Private equity returns statistics shape every allocation decision, every re-up conversation, and every first-time fund pitch that crosses an LP’s desk. The numbers below are drawn from the most recent benchmark publications by Cambridge Associates, Preqin, Bain & Company, Burgiss, PitchBook, and ILPA. Where possible, figures reflect data through Q2 or Q3 2024, the latest vintages with meaningful DPI data.
This page is structured so you can find the exact number you need: buyout returns, venture capital returns, returns by strategy, and the metric that now dominates LP due diligence: DPI.
Buyout Returns Overview
US buyout remains the anchor allocation for most institutional portfolios, and the long-run data supports that position. The median US buyout net IRR over two decades sits at 13-16%, depending on the benchmark provider and the vintage years included (Cambridge Associates, 2025; Burgiss, 2025).
Here is how the pooled net return data breaks down by time horizon:
- 25-year pooled net return: 14-16% (Cambridge Associates, 2025)
- 10-year pooled net return: 15-18% (Preqin, 2025)
- 5-year pooled net return: 12-15% (Cambridge Associates, 2025)
- Top-quartile net IRR: 20%+ across most vintage years (Burgiss, 2025)
- Bottom-quartile net IRR: 5-8% (Burgiss, 2025)
The PME premium tells the relative story. US buyout funds have historically generated a 200-400 basis point premium over the S&P 500 on a time-weighted, cash-flow-adjusted basis (Cambridge Associates, 2025). A PME above 1.0 means the PE fund outperformed an equivalent investment in public equities. Over 25 years, the median US buyout PME sits at approximately 1.15-1.25, meaning LPs earned 15-25% more than they would have by indexing the same cash flows into the S&P 500.
That premium has compressed in recent years. The 5-year PME for buyout dropped to 1.05-1.12 as of 2024, reflecting a combination of elevated entry multiples, slower exits, and a public equity market that delivered 12-15% annualized returns over the same period (Bain & Company, 2025). Whether private equity continues to justify its illiquidity premium at current entry prices is the central question in every PE benchmark conversation.
Buyout Returns by Vintage Year
Vintage year is the single largest determinant of fund returns. The same GP deploying the same strategy can produce a top-quartile fund or a third-quartile fund depending on when capital was deployed. The spread between the best and worst buyout vintage years over the past 15 years exceeds 400-600 basis points of net IRR (PitchBook, 2025).
| Vintage Year | TVPI Range | DPI Range | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2010-2014 | 1.8-2.2x | 1.4-1.8x | Fully mature; strong exits pre-2022 |
| 2015-2018 | 1.5-1.8x | 0.6-1.0x | Partially realized; exit drought impact |
| 2019-2021 | 1.1-1.4x | 0.1-0.3x | Largely unrealized; peak entry multiples |
The DPI decline visible in the 2015-2021 vintages is not an abstraction. It reflects the deepest exit drought in private equity history. As of Q3 2024, approximately 28,000 PE-backed companies remain unsold globally, up from 19,000 in 2019 (Bain & Company, 2025). That overhang represents roughly $3.2 trillion in unrealized value sitting in fund portfolios, waiting for exit conditions to normalize.
For LPs evaluating fundraising outlook data, vintage year context is non-negotiable. Funds that deployed capital in 2006-2007 (pre-crisis entry multiples) underperformed 2009-2011 vintages (post-crisis entry multiples) by 400-600 basis points of net IRR, despite many being managed by the same GPs with the same teams (Cambridge Associates, 2025). The lesson: when you invest matters as much as who you invest with.
Venture Capital Returns
Venture capital returns are defined by dispersion. No other private markets strategy produces a wider gap between the best and worst funds, and no other strategy is more dependent on a small number of outcomes within each portfolio.
The headline numbers:
- 25-year pooled net return: 12-15% (Cambridge Associates, 2025)
- 10-year pooled net return: 14-18% (Cambridge Associates, 2025)
- 5-year pooled net return: 8-12% (Preqin, 2025)
- Top-quartile net IRR: 20-30%+ (Burgiss, 2025)
- Median net IRR: 10-15% (Burgiss, 2025)
- Bottom-quartile net IRR: 0% or negative (Burgiss, 2025)
The spread between top-quartile and bottom-quartile venture capital returns exceeds 30 percentage points in most vintage years (Cambridge Associates, 2025). That dispersion is roughly 3x wider than what you see in buyout, and it makes manager selection the dominant variable in VC allocation outcomes.
