At The Money: Investing in Founder-Led Companies

The Big Picture

Sep 17

At The Money: At The Money: Investing in Founder-Led Companies Michael Monahan (September 16, 2026) How can ordinary investors access funds of companies led by founders? Enter the Founders 100 ETF (...

Source Link

Disclaimer: Investing carries risk. This is not financial advice. The above content should not be regarded as an offer, recommendation, or solicitation on acquiring or disposing of any financial products, any associated discussions, comments, or posts by author or other users should not be considered as such either. It is solely for general information purpose only, which does not consider your own investment objectives, financial situations or needs. TTM assumes no responsibility or warranty for the accuracy and completeness of the information, investors should do their own research and may seek professional advice before investing.

Most Discussed

{"basename":"","ssrTDKData":{"titleTemplate":"%s - Tiger Brokers","title":"Tiger Brokers | Global Stocks, Options & Futures Trading App","description":"Tiger Brokers, one-stop investment in US stocks, SGX stocks, HK stocks, A-shares & other global assets. One of the best stock trading platforms in Singapore.","keywords":"tiger brokers,tiger trade,tiger brokers singapore,broker online,stock trading in singapore,share trading singapore,brokerage firm singapore,trading app,stock broker singapore,stock trading platforms,trading account","social":{"ogDescription":"Tiger Brokers, one-stop investment in US stocks, SGX stocks, HK stocks, A-shares & other global assets. One of the best stock trading platforms in Singapore.","ogImage":"https://c1.itigergrowtha.com/portal5/static/media/og-logo.0a0bd8dc.png","ogUrl":"https://www.itiger.com/news/2668934379"},"companyName":"Tiger Brokers"},"pageData":{"isMobile":false,"isTiger":false,"isTTM":true,"region":"SGP","license":"TBSG","edition":"fundamental"},"isCrawlerRequest":true,"__swrFallback__":{"@#url:\"https://stock-news.skytigris.cn/v3/news\",params:#id:\"2668934379\",edition:\"fundamental\",auth_exemption:1,,,undefined,":{"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2668934379?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","thumbnail":"","is_english":true,"pubTime":"2026-09-17 02:00","share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","id":"2668934379","market":"us","top_or_hot":-1,"title":"At The Money: Investing in Founder-Led Companies","media":"The Big Picture","content":"<div>\n<p>At The Money: At The Money: Investing in Founder-Led Companies Michael Monahan (September 16, 2026)\nHow can ordinary investors access funds of companies led by founders? Enter the Founders 100 ETF (...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://ritholtz.com/2026/09/atm-investing-in-founders/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"ritholtz_highlight","html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>At The Money: Investing in Founder-Led Companies</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAt The Money: Investing in Founder-Led Companies\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2026-09-17 02:00 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://ritholtz.com/2026/09/atm-investing-in-founders/><strong>The Big Picture</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>At The Money: At The Money: Investing in Founder-Led Companies Michael Monahan (September 16, 2026)\nHow can ordinary investors access funds of companies led by founders? Enter the Founders 100 ETF (...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://ritholtz.com/2026/09/atm-investing-in-founders/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","isBrief":false,"type":0,"news_type":1,"symbol":"FFF","symbol_name":"Founders 100 ETF","start_time":0,"source_url":"https://ritholtz.com/2026/09/atm-investing-in-founders/","article_id":"2668934379","we_media_id":null,"thumbnails":[],"rights":{"source":"ritholtz_highlight","url":"https://ritholtz.com/2026/09/atm-investing-in-founders/","rn_cache_url":null,"directOrigin":true},"url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2668934379","pubTimestamp":1789581643,"columns":[],"sourceInfo":{"source_id":"ritholtz_highlight","name":"The Big Picture"},"weMediaInfo":null,"summary":"At The Money: At The Money: Investing in Founder-Led Companies Michael Monahan . How can ordinary investors access funds of companies led by founders?Michael Monahan is a partner and portfolio manager of the Founders 100 ETF . He’s been a Wall Street analyst, a private market investor, a tech startup CEO, and a public equity portfolio manager.BARRY RITHOLTZ: How much of this is due to the fact that, hey, if you’re going to start a new company from scratch, by definition you’re a risk-taker. How much of the outperformance of founder-led compa","collect":0,"end_time":0,"defaultTopTitle":"ritholtz.com","property":[],"viewcount":null,"language":"en","relate_stocks":{"FFF":"Founders 100 ETF"},"translate_title":"At The Money：投资创始人领导的公司","themeId":null,"isJumpTheme":false,"ttsUrl":null,"symbols_score_info":{"FFF":1},"content_text":"At The Money: At The Money: Investing in Founder-Led Companies Michael Monahan (September 16, 2026)\nHow can ordinary investors access funds of companies led by founders? Enter the Founders 100 ETF (FFF).