The Complete Guide to Venture Capital Fund Metrics

n venture capital, the numbers don’t just tell the story, they shape the strategy.

This is a business built on asymmetric outcomes, long feedback loops, and limited visibility. Capital is locked for a decade. Success rides on a handful of outliers. And yet, GPs and LPs need to make high-stakes decisions every quarter with imperfect data. In that kind of environment, metrics aren’t just reporting tools, they’re survival tools.

But here’s the catch: the same metrics can mean very different things depending on where you sit. A GP might tout a strong TVPI. An LP might want to know how much of that is realized. A founder might focus on burn multiple, while the fund tracking them cares more about IRR. Most articles isolate these metrics or over-index on one lens. Few connect the whole system.

This article does.

We’ll break down the metrics that matter, and show how they work together. From fund-level KPIs like IRR and DPI, to startup performance metrics like CAC and churn, to the platform-level indicators VCs use to run their firms, to the regional variations that change what “good” looks like, we’ll map the full terrain.

Because in VC, the right metric, understood in the right context, is the difference between a story that raises capital and one that raises eyebrows.

‍

Fund-Level Metrics: The Core KPIs LPs Use to Judge a VC Firm

If you want to understand how a VC fund is really performing, this is where to look. LPs don’t invest on vision decks, they invest on track records. And fund-level metrics are the scorecard.

But unlike public market returns, these numbers aren’t plug-and-play. Each metric reveals a different dimension of fund performance: speed, scale, certainty, and unrealized upside. When interpreted together, they give LPs a multi-angle view. When misused, or misunderstood, they create misleading narratives that can skew decisions.

Let’s break down the five core KPIs every LP scrutinizes.

TVPI (Total Value to Paid-In)

Formula: TVPI = (Residual Value + Distributions) ÷ Paid-In Capital

What it shows: TVPI is the total return multiple, combining both realized and unrealized value. It answers the question: How much is this fund worth today, on paper, for every dollar I invested? A TVPI of 2.0× means the fund has generated $2 of value (cash returned + current holdings) for every $1 invested.

When to use it: TVPI is the most cited metric during a fund’s middle years. In early life, it’s mostly driven by unrealized gains (RVPI). In later years, it converges toward DPI.

Strengths: 

• Easy to interpret as a headline multiple
• Captures full fund value at a given time
• Useful for tracking overall portfolio appreciation

Limitations:

• Ignores time - 2× over 3 years vs. 2× over 13 years looks the same
• Dependent on valuations of still-unrealized companies
• Can be inflated by aggressive NAV markups

Benchmark:

• >2.0× TVPI is generally strong
• Top decile small funds can hit 3–4× in peak vintages
• High TVPI + high RVPI = paper gains
• High TVPI + high DPI = real gains

Caveat: A fund with 2.5× TVPI and 0.2× DPI might be sitting on unrealized unicorns, or on a valuation cliff. LPs dig deeper.

‍

DPI (Distributions to Paid-In)

Formula: DPI = Cumulative Distributions ÷ Paid-In Capital

What it shows: DPI reflects realized cash returns. It tells LPs: How much actual money have I gotten back? A DPI of 1.0× means every dollar invested has been returned; 1.5× means you’ve made 50% profit, in cash.

When to use it: Most relevant in mid-to-late fund life. It becomes the primary metric toward the end of the fund, when most value should be realized.

Strengths:

• The most tangible and reliable metric
• Immune to NAV gaming or future projections
• Anchors LP confidence and re-ups

Limitations:

• Doesn’t capture unrealized upside
• Looks weak early in fund life (DPI = 0 for years is common)
• Can be artificially boosted by early partial exits

Benchmark:

• >1.0× = break-even
• >1.5× = solid cash return
• >2.0× = strong DPI
• Many 2017–2019 vintage funds are just crossing 1.0× now

Caveat: Some funds engineer early DPI by selling winners too soon, locking in suboptimal returns to look good on paper.

‍

RVPI (Residual Value to Paid-In)

Formula: RVPI = Residual (Unrealized) Value ÷ Paid-In Capital

What it shows: RVPI captures the unrealized portion of a fund’s value. A 0.8× RVPI means there’s $0.80 of unrealized value for every dollar LPs invested, potential future upside still held in the portfolio.

When to use it: High early in a fund’s life. Declines as investments exit and DPI rises.

