in the prediction task.
AntretterT.BlohmI.GrichnikD.WincentJ. (2019). Predicting new venture survival: A twitter-based machine learning approach to measuring online legitimacy. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 11, e00109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2018.e00109
2.
BaumJ. A. C.SilvermanB. S. (2004). Picking winners or building them? Alliance, intellectual, and human capital as selection criteria in venture financing and performance of biotechnology startups. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(3), 411–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0883-9026(03)00038-7
3.
BlockJ.FischC.VismaraS.AndresR. (2019). Private equity investment criteria: An experimental conjoint analysis of venture capital, business angels, and family offices. Journal of Corporate Finance, 58, 329–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2019.05.009
4.
BlohmI.AntretterT.SirénC.GrichnikD.WincentJ. (2022). Its a peoples game, isnt it?! A comparison between the investment returns of business angels and machine learning algorithms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 46, 1054–1091. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258720945206
5.
CarmonaP.ClimentF.MomparlerA. (2019). Predicting failure in the US banking sector: An extreme gradient boosting approach. International Review of Economics & Finance, 61, 304–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2018.03.008
6.
CaruanaR.Niculescu-MizilA. (2006). An empirical comparison of supervised learning algorithms [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Machine learning (pp. 161–168). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1143844.1143865
7.
ChangY.-C.ChangK.-H.WuG.-J. (2018). Application of extreme gradient boosting trees in the construction of credit risk assessment models for financial institutions. Applied Soft Computing, 73, 914–920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2018.09.029
8.
ChenT.GuestrinC. (2016). XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (pp. 785–794). ACM. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2939672.2939785
9.
ClimentF.MomparlerA.CarmonaP. (2019). Anticipating bank distress in the eurozone: An extreme gradient boosting approach. Journal of Business Research, 101, 885–896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.11.015
10.
CoadA.SrhojS. (2020). Catching gazelles with a lasso: Big data techniques for the prediction of high-growth firms. Small Business Economics, 55(3), 541–565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00203-3
11.
CollisJ. (2012). Determinants of voluntary audit and voluntary full accounts in micro- and non-micro small companies in the UK. Accounting and Business Research, 42(4), 441–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2012.667969
12.
CollisJ.JarvisR. (2002). Financial information and the management of small private companies. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 9(2), 100–110. https://doi.org/10.1108/14626000210427357
13.
ColomboD.MaathuisM. H. (2014). Order-independent constraint-based causal structure learning. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 15(116), 3921–3962. https://doi.org/10.5555/2627435.2750365
14.
CovertI.LundbergS. M.LeeS.-I. (2020). Understanding global feature contributions with additive importance measures [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 34th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (p. 33). ACM.
DhochakM.DoliyaP. (2020). Valuation of a startup: Moving towards strategic approaches. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 27(1–2), 39–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.1703
17.
FerratiF.MuffattoM. (2020). Using Crunchbase for research in entrepreneurship: Data content and structure [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 20th European Conference on Research Methodology for Business and Management Studies: ECRM 2020 (p. 342).
18.
FestelG.WürmseherM.CattaneoG. (2013). Valuation of early stage high-tech start-up companies. International Journal of Business, 18, 216–231.
19.
FriedmanJ. H. (2001). Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine. Annals of Statistics, 29(5), 1189–1232. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1013203451
20.
GarkavenkoM.MirisaeeH.GaussierE.GuerrazA.LagnierC. (2021). Valuation of startups: A machine learning perspective [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 43rd European Conference on Information Retrieval (pp. 176–189). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72113-8\_12
GeorgeG.OsingaE. C.LavieD.ScottB. A. (2016). Big data and data science methods for management research. Academy of Management Journal, 59(5), 1493–1507. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.4005
23.
HallJ.HoferC. W. (1993). Venture capitalists’ decision criteria in new venture evaluation. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(93)90009-t
24.
HartD. M. (2014). Founder nativity, founding team formation, and firm performance in the U.S. high-tech sector. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 10(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-011-0188-x
25.
HendryD. F. (2002). Forecast failure, expectations formation and the Lucas critique. Annales d’ Économie et de Statistique, 67/68, 21–40.
26.
HofmanJ. M.WattsD. J.AtheyS.GaripF.GriffithsT. L.KleinbergJ.MargettsH.MullainathanS.SalganikM. J.VazireS.VespignaniA.YarkoniT. (2021). Integrating explanation and prediction in computational social science. Nature, 595, 181–188. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03659-0
KeG.MengQ.FinleyT.WangT.ChenW.MaW.LiuT.-Y. (2017). Lightgbm: A highly efficient gradient boosting decision tree [Conference session]. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 3146–3154). ACM. https://doi.org/10.5555/3294996.3295074
KnightR. M. (1994). Criteria used by venture capitalists: A cross cultural analysis. International Small Business Journal, 13(1), 26–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242694131002
31.
KöhnA. (2018). The determinants of startup valuation in the venture capital context: A systematic review and avenues for future research. Management Review Quarterly, 68(1), 3–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-017-0131-5
32.
KolkmanD.van WitteloostuijnA. (2019). Data Science in Strategy: Machine learning and text analysis in the study of firm growth (Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers No. 19-066/VI). Tinbergen Institute. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3457271
33.