\nFull transcript below.\n~~~\nAbout this week’s guest:\nMichael Monahan is a partner and portfolio manager of the Founders 100 ETF (FFF). He’s been a Wall Street analyst, a private market investor, a tech startup CEO, and a public equity portfolio manager.\nFor more info, see:\nPersonal Bio\nProfessional/Personal website\nLinkedIn\n~~~\nFind all of the previous At the Money episodes here, and in the MiB feed on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, Spotify, and Bloomberg. And find the entire musical playlist of all the songs I have used on At the Money on Spotify\nTranscript: At the Money: Michael Monaghan\nBARRY RITHOLTZ: Should you invest in companies led by founders? Peter Thiel’s VC Founders Fund has over $20 billion and produced excellent returns. How can ordinary investors get access to funds of companies headed by founders? To help us unpack all of this and what it might mean for your portfolio, let’s bring in Michael Monaghan. He is a partner and portfolio manager of the Founders 100 ETF, stock symbol FFF. He’s also been a Wall Street analyst, a private market investor, a tech startup CEO, and a public equity portfolio manager in his career. So, Michael, let’s just start with the basics. What’s the central thesis behind the Founders 100 ETF? Why should founder-led companies outperform even after they’ve become large public companies?\nMICHAEL MONAGHAN: Barry, thanks for having me. The data shows that founders outperform by about 3X. We looked at 11,000 stocks over 30 years, and on average, founder-led companies grow 4% greater than the S&P.\nBARRY RITHOLTZ: Wow. So let’s stay focused on that 3X. I believe that was Bain research, that founder-led companies tend to outperform other companies. What is it that drives that three times outperformance? Is it that founder-led companies tend to be heavily represented in the technology sector? Is it a function of age or size, or is this just survivorship bias?\nMICHAEL MONAGHAN: We’ve got companies led by founders all across the economy, so it’s not just a concentration in technology, although there are a lot of technology companies that are led by founders. We don’t think it’s survivorship bias. We think that founders bring something really unique. They have the vision to see where to go. They have the execution to execute that plan they’ve envisioned. They have the charisma to build a big team around them, and they’ve got the grit to get through the hard times, combined with the fact that they think in decades, where a board-hired CEO is just trying to make the next quarter and the next PowerPoint presentation for the board.\nBARRY RITHOLTZ: How much of this is due to the fact that, hey, if you’re going to start a new company from scratch, by definition you’re a risk-taker. How much of the outperformance of founder-led companies is simply just embracing that higher tolerance for risk?\nMICHAEL MONAGHAN: I don’t know if that’s the factor that’s showing it. I think if you dig in, a lot of these guys are successful because they de-risk all along the path, right? So if you listen to, say, a Marc Andreessen, he talks about at the zero stage and the one stage and the two stage, it’s all about de-risking the problem as you move along. So I would gently say that I think founders de-risk their business even more than non-founders.\nBARRY RITHOLTZ: Really interesting. And you yourself are a founder. Your startup was Beartooth Radio. It didn’t necessarily find an exit, but I’m curious, how did that experience of standing up a company from scratch affect your view of founder-led firms?\nMICHAEL MONAGHAN: I think it completely reframed how I think about building a company. I had spent the first 15 years of my life working for great companies. I worked at Goldman Sachs, I worked at Sanford Bernstein. But there’s a big difference between working at a world-class organization where you fit into their system, and building your own system from zero to one. I was fortunate enough to get exposure to some of these really good technology founders, and just saw how differently they thought, how passionate they were, how they brought vision that corporate managers didn’t have.