Strengths:

• Shows how much value is still “left in the tank”
• Helps LPs assess future return potential
• Crucial when DPI is still low

Limitations:

• Entirely dependent on mark-to-market estimates
• Can mask overvaluation or portfolio stagnation
• Doesn’t tell you when that value might be realized

Benchmark:

• Early funds: 0.8×–1.2× is normal
• Mid-life funds: 0.4×–0.8×
• Late funds: <0.2× or nearing zero

Caveat: In Asia and some deep-tech strategies, high RVPI is normal, but LPs want to see de-risking signals and eventual pathways to DPI.

‍

IRR (Internal Rate of Return)

Formula: The annualized discount rate that makes the net present value (NPV) of all cash flows (in and out) equal zero

What it shows: IRR reflects the speed and efficiency of returns. It asks: How quickly is this fund creating value? Two funds with the same TVPI can have very different IRRs if one returned money faster.

When to use it: Throughout fund life, but most meaningful after early paper gains convert to actual cash flow.

Strengths:

• Time-sensitive: distinguishes fast vs. slow returns
• Helps LPs compare funds with different vintages
• Useful when DPI begins to materialize

Limitations:

• Highly sensitive to timing of early distributions
• Can be artificially inflated by small early wins
• Assumes reinvestment at the same IRR (rarely realistic)

Benchmark:

• Net IRR > 20% is top-quartile
• 15%–20% is strong
• Below 10% raises questions unless it’s early or high-risk strategy

Caveat: A fund with 30% IRR and 0.3× DPI might have front-loaded one good exit, and little else.

‍

MOIC (Multiple on Invested Capital)

Formula: MOIC = Total Value of Investments ÷ Capital Invested (excluding fees)

What it shows: MOIC is the gross multiple of capital invested. It doesn’t include time, fees, or unrealized vs. realized, just total return versus capital deployed into deals.

When to use it: Deal-level analysis, or as a headline stat for gross performance. Often used by GPs to showcase winners.

Strengths:

• Simple “money in, money out” multiple
• Great for comparing portfolio companies or sectors
• Helps calibrate return concentration

Limitations:

• Doesn’t factor in time
• Gross of fees and carry
• Can be skewed by one outlier

Benchmark:

• 2.5×–3.5× MOIC on gross fund = strong
• 5×+ MOIC on a company = typical power-law winner

Caveat: MOIC without IRR context can overstate success. A 3× MOIC over 15 years might sound good, but it’s a ~7% IRR. Not so great.

‍

Why LPs Look at All Five

No single metric gives the full picture. IRR captures time, TVPI captures total value, DPI captures reality, RVPI shows future promise, and MOIC shows gross performance. Savvy LPs triangulate all five, adjusted for fund age, strategy, and market conditions.

For example:

• Early fund: High RVPI, low DPI, elevated TVPI → promising but needs patience
• Mid fund: IRR stabilizing, DPI rising, RVPI declining → momentum building
• Late fund: DPI dominant, RVPI low, IRR durable → outcome realized

And context matters. A 2× TVPI is not impressive for a 12-year-old fund. A 1.3× DPI might be excellent for a 6-year-old fund that invested through a downturn. Fund size, strategy, and market cycle all shape what “good” looks like.

So LPs don’t just ask for metrics. They ask: What’s behind them? What’s driving them? And what happens next?

‍

Startup-Level Metrics: What VCs Look for Before Writing a Check

Before a VC writes a check, they don’t just want a great story, they want the numbers that prove it can scale.

Every founder has a pitch deck. But the ones that stand out are grounded in data. The right startup metrics show more than traction. They reveal product-market fit, financial discipline, operational efficiency, and long-term upside. And for LPs evaluating a fund’s portfolio, these same metrics provide early signals of what’s de-risked, what’s accelerating, and what might need intervention.

Here are the key metrics that matter most when startups raise capital, and what they tell investors at every stage.

MRR / ARR and Revenue Growth

What it is: 

• MRR (Monthly Recurring Revenue): Predictable monthly income, typically for SaaS or subscription models
• ARR (Annual Recurring Revenue): MRR × 12; a simple way to benchmark annualized revenue run rate

Why it matters: Recurring revenue is the gold standard for predictability. It tells investors whether a startup has a repeatable sales motion and stable cash flow potential.