LedoitO.WolfM. (2003). Improved estimation of the covariance matrix of stock returns with an application to portfolio selection. Journal of Empirical Finance, 10(5), 603–621. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0927-5398(03)00007-0
34.
LévesqueM.ObschonkaM.NambisanS. (2022). Pursuing impactful entrepreneurship research using artificial intelligence. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 46, 803–832. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258720927369
35.
LipovetskyS.ConklinM. (2001). Analysis of regression in game theory approach. Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry, 17(4), 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1002/asmb.446
36.
LundbergS. M.ErionG.ChenH.DeGraveA.PrutkinJ. M.NairB.KatzR.HimmelfarbJ.BansalN.LeeS. I. (2020). From local explanations to global understanding with explainable AI for trees. Nature machine intelligence, 2(1), 56–67. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0138-9
37.
LundbergS. M.LeeS.-I. (2017). A unified approach to interpreting model predictions [Conference session]. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 4765-4774). ACM. https://doi.org/10.5555/3295222.3295230
38.
MacmillanI. C.SiegelR.NarasimhaP. N. (1985). Criteria used by venture capitalists to evaluate new venture proposals. Journal of Business Venturing, 1(1), 119–128.
39.
MartinL. M.Warren-SmithI.ScottJ. M.RoperS. (2008). Boards of directors and gender diversity in UK companies. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 23(3), 194–208. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542410810866944
40.
MasonC.StarkM. (2004). What do investors look for in a business plan?: A comparison of the investment criteria of bankers, venture capitalists and business angels. International Small Business Journal, 22(3), 227–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242604042377
MullainathanS.SpiessJ. (2017). Machine learning: An applied econometric approach. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 87–106. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.2.87
44.
NielsenS. (2010). Top management team diversity: A review of theories and methodologies. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(3), 301–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00263.x
45.
ObschonkaM.AudretschD. B. (2020). Artificial intelligence and big data in entrepreneurship: A new era has begun. Small Business Economics, 55, 529–539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00202-4
46.
ProkhorenkovaL.GusevG.VorobevA.DorogushA. V.GulinA. (2018). Catboost: Unbiased boosting with categorical features [Conference session]. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 6638–6648). https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.5555/3327757.3327770
47.
PrüferJ.PrüferP. (2020). Data science for entrepreneurship research: Studying demand dynamics for entrepreneurial skills in the Netherlands. Small Business Economics, 55(3), 651–672. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00208-y
48.
QuinteroS. (2019). An empirical perspective on startup valuations. Radicle Working Paper.
49.
SchwabA.ZhangZ. (2019). A new methodological frontier in entrepreneurship research: Big data studies. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 43, 843–854. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258718760841
50.
ScutariM. (2010). Learning Bayesian networks with the bnlearnRPackage. Journal of Statistical Software, 35(3), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v035.i03
51.
ShapleyL. S. (1953). A value for n-person games. Contributions to the Theory of Games, 2(28), 307–317.
52.
SharchilevB.RoiznerM.RumyantsevA.OzorninD.SerdyukovP.de RijkeM. (2018). Web-based startup success prediction [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (pp. 2283–2291). ACM. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3269206.3272011
SivarajahU.KamalM. M.IraniZ.WeerakkodyV. (2017). Critical analysis of big data challenges and analytical methods. Journal of Business Research, 70, 263–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.001
55.
SpirtesP.GlymourC.ScheinesR. (2000). Causation, prediction, and search (2nd ed.). MIT Press.
56.
SteffensP.TerjesenS.DavidssonP. (2012). Birds of a feather get lost together: New venture team composition and performance. Small Business Economics, 39(3), 727–743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9358-z
57.
ŠtrumbeljE.KononenkoI. (2014). Explaining prediction models and individual predictions with feature contributions. Knowledge and Information Systems, 41(3), 647–665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-013-0679-x
58.
TonidandelS.KingE. B.CortinaJ. M. (2018). Big data methods: Leveraging modern data analytic techniques to build organizational science. Organizational Research Methods, 21(3), 525–547. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428116677299
59.
TumasjanA.BraunR.StolzB. (2021). Twitter sentiment as a weak signal in venture capital financing. Journal of Business Venturing, 36(2), 106062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2020.106062
60.
VogelR.PuhanT. X.ShehuE.KligerD.BeeseH. (2014). Funding decisions and entrepreneurial team diversity: A field study. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 107, 595–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2014.02.021
61.
XiangG.ZhengZ.WenM.HongJ.RoseC.LiuC. (2012). A supervised approach to predict company acquisition with factual and topic features using profiles and news articles on TechCrunch [Conference session]. Sixth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media.
62.
YinB.LuoJ. (2018). How do accelerators select startups? Shifting decision criteria across stages. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 65, 574–589. https://doi.org/10.1109/tem.2018.2791501
63.
ŻbikowskiK.AntosiukP. (2021). A machine learning, bias-free approach for predicting business success using crunchbase data. Information Processing & Management, 58(4), 102555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2021.102555
64.
ZhangJ. (2008). On the completeness of orientation rules for causal discovery in the presence of latent confounders and selection bias. Artificial Intelligence, 172(16–17), 1873–1896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2008.08.001
65.
ZhengY.LiuJ.GeorgeG. (2010). The dynamic impact of innovative capability and inter-firm network on firm valuation: A longitudinal study of biotechnology start-ups. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(6), 593–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.02.001
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