\nBARRY RITHOLTZ: So let’s zoom in on that. How do you define a founder? Must the individual have actually started the original enterprise, or do you include anyone who perhaps acquired or reinvented or merged with or effectively refounded an already existing company?\nMICHAEL MONAGHAN: So we define founder-led as the original founder — that’s the person who started the company — still running it, most often as the chief executive officer. Occasionally it’ll be the chief technology officer, or in the case of a medical or scientific company, it could be the chief medical or chief scientific officer. So it’s the chief officer running the company day-to-day. We looked at the data. Board member doesn’t have the efficacy we want. Chairman doesn’t have the efficacy. It’s only if the founder’s sitting in the seat every day running the company.\nBARRY RITHOLTZ: And some classifications are really straightforward. Obviously Michael Dell founded Dell Computers, Zuckerberg at Facebook. What do you do with the more ambiguous cases? And I think probably the biggest one is Elon Musk, who was an investor, not an original founder of Tesla. There are debates about the merger with PayPal. We could talk about SpaceX. How do you draw the lines there? You’re really less interested in the technical founding issue than the driving animus of the company. Is that a good way to distinguish it?\nMICHAEL MONAGHAN: I think that’s fair. We have a rigorous process to decide, and you and I can hit a couple of edge cases. But we look to see who the original founder is. Most of the time it’s clear-cut. Sometimes it’s not, and then we have to dig in. We have to say, who does the company define as the founder? Elon’s a great one to examine, because for some reason there’s controversy as to whether he’s the actual founder. We dug in and did the hard work. The company defines him as the founder, and in fact it was either 2012 or 2014, there was a court case where this was actually settled, and Elon Musk is one of the five original founders of the Tesla Motor Company.\nBARRY RITHOLTZ: I would modify that to say Elon wasn’t the original founder, but once he took over, he so totally revamped the company that it looks nothing like the prior enterprise. So is there any reason to split hairs with that? But same sort of thing with PayPal or SpaceX. How do you think about those two?\nMICHAEL MONAGHAN: So I think SpaceX, he clearly was the founder. I don’t think anyone else lays claim to it, right? PayPal was the merger of a couple of entities. It was the original X entity that Elon was building merged into Peter Thiel’s company. But there are edge cases. Berkshire Hathaway is a great example. I don’t think anyone would doubt that Mr. Buffett was the founder of Berkshire, but he bought a failing textile company as part of a massive acquisition, and that company that acquired that and many other things — he’s the founder of. And Monster Beverage is kind of the same way. They acquired a juice company, but it was really the energy drink company and the other acquisitions they made that is the founding of the Monster Beverage company.\nBARRY RITHOLTZ: Yeah, that makes a whole lot of sense. So amongst your current holdings, you have founders like Alex Karp of Palantir, Larry Fink at BlackRock, Marc Rowan at Apollo. Each of those companies had multiple co-founders. How relevant must the individual who remains be to the company, to its strategic vision — to really be its dominant force?\nMICHAEL MONAGHAN: You know, our test is: were they an original co-founder? And we often look to the company to define it. Most of the companies in their origin story or their history will list who the original co-founders are. As long as at least one remains as an executive, that meets our test.\nBARRY RITHOLTZ: So now we take the list of however many founder-led companies there are — I think it was 11,000. You’re going to break that down to a list of 100. What are the underlying criteria that determine which of those thousands and thousands of founder-led companies end up in the 100 that are in FFF?\nMICHAEL MONAGHAN: Really great question. So we looked at 11,000 stocks over 30 years, and during that 30-year time period, there are about 800 founder-led stocks at any one time. So in the current market, there are about 800 founder-led stocks. From there, we look at the 200 largest by market capitalization. And then my co-founder and I come from a fundamental background, especially her. She’s a classically trained Columbia Business School value investor. We build a valuation model, using some factors, to pick what we then believe are the 100 best out of the 200 largest.\nBARRY RITHOLTZ: Interesting. And I’m looking at your largest holdings: Meta, Nvidia, Oracle, Palantir, Dell, Arista, and CrowdStrike. A lot of this is a heavy overlap with technology, AI, high growth, big cap companies. Why go with a founders fund instead of just a simple Nasdaq 100?