How to benchmark:

• Early-stage SaaS: $1M ARR is a common Series A threshold
• Growth stage: 2–3× YoY revenue growth is strong
• 100% net ARR retention (if tracked) = best-in-class

How to contextualize it: Founders should pair ARR with growth rate and customer count. A $500k ARR growing 15% MoM is often more impressive than a flat $1.2M ARR. VCs want to see the velocity and consistency of revenue, not just the top-line number.

‍

CAC, LTV, and Payback Period

What it is:

• CAC (Customer Acquisition Cost): Total cost to acquire one new customer
• LTV (Lifetime Value): Gross profit expected from a customer over their lifetime
• Payback Period: Time it takes to recoup CAC from gross margin contribution

Why it matters: These metrics tell you whether your growth engine is efficient or burning cash to chase customers. A startup with strong unit economics scales better and survives longer.

How to benchmark:

• LTV:CAC ratio: 3:1 is good, 5:1 is great (but too high may suggest underinvestment in growth)
• Payback period:
  
  • <12 months is strong (especially for B2B)
  • <6 months is rare but excellent

How to contextualize it: Don’t just show a strong LTV:CAC, explain what’s driving it. Are CACs dropping because of referral loops? Is LTV expanding through upsells? Founders should also break CAC into paid vs. organic channels to show scalability.

‍

Gross Margin

What it is: Gross Margin = (Revenue – Cost of Goods Sold) ÷ Revenue

Why it matters: Gross margin reveals operating leverage—how much value the company keeps after delivering the product. Higher margins mean more capital can be reinvested into growth.

How to benchmark:

• SaaS: 75–90%
• Fintech: 60–80%
• Consumer goods: 40–60%
• Hardware: 20–40%, but improving with scale

How to contextualize it: Founders should show margin trends over time. Improving margins signal stronger pricing power or better cost control. If margins are low, explain whether it’s a deliberate early strategy (e.g., subsidizing growth) or a structural challenge.

‍

Churn Rate

What it is: Percentage of customers (or revenue) lost over a period, typically monthly or annually.

Why it matters: Churn reflects customer satisfaction and retention. High churn kills growth. Low churn signals product-market fit.

How to benchmark:

• SMB SaaS: <5% monthly churn
• Enterprise SaaS: <1% monthly
• Net Revenue Retention (NRR):
  
  • 100% = expansion revenue exceeds churn
  • 120% = exceptional

How to contextualize it: Churn is more than a number. Founders should explain who’s churning and why. Segmenting cohorts (by signup month, industry, ACV) often reveals that churn is concentrated in non-ideal customers. That’s a solvable problem, and VCs know it.

‍

Burn Rate and Burn Multiple

What it is:

• Burn Rate: Monthly cash loss
• Burn Multiple: Net burn ÷ Net new ARR (how much it costs to generate a dollar of new revenue)

Why it matters: These metrics show how efficiently the company uses capital. Especially in downturns, investors scrutinize whether growth is worth the spend.

How to benchmark:

• Burn multiple:
  
  • <1× = elite
  • 1–1.5× = good
  • 2× = concerning unless growth is off the charts
    
    
• Runway: 12–18 months post-fundraise is typical

How to contextualize it: In pitch decks, founders should avoid hand-waving burn. Show monthly burn, projected burn curve, and when the company hits key inflection points (e.g., Series B readiness or breakeven). If burn multiple is high, back it with a deliberate growth strategy, and a plan to bring it down.

‍

NPS (Net Promoter Score)

What it is: A measure of customer satisfaction based on how likely they are to recommend the product (range: –100 to +100).

Why it matters: High NPS correlates with retention, word-of-mouth growth, and brand loyalty. It’s an early proxy for virality and moat.

How to benchmark:

• 0–30: Fair
• 30–50: Strong
• 50+: Excellent (Apple-level loyalty)

How to contextualize it: Founders should treat NPS as a story metric. Pair it with qualitative feedback, customer testimonials, or reference quotes. An 80 NPS backed by “we can’t live without it” quotes from design partners goes a long way in a pitch.

‍

The Metrics Behind the Metrics

Each of these KPIs signals a different piece of the puzzle: growth, efficiency, durability, love. No one number seals a deal, but the narrative they collectively form can.

For founders: Own your numbers. Explain what’s improving. Show what you’re testing. Great VCs don’t expect perfection, they expect clarity.

