Not All Capital Is Created Equal: A New Lens on VC Performance in Web3 At Gallet Capital, we don't view DeFi just as a parallel to traditional finance, but as the foundation of a new and emerging capital market. And it is rapidly evolving beyond basic lending/borrowing and leverage into more sophisticated layers: interest rate curve formation, credit assessment, risk intelligence, and decentralized insurance. It’s in that context that I’ve been closely following the work of @Xerberus_io , which is helping to build the tooling and transparency needed to support this next phase. @Xerberus_io has just released its inaugural VC Ratings, ranking how tokens backed by top VCs have actually performed. Not based on hype, announcements, or fund returns but on public on-chain data. It may raise eyebrows, this is not meant to be controversial about VC activity (I keep it for another post to be released soon). It is meant to be useful. What are VC Ratings? Xerberus does not look at paper valuation or headlines, but rates VC firms based on on-chain observable activity such as token performance after public sale, ecosystem resilience, community strength decentralization signals. Their first version defines 3 categories (the full dataset is available at : - Top Performer: Strong post-sale token performance, active ecosystems, solid user adoption. - Average Performer: Mixed signals, not terrible, but not alpha generators either. - Under Performer: Weak usage, low traction, or disappointing token performance. Quick Takeaways: Some household names are not leading in token performance. Paradigm, A16Z, and DeFiance land in the average or underperformer tiers. Niche or smaller firms like CoinFund or Robot Ventures quietly deliver higher hit rates. Volume is not performance. Some funds with many bets (Lemniscap, Multicoin) show middling results. Why it matters? Not all venture capital firms are created equal, especially in crypto. We often judge VCs by their brand, narrative alignment, who they co-invest with, the success of previous funds. But for LPs, founders, and market participants, that doesn't always reflect what matters most: what happens when the token hits the market? VC Ratings only offer one lens on that question. Some nuances though: I appreciate this type of analysis, it's fresh, data-driven, but these VC Ratings are not a proxy for risk. They speak to value realization through token performance, not to the structural integrity of a protocol for which Xerberus is specialized in. The two may overlap, but they are not the same. A protocol can be well-engineered and still fail to attract users. Likewise, something with questionable architecture may ride hype cycles to short-term gains. Demand, community, business model matter too. What is Xerberus? Xerberus is building a risk intelligence layer for Web3. The topic is broad still, from token classification to DeFi vault scoring and VC behavior, the project aims to map risk across the full spectrum of crypto capital markets, one module at a time. VC Ratings are a small but meaningful piece of that puzzle. Before you jump on me. Yes, this does not reflect the full funds returns. It is token-centric and does not cover off-chain equity investments for instance or possible focus on governance. Finally it only focuses post-2023. It is not a verdict, but a signal, a complementary tool for your due diligence, not a replacement of a deeper analysis. And like all tool its value lies in how you use it. For founders: it helps frame which investors may be long-term aligned on your token strategy. For LPs: it adds a layer of transparency to performance. For VCs: it invites reflection and perhaps a new way to communicate on-chain outcomes to the market. Xerberus has never claimed that one metric can capture the whole picture, quite the opposite. Their philosophy is to dissect crypto complexity with modular, transparent, and open-sourced frameworks. This analysis is only value expression through token performance. For a full structural risk assessment, including code integrity, governance vectors, liquidity modeling, and attack surfaces, Xerberus offers a dedicated framework that lives separately on their platform. Don’t confuse one for the other. Together, they form a richer map, not a shortcut to certainty. Reach out: Any VC, Founder, LP can reach out to @Xerberus_io to clarify data or provide context. If the claims hold up to review, ratings may be updated. No black boxes here. Happy to intro this innovative team I met recently as well.