How to be a Pathological Optimist with Speedinvest’s Daniel Keiper-Knorr

Robin Haak: It’s great to have you with us today, Daniel. Thank you for joining us. I wanted to start with something you wrote in one of your LinkedIn posts about hiring a Head of DPI at Speedinvest. You mentioned it’s a bit of a wonky job title, but it’s made a lot of difference to your fund. Maybe you could tell us a bit about this role and the impact you’ve seen from having someone in this position?

Daniel Keiper-Knorr: Yeah. So that whole project, when it hit the media a few months back, was already over two years in the making. Internally, the initiative dates back to probably late ‘21 or early ‘22. At the time, we had just come out of a successful fundraising for Fund Four and our first Opportunities Fund, which together added up to nearly €600 million.

When entering the market, we felt a sense of urgency—not only from our LPs but internally as well—that it made sense to proactively and preemptively focus on creating liquidity from the portfolio and the funds toward our LPs. This eventually led us to hire someone, and internally, the role was nicknamed the “Head of DPI”—and it turned out to be quite a catchy title.

It seems like this approach didn’t go unnoticed - what kind of reactions or interest have you been getting from others in the industry?

Yeah, we’ve received a lot of feedback on this from the market. When I was at a Super Investor conference last year this topic didn’t go unnoticed. We’ve received a lot of positive reactions—both from our existing and prospective LPs and from fellow GPs who are curious about how we implemented this and what drove us to take this route.

I mean the idea itself is pretty simple. At the end of the day, a VC fund manager is an asset manager. A VC fund—and its GPs—essentially have a contract to turn one euro into five or more over a given period. That’s what our LPs pay us for, that’s how the industry makes money, and, ultimately, it’s what will keep the industry alive and carry it through cycles.

Everything else—whether it’s the strategy, the sectors we invest in, the stages we focus on, or the way we structure our fund—is just a means to that end: turning one LP euro into five in 10 years.

That’s the ultimate goal, so how are you making that happen?

Making one euro into 5 over 10 years translates to an annual net IRR of about 17%. That’s not even that high. To justify the risk that our industry takes, we need to aim for higher than 17% net IRR. The thing about IRR—returns over time—is that the quicker you deliver it, the lower the hurdle needs to be to achieve that north-of-17% target. That’s where we approached the topic of producing DPI in a structured and systematic way.

So we took that decision right at the launch of Fund Four, and then we looked at the market and did our homework - looking at what needed to be in place internally to get this strategy off to a good start. We also decided to hire someone from the market who wasn’t rooted in our investment team. This was deliberate because we wanted to avoid any gray zones or conflicts of interest that might arise. In our investment team there might be some gray zones of interests that might collide.

Which fund are you working on now?

We’re in the final stages of the portfolio-building period for Fund Four. That one still has one more year to go.

And what comes next after Fund Four wraps up?

At the beginning of 2025, we’ll be going out to raise Fund Number Five. We’re aiming for a first close in about 12 months and plan to have the fund ready for deployment in Q1 of 2026. It’ll be more or less the same size and strategy as Funds Three and Four. So, for now, we can say we’ve found our sweet spot in the market—in terms of strategy and size. We’re targeting another €300 to €350 million in volume, following the same successful strategy we had for Funds Two, Three, and Four.

Fund One, 13 years back, was a bit of an outlier in many respects. At €10 million, it was a small, boutique effort. In hindsight, it was more of a friends-and-family SPV than what you’d properly call a fund. But by 2015, and even more so with the 2019 vintage, we developed the strategy that we’re on now. That laid the groundwork for the 2022 fund and will do the same for the 2026 fund.

So, you joined in 2011 as one of the co-founders of Speedinvest. What’s changed the most since those early days? You started small, with friends and family, and now you’re managing €300 to €350 million per fund. What have you learned along the way?

Well, when you start with very little, the learning curve is steep—it’s that helpful “base effect,” right? But honestly, the whole industry has changed significantly along every vector: size, professionalism, and quality. And when I talk about this, I’m referring to the mainland European ecosystem—I’d probably exclude the UK from that, as they’re at least 15 years ahead if not more.

But in mainland Europe—Germany, the German-speaking regions, and neighboring countries—we’re now going through a phase of real transition. For the first time, we’re seeing signs of consolidation in the industry.

What does that consolidation mean for the ecosystem, especially given how the European VC landscape has evolved?

It’s now a once-in-a-lifetime chance to finally build a real ecosystem here. That’s what the European VC industry missed in the early 2000s. When the bubble burst, the “tech winter” that followed erased nearly the entire European VC landscape. In Germany, for example, only a handful of names survived through to the present day. You’d think of firms like Earlybird, but there weren’t many others that come to mind.