\nMICHAEL MONAGHAN: We have very different exposures than the Nasdaq 100. We’ve got about 80% active share versus the Nasdaq 100. We’ve got much higher exposure to founders — 100% founders versus about 20% of the Nasdaq 100 — and it’s a different portfolio construction. The Nasdaq 100 is limited to only Nasdaq stocks, and there’s obviously incredibly high growth in tech and out-of-tech stocks on the NYSE. And we feel like we’ve got a little better spread across the economy. Right now, the Nasdaq 100 is 30% exposed to semiconductors, the S&P at 20, and we’re only at 10. So we do have exposure to technology, but we really are bent across the entire curve. We’re not substantially overweight versus, say, the S&P. We are slightly overweight, but I don’t think we’re massively overweight versus the S&P.\nBARRY RITHOLTZ: Yeah, I was looking through your holdings and I saw a lot of industrials and energy and financials, which you don’t necessarily see in the Nasdaq 100. But I’m glad you mentioned the 80% active share. So many ETFs I look at end up being closet indexers. This is really a very concentrated portfolio, with the top 10 holdings really accounting for a big chunk of your exposure. How much of what drives the performance of this is really just a conviction strategy — a concentrated portfolio with a long tail of sub-1% holdings? Tell us about the concentration, and also tell us, why do you have the rest of these small holdings? They’re almost like placekeepers to keep an eye on.\nMICHAEL MONAGHAN: So we run a modified market cap weighting. That is, we take the market cap and we allow that to define how much position size we’re going to take for each position. The reason we modify it is we put a hard cap of 7.5%. So we rebalance quarterly — every quarter we reset the portfolio. We don’t take any single position more than 7.5%, because we want to have some diversification in the portfolio. That’s where we come up with the weightings. And the reason we end up with some of these smaller weights at the bottom, it’s just defined by where they are on a free float market cap.\nWhat I would tell you, Barry, it’s really interesting. There’ll be days I wake up, I look at our portfolio, our top holdings are down, and the portfolio’s actually up, because those other 75 to 80 stocks that make up the balance — 50% — they drive sometimes when the big guys aren’t working. So it’s sort of just — we allow the market capitalization to set our position sizes.\nBARRY RITHOLTZ: All right, so now we know the criteria for selection, the criteria for weighting. Let’s talk about the most challenging aspect of managing a portfolio: the sell discipline. What leads you to taking a company out of the portfolio? Is it just something as simple as the founder leaving, or do you also run through operating parameters and other fundamentals? And when suddenly you’re starting to think, “Hey, this company doesn’t have the growth prospects we were hoping for,” is that a basis for ejecting them, or is it a variety of things?\nMICHAEL MONAGHAN: The main reason we would sell a stock is if the founder leaves. So in the prospectus, we state that if a founder announces their resignation, we will sell within 90 days of that announcement. So we don’t wait for them to actually leave — we would sell on the announcement. The second way a stock would get sold is if the fundamental overlay flags a condition that says to sell the stock. One of the ways we like to describe the fundamental overlay — it was built by my partner — it’s really looking for what she calls burnt pizza crust. We think all of our founders can make great pizza. We don’t want to tell them whether to make pepperoni or margherita. The factor looks and it says, are one of these crusts getting burnt? And if so, we’ll slide it out and bring in the next best company.\nBARRY RITHOLTZ: Really interesting. So to wrap up: if you’re interested in a venture fund like Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund, but you don’t have a quarter billion dollars to gain access to it, consider the Founders 100 ETF, stock symbol FFF. Be aware of the fact that this is a concentrated portfolio with a high active share, and it may not perform similarly to the S&P 500 or the Nasdaq, but it is concentrated, and it focuses on companies being led by the original founders.\nI’m Barry Ritholtz. You’re listening to Bloomberg’s At the Money.\n~~~\nFind our entire music playlist for At the Money on Spotify.","kind":"highlight","is_publish_news":true,"is_publish_highlight":false,"is_publish_live":false,"is_publish_wemedia":false,"editions":null,"column":"","sentiment":"0","news_tag":"","news_rank":0,"isVideo":false,"video":null,"symbols":[],"gpt_button":0,"need_auth":false,"need_login_tip":false,"code":"91000000","status":"200"}}}