The power law drives everything. In a typical VC fund of 20-30 portfolio companies, 1-3 investments generate 50-80% of total returns (PitchBook, 2025). The remaining 17-27 companies return somewhere between 0x and 2x. This distribution means a single missed winner or a single additional loss has an outsized impact on fund-level performance. A fund that returns 3.5x with one breakout winner would return 1.8x without it.
The J-curve in venture is steeper and longer than in buyout. LPs should expect 2-4 years of negative performance as management fees are drawn and early write-downs flow through. Meaningful distributions typically begin in years 5-7, with the final return profile crystallizing in years 8-10 (Preqin, 2025).
VC Returns by Stage
Stage matters within VC. Earlier stages carry higher variance and higher upside; later stages look more like growth equity in their return profile.
| Stage | Target TVPI | Target IRR | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-seed / Seed | 3-5x | 20-30%+ | Highest variance; power law dominant |
| Series A / B | 2.5-3.5x | 18-25% | Moderate variance; requires selection skill |
| Growth Stage | 2-2.5x | 15-20% | Lower variance; compressed upside |
Pre-seed and seed funds target 3-5x TVPI because they need that upside to compensate for the 60-80% loss rate at the individual company level (PitchBook, 2025). A seed fund investing at $5-15M pre-money valuations can achieve 100x+ on individual winners, which is mathematically impossible for a growth fund entering at $500M+ valuations.
Growth-stage VC has converged with growth equity in recent years, with entry multiples of 15-30x revenue and target returns of 2-2.5x TVPI (Preqin, 2025). The distinction between late-stage VC and growth equity is increasingly semantic rather than structural.
Returns by Strategy
Private equity is not a monolithic asset class. Each strategy carries a distinct return profile, risk structure, and liquidity timeline. The table below shows median net IRR ranges across strategies for recent vintages:
| Strategy | Median Net IRR | Top Quartile | Bottom Quartile | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buyout | 13-16% | 20%+ | 5-8% | Most consistent; largest dataset |
| Growth Equity | 12-16% | 18-22% | 4-8% | Lower leverage; minority positions |
| Secondaries | 12-15% | 18-20% | 6-10% | Shorter J-curve; discount-driven |
| Fund of Funds | 8-12% | 14-16% | 3-6% | Double fee layer; diversification trade-off |
Source: Burgiss, 2025; Preqin, 2025; Cambridge Associates, 2025.
Secondaries deserve a note. The strategy has gained significant LP allocation share over the past five years, driven by a shorter J-curve (distributions begin 1-3 years earlier than primary commitments), NAV discounts of 5-20% that provide a margin of safety, and immediate diversification across vintages, strategies, and GPs. Median secondaries fund IRR of 12-15% slightly trails buyout, but on a time-weighted basis the returns are competitive because capital is at work faster (PitchBook, 2025).
Fund of funds returns of 8-12% reflect the double fee layer: LPs pay both the fund-of-funds manager (typically 0.5-1.0% management fee, 5-10% carry) and the underlying GPs. For institutional LPs with the resources to run a direct program, the cost drag makes fund-of-funds difficult to justify. For smaller allocators lacking in-house PE expertise, the diversification and manager access can still make economic sense.
DPI: The Metric LPs Care About Most
DPI, or distributions to paid-in capital, measures how much cash a fund has actually returned to investors relative to what they contributed. A DPI of 1.0x means the fund has returned all invested capital. Anything above 1.0x represents realized profit.
DPI has moved from a secondary metric to the primary filter in LP decision-making. According to a 2024 ILPA survey, 74% of institutional LPs now rank DPI as their primary criterion when evaluating re-up decisions, up from 52% five years earlier (ILPA, 2024). The shift reflects a loss of confidence in unrealized marks and a growing insistence on actual cash returns.
Here is why DPI now dominates the conversation:
Subscription line IRR inflation. Capital call facilities artificially inflate IRR by 200-500 basis points by delaying capital calls and compressing the time capital is outstanding (Preqin, 2025). A fund reporting a 25% net IRR with aggressive subscription line usage might deliver the same DPI as a fund reporting 18% without one. The IRR looks better; the cash returned is identical.
The IRR-DPI disconnect. Consider two funds in an LP’s portfolio. Fund A reports a 35% net IRR but has a DPI of 0.3x after 5 years. Fund B reports an 11% net IRR with a DPI of 1.9x. Fund A looks better in the quarterly report. Fund B has actually returned nearly 2x the invested capital. LPs have learned, sometimes painfully, that unrealized IRR does not fund pension obligations or endowment spending.