Now we’re experiencing a second period of consolidation. Funds are being sold, fundraises are taking longer, and fund sizes are coming in smaller amounts. It’s a stark contrast to the years of zero-interest-rate policies from 2010 to 2021 or early 2022. But these times of crisis always present tremendous opportunities for innovation. And we’ve learned a lot along the way.

Looking at 2023 and 2024, these years were particularly tough for venture capital and tech and software industries in general. What are you seeing in 2025 that feels different?

What’s different now is that I think the whole industry has finally learned that all markets move in cycles. All of them.

The tech market cycles just like any other, and even markets that people thought were immune—like real estate—are showing it. You’re seeing companies going bankrupt left and right in real estate, which took many players by surprise. It’s the same in tech—there are cycles, and that’s natural.

Looking ahead into 2025, and maybe even beyond, I can see the downturn bottoming out. I’m speaking specifically about seed-stage investments—from company formation up to Series B. I can’t speak for the later stages or further downstream markets, but at the early stage, I see things stabilizing. That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if there are still some negative surprises to the downside. But on average, broadly speaking, I think the market is bottoming out.

You mentioned the market is bottoming out, but in some areas, valuations are starting to recover. Where are you seeing that activity, and what’s driving it?

In some areas, I’m seeing valuations at the seed stage picking up again and even surpassing 2021 levels. Not broadly, but specifically in the AI-centered part of the market, which is very buoyant and attracting a lot of money. Large rounds are happening in that space. Overall, fewer rounds are happening, but the ones in AI are far larger compared to other parts of the market. So, it distorts the statistics a bit.

But generally speaking, I would say the market is bottoming now. I wonder if it will pick up again.

If we knew the answer to that, it’d make our jobs a lot easier, right?

(laughs) Well, this is the strange part—it’s all about people dealing with people. We specifically invest in seed and early stage, and at least 75% of our investment decisions are based on the team. Every deal is the result of a negotiation.

It’s the same on both sides of the VC fund model: with startups and with LPs. Every transaction, every agreement, is negotiated—that’s what defines private markets. And there’s this strange kind of inertia I’ve observed in people’s minds. This became very visible to me in 2022. I did two roadshows that year—one in the spring and one in the fall.

What do you mean by inertia? Can you explain what you’ve observed between those two roadshows?

During the spring roadshow in 2022—keep in mind that interest rate hikes had already started in the summer of 2021, so the market had turned about a year before—most LPs were still focused on portfolio details. They were asking about things like KPIs for specific portfolio companies, MRR growth, LTV versus CAC, payback periods, and so on.

And then when you went back in the autumn?

Six months later, in October, I met with the exact same people. Suddenly, all the discussions were about interest rates, macroeconomics, inflation, and how these things would affect the market. Now, these are good and relevant questions, but they were coming 18 months after the market had already turned.

And I think we’ll see something similar when the markets turn upward again. Even once the real situation improves, many people will still be stuck in a gloomy mindset. That state of inertia, where people remain cautious and hesitant, will drag out investments into the industry for longer than necessary.

Yeah, I can see how that could happen. Let’s talk about the kinds of startups you’re investing in right now. You’ve got a really broad portfolio including start-ups in fintech, deep tech, marketplaces, Industry 4.0, and digital health. What kinds of startups are you finding interesting at the moment?

The health tech space is picking up significantly, and we’re seeing a lot of momentum in deep tech as well. In some SaaS markets, we’ve seen surprisingly high valuations. But across all six sectors that we cover, we still see dynamics at play. That’s why we don’t call ourselves generalists—we refer to ourselves as multi-sector specialists. It’s an important distinction to make.

When I compare the six sectors to each other, I can finally say that deep tech, health tech, and what we call the “industrial” sectors are picking up in terms of dynamics. For fintech and marketplaces—sectors we’ve been investing in since the very beginning of 2011—the themes are shifting. Things are moving away from consumer-facing solutions. That’s normal. When an industry is still new or stuck, the consumer-facing part is usually tackled first. It’s only later that entrepreneurs start digging into the weeds and solving inefficiencies behind the scenes.

For example, in fintech, we’re seeing very specific embedded finance solutions. In marketplaces, there’s a noticeable increase in B2B marketplaces for specific industries—both on the distribution and procurement sides. In SaaS, we’re seeing solutions across industries, but even here, the focus is shifting. There’s less emphasis on consumer products and much more attention on enterprise and business-targeted solutions.

Speedinvest has been operating since 2011, so you must have seen all kinds of startups. Is it tricky to predict which AI companies will become market leaders? How do you, at Speedinvest, assess the value of AI or generative AI startups?

