What investors are saying about Sequoia Capital

Summary

In the past 30 days, 3 people on 1 investor and market show discussed Sequoia Capital in 5 views. Going by each speaker's latest call, 1 is bearish. Chorus has followed Sequoia Capital since November 7, 2026.

Who talks about it most

• Jason Lemkin · 2
• Rory O'Driscoll · 2
• Scott Wilson · 1

The latest views

Newest first. Every quote is checked against the episode's transcript.

• Rory O'Driscoll · Scale Venture PartnersNeutral

  Sequoia's Evergreen fund was logical but badly timed, illiquid for LPs, and misaligned with partner economics.

  Rory says holding a diversified portfolio of high-quality VC-backed IPOs was intellectually correct and could compound above the S&P. The fund had three problems: it launched before a drawdown, so a year later stocks fell 30%; LPs have different liquidity needs and want to make their own choices; and partners who have cleared carry can already hold their own stock, so forcing LPs to hold looks like trying too hard.

  “The first problem is they picked a horrible time to do it because they implemented in [2022], which is when stocks actually turned down.”at 5:30

  20VC: 20VC: Jensen Huang Investigation: What Happens Now | Sequoia Leave London, Close Scout Program and End Evergreen Fund | NASDAQ Loses $2.5TRN in 24 hours | Anthropic targets $1.4TRN IPO valuation · November 12, 2026

• Jason Lemkin · SaaStrNeutral

  Ending Sequoia's Evergreen fund makes sense; the structure was too complex.

  Jason asks why Sequoia wound down a structure that would have held the dominant brand's winners like Nvidia and Google. He learns LPs could not leave and that the structure encouraged holding long after IPO. He concludes that trying to force LPs to hold was too complex, so getting rid of it to keep things simple makes sense, and Sequoia's partners can still make money.

  “It's just trying too hard, too much complexity. So I think getting rid of it was just, let's keep it simple here, people.”at 7:25

  20VC: 20VC: Jensen Huang Investigation: What Happens Now | Sequoia Leave London, Close Scout Program and End Evergreen Fund | NASDAQ Loses $2.5TRN in 24 hours | Anthropic targets $1.4TRN IPO valuation · November 12, 2026

• Rory O'Driscoll · Scale Venture PartnersNeutral

  Sequoia's scout program gave a big advantage for little effort, so closing it surprises him.

  Rory says he never understood the scout program, because it was relatively little lift for a very significant advantage. He was surprised to see it ended, though he gives Sequoia credit for reinventing itself and focusing its resources.

  “I always did think the scout program was relatively little lift for a very significant advantage.”at 11:11

  20VC: 20VC: Jensen Huang Investigation: What Happens Now | Sequoia Leave London, Close Scout Program and End Evergreen Fund | NASDAQ Loses $2.5TRN in 24 hours | Anthropic targets $1.4TRN IPO valuation · November 12, 2026

• Jason Lemkin · SaaStrNeutral

  Sequoia's scout program worked better as a secret; closing it reflects managing it was too much.

  Jason says the scout program was cloned by others and worked better when it was secret, when Sequoia was years ahead. He reads its end as the program becoming too flat and lacking energy. Running a scout network with a small partnership and six London partners in different time zones and incentives was too much, and he thinks simpler, conviction-led deployment is the better model.

  “Well, it did get cloned... I think it worked better when it was a secret. They were years ahead of everybody else.”at 11:32

  20VC: 20VC: Jensen Huang Investigation: What Happens Now | Sequoia Leave London, Close Scout Program and End Evergreen Fund | NASDAQ Loses $2.5TRN in 24 hours | Anthropic targets $1.4TRN IPO valuation · November 12, 2026

• Scott Wilson · Washington University Investment Management Company (WashU)Bearish

  Sequoia's evergreen structure was detrimental to LPs and the firm will degrade over time.

  WashU walked away from Sequoia because the switch to an evergreen structure did not fit WashU's co-investment model. Scott says the structure change was probably detrimental to some LPs. He adds that WashU has not followed the firm closely since, and expects it to degrade over long periods. He acknowledges Sequoia has made LPs a lot of money over long periods.

  “Didn't fit super well into our kind of co investment model. So they weren't great partners for us at that point in time. And, you know, it was probably detrimental to some LPs when they switched that structure.”at 32:47

  20VC: 20VC: From $8BN to $19BN: Inside WashU's Endowment Fund | SpaceX Made Up 20% of Our AUM | Why Europe and China Has So Much Opportunity | The Reckoning That is Coming for AI Companies with Scott Wilson · November 7, 2026