For VCs and LPs: These metrics don’t just de-risk a company. They shape the performance of the entire fund. A portfolio full of low churn, high-margin, capital-efficient startups isn’t just healthy, it’s how you earn DPI.

‍

Platform & Operational Metrics That Drive VC Firm Efficiency

Great fund performance doesn’t just come from great startups, it comes from running a tight operation behind the scenes.

While LPs mostly focus on fund-level metrics like IRR and DPI, the smartest VC firms also track internal metrics that measure how efficiently they source deals, run diligence, support founders, and raise new capital. These platform and operational metrics don’t show up in quarterly reports, but they shape everything that eventually does.

Think of this as the fund’s operating system: invisible to outsiders, but essential to long-term success.

Deal Flow Efficiency Metrics

The investment process begins with sourcing. But volume alone isn’t the game - conversion, pattern recognition, and time efficiency are what separate reactive funds from disciplined ones.

Pipeline Volume and Conversion Rates

How many deals are entering the funnel? Where are they coming from? And how many become actual investments?

Smart firms break this down weekly or monthly:

• Total inbound vs. outbound deal flow
• Source breakdown: warm intros, founder referrals, cold outreach, accelerator demo days
• Conversion rate from intro → diligence → partner meeting → term sheet

Why it matters: High pipeline numbers look good, but a low conversion rate may signal misalignment or wasted effort. Tracking where quality deals originate allows firms to focus time where it matters.

Time Spent in Each Deal Stage

Speed is all about reducing drag, not cutting corners for the sake of it.

Operationally excellent firms track:

• Average time from first touch to term sheet
• Stage-by-stage bottlenecks (e.g., legal diligence, IC prep)
• Drop-off points (where deals die and why)

Why it matters: Understanding cycle time per stage helps VCs respond faster to great founders and avoid losing deals to faster-moving peers.

Common Traits of Successful Deals

Data-driven firms look backward too. What do past winners have in common?

Metrics might include:

• Check size
• Partner lead
• Stage at entry
• Sector or founder background

Why it matters: This feedback loop shapes future sourcing filters. If 80% of historical DPI came from seed-stage B2B SaaS investments with female founders, that’s not trivia—that’s strategy.

Fundraising & LP Metrics

Capital doesn’t just deploy, it needs to be raised, nurtured, and committed. And top VCs treat fundraising like a sales motion, complete with pipeline tracking and performance KPIs.

Forecasted Capital Close (Weekly)

Firms with active raises forecast expected capital commitments by week or month.

This includes:

• Total soft-circled
• Probability-weighted forecasts
• Close rate by LP type (institutional, family office, individual)

Why it matters: A clear fundraising pipeline helps avoid mismatched deployment timing and signals professionalism to LPs who expect visibility.

Seasonal Fundraising Cadence

Many experienced firms build annual calendars for capital formation:

• Ideal months for outreach (e.g., pre-summer, post-year-end allocations)
• Historical close timing
• Time from first LP meeting to signed subscription docs

Why it matters: Fundraising has its own rhythm. Understanding when LPs are most responsive improves hit rates and reduces timeline slippage.

LP Engagement Tracking

Relationship management is measurable.

Top firms track:

• Number of touchpoints per LP
• Engagement per update (email opens, click-through rates)
• Event participation (e.g., LP webinars or in-person briefings)

Why it matters: LPs often cite communication quality as a reason to re-up. Firms that proactively monitor engagement know who’s leaning in—and who needs more care.

Demonstrating Value to LPs via CRM Data

More than what you report, it’s how you prove your impact.

Examples:

• Number of founder intros made per quarter
• Logged support requests fulfilled (hiring, BD, follow-on fundraising)
• Internal scorecard on platform contributions

Why it matters: This is the “show your work” layer of LP trust. A firm that quantifies its founder support isn’t just telling a story, it’s showing evidence.

Metrics That Power the Machine

These platform KPIs won’t show up on an LP’s dashboard. But they power the fund's ability to consistently source high-quality deals, move fast, support founders, and close new capital, all of which directly shape eventual IRR, DPI, and TVPI.

Operationally mature firms treat these metrics with the same rigor as their portfolio tracking. Because over time, internal discipline becomes external performance.

‍

How VC Metrics Shift by Region: The Geographic Lens

Not all metrics travel well. A 2.0× TVPI in San Francisco doesn’t mean the same thing as a 2.0× in Stockholm or Singapore.