As you said, it’s very difficult. Not every fund can invest in every startup. AI, and generative AI specifically, requires tons of capital, and that’s something I have trouble seeing in Europe. There’s also the issue of regulation. Europe’s addiction to regulation is worrying me—it’s almost like Europe is ruling itself out of this business.

That’s an interesting perspective.

I don’t know if it’s intentional or accidental, but I believe Europe is, to some extent, ruling itself out of this business.

Can you expand on that? What do you think sets Europe apart in terms of AI, and where does it fall short?

The AGI (artificial general intelligence) space is, essentially, American—despite the good things we’re seeing in Europe. Ultimately, it’s a big checkbook game, and the big checkbooks are in the U.S. That said, it’s different when we’re talking about more business-model-specific or value-chain-specific AI. Those areas require a lot of specialized knowledge and expertise, and I think that’s where Europe can make its mark. But when it comes to the foundational layer of AI, I’m doubtful Europe can compete.

Okay, let’s shift to the broader European ecosystem. You’ve often talked about the need for more collaboration among firms across different stages. What do you see as the biggest challenges or opportunities for Europe right now in the venture capital market?

The biggest challenge is that there’s still not enough capital in the market. In my view, there’s only one true bottleneck in the market: the LP. It’s not the founders—they’re not lacking in number or quality. It’s not about talent, education, or credibility. Europe simply lacks the supply of required capital. If that bottleneck were to be addressed, I believe that within five to ten years, the playing field between Europe and other regions would level out.

So, what do you think needs to be done to attract more LPs to invest in Europe?

It would of course require efforts on all sides—from the players in the market, the VC firms, the PE firms, including us and all our peers. It also requires action from policymakers, like finally unifying the capital market and tax regimes. If that happens, it would make a big difference.

And there’s this phrase someone coined: “Capital is like a heat-seeking missile—it will find its targets.” There’s no point in just giving subsidies. Subsidies are nice, but they don’t solve the root of the problem, which is making it easier for investors to access these asset classes.

What’s the root of the problem, in your view?

I’m not just pointing fingers at policymakers to change the rules—this includes all of us. But to me, that’s the one thing holding Europe back.

Talking about collaboration among VC firms—what do you think VC firms like yours and solo GP firms, like Robin Capital, could do to foster better collaboration?

It’s about contributing to and building a true ecosystem. And if you look at ecosystems in biology, they live and thrive through collaboration.

That's the part that we can provide. One way we contribute is by writing LP checks into smaller, earlier-stage funds that are doing things we’re not doing ourselves. It widens our spectrum and gives us access to deals.

We actively write LP checks to first-time funds, emerging managers, special strategies, and unique setups, including solo GPs. At the same time, we take LP checks from later-stage GPs to ensure a flow of information and deals downstream and a flow of candidates upstream. We believe in vertical integration and collaboration in the industry.

But there’s so much more potential. People should work together more—not just on cap tables when you happen to syndicate a round, but by actively seeking collaboration and partnerships. Share resources, share knowledge, and even launch joint initiatives.

Yeah. Share resources, share knowledge, best practices, etc.

Exactly. And don’t wait around for policymakers or industry boards to get involved. Just start now.

Yeah, it's time for VCs to take things into their own hands. Let’s quickly talk a bit about you before we finish. What’s your background? Do you come from an entrepreneurial family?

Where shall I start? How much time do we have? (laughs) I was born and raised in Austria in the ‘70s and ‘80s, then studied in Switzerland through the mid-‘90s. Then I returned to Vienna and worked in a bank in brokerage, followed by a short stint in private banking in Switzerland. Then I got a phone call from Oliver, my co-founding partner. Back then, he was about to spin out an academic startup from the University of Vienna.

What was that call about?

It was late ‘99 or early 2000. Oliver was being chased by VCs to take their money. He said to me, “You work in a bank—you can handle money. Help me out here.” And I told him, “Exactly, I work in a bank. That’s why I know I can’t handle money.”

But by the end of that call, I decided to leave Zurich, come back to Vienna, and join his startup. We raised capital right in the middle of the dot-com bubble bursting. Somehow, we kept the company afloat, turned it around several times, and eventually achieved a successful trade sale in early 2006.

After that, we went through a two- or three-year lockup period. Once that ended, we all left but stayed in touch. About a year later, we sat down and thought, “What’s next?” And Speedinvest was the best idea we could come up with.

So, you founded a company together, and then later, you founded a fund together?

Exactly. It’s Oliver, Werner and me. There were some others involved early on, but they’re no longer with us, although we’re still good friends. Including the one and a half years of working in the dark, it’s now been 15 years since we started this journey.

And growing up, did you feel like you were driven to work in entrepreneurship or VC?

Entrepreneurship, yes—that’s definitely in the family. But I also knew early on that I wouldn’t fit into a corporate environment. That became very clear.

