Menlo Ventures IX
Menlo Ventures Vintage 2001 Reported by Washington State Investment Board, Los Angeles City Employees' Retirement System (LACERS)
What each LP reports
| LP | As of | Committed | Paid in | Distributed | Remaining value | Net IRR | TVPI | DPI | Paid in vs. value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Washington State Investment Board | 2026-03-31 | $200M | $200M | $204M | $0M | 0.3% | 1.02x | 1.02x | |
| Los Angeles City Employees' Retirement System (LACERS) | 2025-12-31 | $20M | $20M | $20M | $0M | 0.3% | 1.02x | 1.02x |
Paid in Distributed Remaining value
2001 vintage in Washington State Investment Board’s portfolio
All 13 funds of vintage 2001 in Washington State Investment Board’s report, ranked by net IRR. Private equity, venture, and other strategies are mixed, so treat this as context rather than a strategy benchmark.
| # | Fund | Net IRR | TVPI | DPI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GTCR Fund VII-A, L.P. | 83.0% | 2.79x | 2.79x |
| 2 | First Reserve Fund IX, L.P. | 48.1% | 2.85x | 2.85x |
| 3 | Apax Europe V-A, L.P. | 36.2% | 2.10x | 2.10x |
| 4 | OCM Opportunities Fund IV, L.P. | 28.0% | 1.61x | 1.61x |
| 5 | HarbourVest Int'l PEP IV- Partnership Fund L.P. | 22.6% | 1.71x | 1.71x |
| 6 | HarbourVest Int'l PEP IV - Direct Fund L.P. | 21.3% | 1.87x | 1.87x |
| 7 | Warburg Pincus Private Equity VIII, L.P. | 14.5% | 2.24x | 2.24x |
| 8 | Austin Ventures VIII, L.P. | 6.8% | 1.62x | 1.62x |
| 9 | Oak Investment Partners X, L.P. | 3.5% | 1.26x | 1.26x |
| 10 | U.S. Venture Partners VIII, L.P. | 3.5% | 1.30x | 1.30x |
| 11 | Frazier Healthcare IV, L.P. | 0.7% | 1.04x | 1.04x |
| 12 | Menlo Ventures IX, L.P. | 0.3% | 1.02x | 1.02x |
| 13 | OVP Venture Partners VI, L.P. | -15.6% | 0.28x | 0.28x |
2001 vintage in Los Angeles City Employees' Retirement System (LACERS)’s portfolio
All 5 funds of vintage 2001 in Los Angeles City Employees' Retirement System (LACERS)’s report, ranked by net IRR. Private equity, venture, and other strategies are mixed, so treat this as context rather than a strategy benchmark.
| # | Fund | Net IRR | TVPI | DPI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GTCR Fund VII-A | 83.1% | 2.79x | 2.79x |
| 2 | CVC European Equity Partners III | 41.0% | 2.92x | 2.89x |
| 3 | OCM Opportunities Fund IV | 28.4% | 1.65x | 1.65x |
| 4 | Austin Ventures VIII | 6.8% | 1.65x | 1.65x |
| 5 | Menlo Ventures IX | 0.3% | 1.02x | 1.02x |
Other reported funds by this firm
| Fund | Vintage | Net IRR | TVPI | Versus vintage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Menlo Venture Select I | 2026 | 54.8% | 1.41x | Top quartile |
| Menlo Ventures XVII | 2026 | 28.4% | 1.23x | |
| Menlo Inflection IV | 2025 | 61.8% | 1.36x | Top quartile |
| Menlo Ventures XVII | 2025 | 28.7% | 1.23x | Second quartile |
| Menlo Olympic Fund I | 2023 | 37.6% | 1.57x | Top quartile |
| Menlo Ventures XVI | 2023 | 43.9% | 1.72x | Top quartile |
| Menlo Inflection III | 2022 | 45.0% | 2.09x | Top quartile |
| Menlo Ventures XV | 2020 | 16.0% | 1.80x | Top quartile |
| Menlo Inflection II | 2019 | 10.7% | 1.64x | Third quartile |
| Menlo Ventures XIV | 2017 | 14.7% | 2.12x | Third quartile |
| Menlo Inflection I | 2016 | 12.3% | 2.48x | Second quartile |
| Menlo Ventures XII | 2015 | 9.4% | 1.88x | Bottom quartile |
| Menlo Ventures XI | 2011 | 29.0% | 4.19x | Top quartile |
| Menlo Ventures X | 2006 | 10.4% | 2.06x | Top quartile |
| Menlo Ventures VIII | 1999 | -8.9% | 0.50x | Bottom quartile |
| Menlo Ventures VII | 1997 | 135.6% | 4.71x | Top quartile |
| Menlo Ventures VI | 1993 | 40.8% | 3.11x | |
| Menlo Ventures IV | 1988 | 42.1% | 5.13x | |
| Menlo Ventures III | 1983 | 7.2% | 1.57x | Third quartile |
| Menlo Venture Partners | 1981 | 6.1% | 1.31x | |
| Menlo Inflection IV | — | N/M | — | |
| Menlo Special Opportunities Fund II | — | N/M | — | |
| Menlo Special Opportunities Fund III | — | N/M | — | |
| Menlo Ventures IX | — | N/M | — | |
| Menlo Ventures X | — | N/M | — | |
| Menlo Ventures XI | — | N/M | — | |
| Menlo Ventures XIV | — | N/M | — | |
| Menlo Ventures XV | — | N/M | — | |
| Menlo Ventures XVI | — | N/M | — | |
| Menlo Ventures XVII | — | N/M | — |
About this data
Washington State Investment Board: WSIB Private Equity Portfolio Performance Summary By Strategy, as of March 31, 2026. Net IRR as labeled by WSIB, calculated by Hamilton Lane from general partner cash flows and valuations and not confirmed by the general partners. TVPI is WSIB's total value multiple (B+C)/A recomputed to two decimals from the reported totals (WSIB prints one decimal). WSIB lists an initial investment date rather than a vintage year; its year is used as the vintage (blank for commitments not yet funded). Includes realized and legacy partnerships. View source
Los Angeles City Employees' Retirement System (LACERS): LACERS Private Equity Portfolio Performance Report, as of December 31, 2025. "Net IRR" and "Net TVPI" as printed in the fund-by-fund appendix of the Private Equity Portfolio Performance Report that LACERS posts semiannually (prepared on its private equity consultant's template; the cover gives www.aksia.com). The report defines TVPI as (cumulative distributions + fair market value) / cumulative contributions and labels IRRs of investments held less than two years "n.m."; 27 funds have no IRR (n.m., or "-" in the report) and 14 have no multiple ("-", mostly commitments with nothing contributed yet), all shown as blank. Dollar amounts are whole US dollars as reported (inception-to-date contributions and distributions). Total value = distributions + fair market value, and DPI = distributions / contributions, are computed. All 408 partnerships in the report are included: 305 active and 103 liquidated (no remaining fair market value), of which 23 are in LACERS' Specialized Portfolio and the rest in its Core Portfolio. LACERS counts 36 Credit/Distressed and 15 Natural Resources (energy) partnerships as private equity in this report, alongside buyout, growth equity, venture capital, secondaries, co-investment and fund-of-funds vehicles; its separate private credit and real estate reports are not imported. View source
Figures are as each LP reports them for its own investment, so they can differ between LPs because of timing, fees, and share class. Not investment advice.