"The idea that large funds can't have great returns is just not true." The counterposition is not that big funds can't outperform, but simply (and demonstrably) that they're less likely to produce impressive multiples. This is especially true as the market concentrates around large funds, pushing up prices substantially and narrowing the focus of investment. "In that fund Databricks has returned 7x the fund, so far. Coinbase has already returned 5x the fund. In that fund we also had GitHub, DigitalOcean, Lyft..." This is open for debate, but I wouldn't characterise these investments as particularly "consensus". Databricks had a notoriously bad initial pitch. Armstrong struggled with fundraising. GitHub and DigitalOcean started out boostrapped. So while a16z Fund III can make the case that exceptional large funds can outperform, it doesn't validate the consensus-chasing beta of large VCs today, or large funds in general.