YC released a list of their highest revenue-generating companies

Wow, the top 50 companies are collectively worth 400B. Considering that YC has invested in 4000 companies collectively 600B so basically the top 1% of companies generate ~70% of returns. Really goes to show how much the startup game is dominated by outliers.

I wonder if there's any similar analysis of characteristics of "successful" startups but with a lower bar for success, like say, top 20% of YC startups? That would probably be more relevant for the majority of indie hackers looking for a modest exit.

It's always about the team - if it's a good team, they will end up finding a problem and solving it.

I do feel like YC also has a name that benefits startups greatly. It's easier for a YC alum to raise money and get resources to actually find PMF. It's like a flywheel of great teams with great resources and mentors to help them reach the top :)

Hey guys,
(my first post/comment on this forum, so be indulgent ;)

To answer another comment: only 1-2% of submissions actually get accepted into YC batches. So, if you hope to get into YC, unfortunately you probably won't. But you should still apply, as writing that application alone is a very useful exercise.

I'm on YC's SUS (startup school), but since 2023 they killed the SUS Forum (YC gave us no reason why), so now SUS is an order of magnitude less useful to me because with that move we lost the SUS community.
Anyway ... Michael and Dalton make great videos though !

Yes, I also received that mail for that list, but as I replied to that mail (not sure YC reads those replies though), because they specifically omitted any revenue data from their list, the list itself is pretty useless, essentially some vanity metrics.

Because, the irony: how come a list titled "YC Top Companies List by Revenue" omits to show ANY revenue data whatsoever. To me that's pretty useless ... show me revenue data, not just aggregated values (i.e. "vanity metrics" ;)

A good base means everything to get going

Product. An insanely great product will market itself both externally and internally. You need superstars, don't get me wrong, but the offer is key. The margin between the two is very small.

I think its really a delicate balance between the two. A great product sets the stage, but a great team is what elevates it to new heights. You can have the most amazing product in the world, but without a skilled and motivated team, it's like a ship without a captain.

Thanks for sharing the insights!

$50B generated

Any idea what is the funding/investment amount for the same year? Is YC running at a profit?

Interesting insights!

To your question - I believe the answer is two fold!

1. All about Product in the beginning. When you're trying to get the first version of your product in the market, find product market fit and attract a loyal user base you need to have a strong product. Users don't care about the team behind the product and it's fairly easy when you're a smaller team to align and get a product out there.
2. After that it's all about the team. How the team works together, who you add to the team over time, how the dynamics change when adding more people to the team, how good you work together with your co-founder as you go from project to actual company.

The dynamics might be different if you need to raise investment from the start. The Venture Capital world is still very biased to supporting early stage teams that have great brands backing their credibility (don't get me started on whether or not that's a valid hypothesis on their side).

For startups, revenue is now more important than valuation

I think a great team is more important than a great product (at least in the early stages). Y Combinator companies are rarely solo-founded. I think around 10% of them are. That is one of my biggest concerns with my venture currently. I am looking for a cofounder!

I think both matter. Having a great team means good collaboration and understanding of what we want to accomplish in the project. This ultimately leads to a great product.

That's a great question, Jacob.

A great product matters a lot compared to a great team. Here is why I think that:

1. Users care less about your team.
2. All they care about is the job your product is getting done.
3. You can sell your product and not a team.
4. Ahrefs is doing over $40m in ARR with just 50 team members. That's approx. $800k in revenue per employee.

I hope this helps.

I think it could go either way — stellar team or stellar product. Either way = a winner. Both = a unicorn.

It's 100% about the founders and the knowledge/experience they have. Mentors too like you said. And YC doesn't hurt :)