Venture capital is global, but the market forces shaping returns - exit timing, sector dynamics, regulatory friction - are intensely local. And that changes how LPs read the numbers. Looking at DPI without understanding exit timelines, or benchmarking IRR across vastly different regions, leads to the wrong conclusions.

Let us see how fund metrics vary across three major VC ecosystems: North America, Europe, and Asia.

North America: Fast Exits, High IRR Expectations

Exit Market Maturity

The U.S. and Canada benefit from mature IPO and M&A markets. Even in down years, there’s a deep bench of acquirers and secondary buyers. That means cash returns can come faster, and IRRs can look higher earlier.

Preferred Metrics

• IRR and TVPI dominate LP conversations
• DPI shows up faster and is scrutinized mid-fund
• LPs expect some early distributions within 4–5 years

Sector Strength

North America leads in software, fintech, life sciences, and consumer internet. Many sectors here offer faster paths to monetization or acquisition, which boosts metric velocity.

Regulatory Risk

Low. The U.S. legal environment is stable and founder/VC-friendly.

NAV Reliability

Generally high. U.S. firms have stronger reporting norms, and pricing methodologies are relatively standardized. That said, 2021’s valuation bubble led to some NAV inflation, which many GPs are still marking down.

What to Expect

• Early high IRR, especially from quick wins
• Higher mid-cycle TVPI, followed by rising DPI
• Benchmarking often assumes exits within 7–8 years

‍

Europe: Conservative Reporting, Durable Outcomes

Exit Market Maturity

Europe’s exit environment has historically lagged the U.S., but it’s catching up. IPO volumes are improving, and corporate M&A is steady. Exits take longer, but are often more stable.

Preferred Metrics

• DPI carries more weight than in the U.S.
• TVPI is viewed cautiously, often as conservative estimates
• IRR is used, but usually interpreted within longer timeframes

Sector Strength

Deep-tech, AI, industrial software, and fintech are strengths across hubs like London, Berlin, Paris, and Stockholm. These sectors may have longer gestation periods but large eventual payoffs.

Regulatory Risk

Moderate. Data privacy laws, financial regulations, and labor protections can slow certain business models, but they also protect long-term value creation.

NAV Reliability

High. European GPs are typically conservative with valuations, often under-marking portfolio companies until exit is near. LPs view this conservatism as a trust signal.

What to Expect

• Slower DPI build, but more predictable
• IRRs often look lower early, then rise post-exit
• Strong TVPI might lag until realizations catch up
• DPI >1.0× after year 7 is common in successful funds

‍

Asia: High Growth, Longer Liquidity Horizon

Exit Market Maturity

Asia has high-growth ecosystems, but uneven exit paths. China, India, and Southeast Asia produce unicorns rapidly, but IPO readiness varies, and domestic M&A markets are still maturing.

Preferred Metrics

• RVPI tends to be high for much longer
• TVPI can look strong, but backed by concentrated unrealized positions
• DPI is often delayed, and IRR remains suppressed until exits materialize

Sector Strength

Consumer tech, superapps, fintech, logistics, and digital marketplaces dominate. Many Asian startups scale fast but are reliant on regional macro cycles for exit opportunities.

Regulatory Risk

High and dynamic. Changes in FDI rules, IPO eligibility (especially in China), and government scrutiny can affect liquidity timelines dramatically.

NAV Reliability

Varies. Some GPs follow rigorous practices, but LPs are cautious with NAVs tied to opaque private rounds or inflated local valuations.

What to Expect

• High RVPI even in years 5–7
• DPI <0.5× is common mid-cycle
• Real DPI often materializes late in fund life, years 9–12
• LPs benchmark performance with extra attention to cash conversion timeline

‍

Local Markets Shape Global Metrics

Here’s the reality: a high IRR in the U.S. might reflect speed. A high RVPI in Asia might reflect potential. And a modest DPI in Europe might signal reliable value, not underperformance.

Founders pitching international investors, and GPs raising from global LPs, need to contextualize their metrics with regional expectations. Likewise, LPs should avoid applying Silicon Valley benchmarks to global funds without adjusting for liquidity, sector, and macro factors.

Metrics are relative. Interpretation is regional. Judgment must be both.