What I also realized is that it’s really about the team you do something with. It’s not so much about skills or education; it’s about culture, mindset, morale, and mentality. That’s what drives success - culture eats everything else for breakfast every day.

Culture eats everything for breakfast, all day, every day.

(laughs) Exactly. It’s a good motto for life. At Speedinvest, the team is a testament to that philosophy, and it’s also what we look for in the companies and entrepreneurs we back. Typically, we’re the first check on the cap table.

So yeah, I started my career in banking, but not in the traditional corporate sense. Brokerage and equities trading aren’t very corporate compared to other areas of banking.

What excites you most about your job?

Honestly, after nearly 15 years, there’s still never a dull day in this company. What excites me most is the fantastic ideas these entrepreneurs come up with. We screen up to 10,000 deals a year, and in 99,7% of cases, we unfortunately have to say no.

That’s a lot of rejection. How do you approach that side of the job?

It’s true—99,7% of the time, you’re saying no. And in about 0,3% of cases, you say yes. To do this job, you have to be a pathological optimist. You also need to have a fundamental belief in people. You’re constantly looking for and seeing the good in people. Maybe some neurologist or psychiatrist out there will study VCs someday—it would be interesting to read their findings!

So this excitement applies to both sides of the business for me: working with entrepreneurs and dealing with LPs. When we started, the team was just five generalists—each of us capable of doing everything. None of us were brilliant at one thing, but none of us were catastrophic at anything either.

Over time, as the firm grew, roles naturally became more specialized. For me, it was around the time we raised Fund Three in 2018-19 that it became clear we needed to professionalize the LP and capital supply side of the business. It could no longer be a side gig for the CEO every three years during a fundraising campaign.

What did that transition look like for you?

I stepped out of the investment business entirely to fully focus on capital markets. For the first two years, I handled it more or less alone. Once we raised Fund Three, we started preparing for Fund Four, and we realized we needed to build a dedicated team. We hired people specifically for this, and some members of our existing team transitioned into the capital markets team. That includes the Head of DPI (who we talked about earlier).

How big is your capital markets team now?

The capital markets team is six people out of a total headcount of just under 80. That’s about 7% of the firm, fully focused on capital markets.

Of those six, two-thirds, including myself, are focused on raising primary capital from LPs, ranging from private individuals to large institutional investors. The other third - two people - are the DPI team.

It’s not just them, though. One of my co-founding partners, Werner, oversees this side of the business as well.

I'm the co-founding partner who takes care of the primary liquidity and LP relations, while Oliver takes care of the rest of the business. Honestly, he has a far bigger workload!

It sounds like each of you plays to your strengths.

Exactly. I come from a capital markets background, so I speak the lingo—and that’s become increasingly important. At the end of the day, we’re asset managers. Robin Capital is, too. We have an agreement with our LPs: to multiply their investment, ideally fivefold. If we fail to deliver on that, they won’t come back.

Yeah, that makes total sense. That’s the main goal of the fund, I suppose. So what gives you balance in your life between your work at Speedinvest and your personal life?

Family, friends, sports. I love to ski!

You live close to the mountains…

I do. My parents’ home is just a 10-minute bus ride from the nearest ski lift. Back in grammar school - when we only had school in the mornings - I’d be free after lunch and if conditions allowed, I’d go home for lunch, get changed, walk to the bus stop, go skiing for three hours in the afternoon, and be back by nightfall at 5:00 p.m. And like every good Austrian, I was a ski instructor during high school and university. It was my second-best job ever - it was perfect.

I also deliberately worked only with kids and beginners because you could create the happiest and most tired smiles on their faces after a great day on the slopes. That’s still one of the most memorable sights for me, even now at Speedinvest. As a kids’ ski instructor you have one job: return the kid in the evening happy, healthy, and tired.

Last question. What would you say are your top three achievements in life and business?

In life, it’s my family—my wife and kid. No doubt there.

In business, it’s being a two-time founder and having built Speedinvest into what it is today. Managing a billion euros in assets still sounds crazy to me. Every time I take a step back and think about it, it gives me goosebumps. It’s still totally unreal.

I’m sure it’s a bit of a pinch-me moment when you see that number - wow.

Absolutely. But what strikes me the most is when, during an LP conversation, you see the moment the pitch clicks. Their tone of voice changes, their posture shifts, and their eyes widen. It triggers a physical reaction. The energy in the room suddenly changes. That moment is hard to describe.

That must be a very exciting part of your job.

It is. It doesn’t matter if it’s a €100k ticket, €500k, €1 million, €10 million, or €40 million—it’s all about that human connection. In the end, we’re dealing with people.

Yes, it is a people business.

Very much so

Thank you so much for your time, Daniel.

All the best. Thanks!