DPI benchmarks by vintage. Median US buyout DPI for 2012-2015 vintages sits at 1.4-1.7x as of Q3 2024 (Cambridge Associates, 2025). LPs generally expect 1.5x+ DPI by year 8 for buyout funds and 1.8-2.0x by end of fund life. Funds falling significantly below those thresholds face difficult re-up conversations regardless of their TVPI.
For GPs preparing to raise their next fund, the implication is clear: realized returns now carry more weight than paper marks. A GP walking into an LP meeting with strong DPI and a modest TVPI will have an easier conversation than one with a high TVPI and minimal distributions.
GP Commitment and Performance
The GP commitment, how much of the general partner’s own capital goes into the fund, is both a governance signal and a statistically meaningful predictor of returns.
Funds where the GP commits 3% or more of total fund size outperform those with sub-1% commitments by approximately 280 basis points of net IRR (Cambridge Associates, 2025). The outperformance is intuitive: GPs investing meaningful personal capital alongside LPs have stronger alignment, sharper incentive to manage risk, and greater credibility during fundraising.
The standard GP commitment range is 1-5% of total fund size. Median buyout GP commitment sits at approximately 2.5%, while median VC GP commitment is roughly 1.5% (Preqin, 2025). The lower VC figure reflects the smaller fund sizes and the earlier-career profile of many VC GPs.
LP expectations around GP commitment have hardened. According to Preqin’s 2025 fund terms survey, 78% of institutional LPs will not invest in a fund where the GP commitment falls below their minimum threshold. That threshold varies by LP, but 2-3% is the floor for most pension funds and endowments. Some sovereign wealth funds require 5%+ for GP commitment to be considered meaningful.
The commitment also affects GP behavior in subtle ways. A GP with $10M of personal capital in a $500M fund (2%) makes different portfolio construction decisions than one with $1M (0.2%). The former is less likely to swing for the fences on a single position, more likely to maintain diversification discipline, and more responsive to downside risk. These behavioral effects compound over a 10-year fund life.
The Bottom Line
- Buyout remains the workhorse allocation, delivering 13-16% median net IRR with a 200-400bp premium over public markets, but that premium has compressed to 100-200bp over the most recent 5-year period (Cambridge Associates, 2025).
- Venture capital offers the highest ceiling and the deepest floor, with 30+ percentage points separating top-quartile from bottom-quartile funds, making manager selection the single most important variable in VC allocation (Burgiss, 2025).
- DPI has overtaken IRR as the metric that drives LP re-up decisions, with 74% of institutional LPs now ranking realized distributions as their primary evaluation criterion (ILPA, 2024).
- 28,000 PE-backed companies remain unsold, representing $3.2 trillion in unrealized value and creating the most significant exit backlog in private equity history (Bain & Company, 2025).
- GP commitment above 3% correlates with 280bp of outperformance, reinforcing alignment of interest as both a governance principle and a return predictor (Cambridge Associates, 2025).
For GPs preparing to raise capital, these statistics are not academic. They define the benchmarks your fund will be measured against, the metrics LPs will scrutinize, and the competitive landscape you are entering. Build your investor pipeline and private equity CRM around these realities, and let the data inform your positioning from day one.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the average private equity return?
The median US buyout net IRR over two decades is 13-16%. The 25-year pooled net return is 14-16%, and the 10-year pooled return is 15-18% (as of 2023). Top-quartile funds achieve 20%+ net IRR.
What is the average venture capital return?
The 25-year pooled net return for US VC is 12-15%, with 10-year returns at 14-18%. Top-quartile VC funds achieve 20-30%+ net IRR, while bottom-quartile funds return 0% or less. The spread between top and bottom quartile exceeds 30 percentage points.
What is a good DPI for a private equity fund?
A DPI of 1.0x means the fund has returned all invested capital. LPs generally expect 1.5x+ DPI by year 8 for buyout funds and 1.8-2.0x by end of fund life. As of 2024, 74% of institutional LPs rank DPI as their primary re-up criterion.
How does private equity compare to public markets?
US buyout funds have historically generated a 200-400 basis point PME premium over the S&P 500. A PME above 1.0 means PE outperformed public markets on a risk-adjusted, time-weighted basis.