‍

Metric Misuse and Manipulation: What to Watch Out For

Not all metrics are created, or presented, honestly. In venture, even well-intentioned investors and founders can game numbers, consciously or not. And when capital flows depend on perception, the pressure to polish can override the need for accuracy.

Here are some of the most common pitfalls and manipulations to watch for:

Inflated NAVs to boost TVPI or RVPI:
Unrealized portfolio companies marked up aggressively, often off the back of loosely priced internal rounds, can make paper returns look far stronger than reality.

Selective cash flow timing to boost IRR:
Small, fast exits early in a fund’s life can spike IRR, but mean little if the bulk of the portfolio stagnates. Some GPs even delay capital calls to optimize IRR optics.

High DPI from early, suboptimal exits:
Selling winners too early for liquidity or fundraising optics may improve DPI but cap the overall return potential. Short-term win, long-term cost.

Churn masking through cohort slicing:
Presenting only the best-performing customer cohorts hides real retention risk. Investors should ask: “What does churn look like across all users over time?”

LTV/CAC exaggeration via small sample sizes:
Lifetime value looks great, until you realize it’s based on a handful of best-case customers. Without large enough cohorts, LTV is more hope than signal.

These aren’t rare. They’re common. And they’re often unintentional—driven by incentives, not malice.

Great investors don’t chase metrics. They ask what they mean and what’s behind them.

‍

How to Use Metrics Strategically (Founders, GPs, LPs)

Metrics aren’t the story, they’re how you tell it well. Used right, they give investors confidence, clarify progress, and anchor decisions in reality. But they work best when tailored to the lens of the person reading them.

Here’s how each stakeholder can turn metrics into leverage.

For Founders

Investors don’t fund numbers. They fund stories backed by numbers. Founders who treat metrics as narrative tools, not performance theatre, build real conviction.

Use metrics to support your narrative, not replace it.
Growth rates, burn multiples, churn trends - they should reinforce why your strategy is working. Numbers give your thesis weight, but they’re not a substitute for clarity.

Connect unit economics to growth strategy and funding milestones.
Don’t just show LTV:CAC or runway, tie it to what's next. Are you raising to shorten CAC? Expand gross margin? Accelerate a product with high NPS? Help investors understand how today’s numbers translate into tomorrow’s outcome.

For GPs

LPs don’t just want top-quartile returns. They want confidence in the journey to get there. Metrics help you signal transparency, control, and forward momentum.

Use a blend of IRR, TVPI, and DPI in LP comms.
Don’t lean on one shiny number. A healthy balance of realized and unrealized value, with time-adjusted context, gives a more credible picture of performance.

Show how unrealized value is being de-risked over time.
High RVPI is fine, if you can explain why those marks are grounded and what milestones your portfolio companies are hitting. Map out progress and downside protection, not just valuation growth.

For LPs

Raw returns don’t tell the full story. The most sophisticated LPs know how to interrogate the assumptions behind the math.

Ask for fund sensitivity analysis and mark-down protocols.
How does the fund mark NAVs? What happens if top holdings are haircut by 30%? LPs who understand the valuation logic gain real visibility into risk.

Benchmark by vintage and region, not raw numbers alone.
A 15% IRR in Europe may be better than a 22% in the U.S. depending on strategy and context. Avoid cross-geography comparisons without calibrating expectations.

Metrics don’t just raise capital. They make the story credible.

Used strategically, they become more than proof points, they become your edge.

‍

Every Metric in One View

‍

The Real Job of Metrics

At its core, venture capital is a long game of asymmetric outcomes. One deal can return the fund. One insight can unlock a career. And one metric, misunderstood, can cost years of effort, or millions of dollars.

The best VCs know this. They don’t use metrics to posture. They use them to focus. IRR, DPI, TVPI, RVPI, MOIC. These aren’t trophies, they’re tools. They guide conviction, shape pacing, and signal when it’s time to double down, or walk away.

Founders win when they speak the language of metrics fluently but humbly. When they connect CAC to strategy, or burn to milestones, they don’t just show traction, they show control. That’s what raises capital.

And LPs, the stewards of long-horizon capital, succeed when they look beyond the glossy PDFs. When they ask how DPI is built, how NAVs are marked, how IRR is earned, not engineered. Metrics are a map, but only if you know how to read the terrain.

Because in this business, metrics aren’t the outcome. They’re how we find our way to it.