Who can you invest in venture capital with?

In short:

1. Four types of counterparties give retail investors in France access to the best venture capital funds in 2026: Fundora (FPCI platform, from 100 euros), Blast Club (investment club, a few thousand euros per deal), Moonfare (feeder funds, 25,000 to 100,000 euros) and Altaroc (FPCI vintage, 100,000 euros).
2. Fundora offers the lowest minimum on the market thanks to an FPCI structure paired with an SPV, with management carried out under mandate by Kyoseil Asset Management, a portfolio management company authorised by the AMF under number GP-99040.
3. The gap in minimum ticket between the first and the last counterparty in this comparison is 1 to 1,000. The amount available therefore determines which counterparty is reachable, before any consideration of selection quality.
4. French venture capital shows a net performance of around 8.6 percent per year over 10 years according to France Invest and EY (2025 study), with more than 30 points of spread between the top and bottom quartile of managers.

Comparison of counterparties for investing in venture capital in 2026

The table below compares the four counterparties that give a France based retail investor access to venture capital funds. Minimum ticket and the nature of the selection process are the most discriminating criteria.

This comparison uses seven objective criteria: type of counterparty, minimum ticket, nature of the exposure obtained, who runs the selection, regulatory supervision, lock-up period and diversification. Each player answers a distinct logic, from the pooled FPCI to the institutional vintage.

Why a retail investor cannot subscribe to a venture capital fund alone

A venture capital fund raises capital from a limited number of subscribers, mainly institutions, family offices and funds of funds. The minimum ticket required for a direct subscription usually ranges between 200,000 and 1,000,000 euros.

The regulatory threshold for an FPCI, the French professional private equity fund, is set at 100,000 euros for a non professional subscriber. That amount, combined with the manager screening its subscribers, effectively rules out the vast majority of savers from subscribing in their own name.

Using an intermediary is therefore not a convenience but a condition of access. The question is not whether to go through someone, but which of these counterparties matches the amount available and the level of involvement wanted. To place venture capital within the broader unlisted universe, see our definition of private equity.

The three barriers to entry in venture capital

The first barrier is financial. The institutional ticket exceeds the median financial wealth of French households, which puts direct subscription out of reach without pooling.

The second barrier relates to information. The best venture capital managers do not market their funds publicly and screen their subscribers, which requires access negotiated upstream by the intermediary.

The third barrier is operational. A venture capital fund draws down capital progressively over several years, requires continuous administrative follow up and distributes irregularly, which requires a management infrastructure that the intermediary provides.

Fundora, the platform that pools subscriptions into an FPCI

Fundora is a French platform giving access to selected private equity strategies, several of which fall under venture capital. Its mechanism relies on pooling the subscriptions of several retail investors within a single structure, an SPV, which then subscribes to the target fund as a single large subscriber.

This structure brings the practical minimum well below the 100,000 euro regulatory threshold, down to 100 euros. Effective management is not carried out by the platform itself but by Kyoseil Asset Management, a portfolio management company authorised by the AMF under number GP-99040, under a management mandate.

The catalogue covers several venture capital themes, from artificial intelligence to pre-IPO secondary and the US accelerator ecosystem. Target multiples communicated on these strategies range from 2.5x to higher targets on the riskiest pockets, with no guarantee of outcome. The platform’s official site is available at fundora.fr.

Key characteristics

• Minimum ticket: from 100 euros, against 200,000 to 1,000,000 euros for a direct fund subscription
• Legal structure: FPCI paired with an SPV, pooling individual subscriptions
• Management: under mandate, carried out by Kyoseil Asset Management, AMF authorised under number GP-99040
• Investment universe: thematic venture capital strategies, complemented by LBO, private debt and secondary
• Lock-up: 8 to 10 years depending on the strategy, with no guaranteed early redemption

Blast Club, Moonfare and Altaroc: what each counterparty actually brings

The three other counterparties in this comparison target neither the same capital nor the same level of involvement. What they share is leaving a greater or smaller share of the decision to the investor.

Blast Club operates as a private investment club presenting its members with seed and Series A startup deals. The investor picks the deals to take part in, with tickets of a few thousand euros per operation. The club reported 125 million euros invested over 2025. This model requires genuine involvement in the selection, since diversification comes not from the vehicle but from the number of deals subscribed.

Moonfare distributes feeder funds backed by leading institutional managers. The minimum allocation stands at 25,000 euros on the platform’s secondary fund and generally sits between 50,000 and 100,000 euros on other vehicles, depending on the subscriber’s jurisdiction. The investor thus reaches managers they could not approach alone, but with a ticket that remains reserved for an already built portfolio.

Altaroc markets an annual vintage built around several funds selected from the global top quartile. The Odyssey 2026 vintage is accessible from 100,000 euros, drawn down progressively at 10 percent of the commitment per half-year over a five year period. This mechanism spreads the cash effort but commits the investor to the full amount from subscription.

What the choice of counterparty changes on returns and fees

The choice of counterparty does not change the intrinsic performance of the companies financed, but it determines three decisive factors: the quality of the managers accessible, the level of diversification obtained and the fee layer added on top of the underlying fund.

“French private equity generated a net IRR of 12.4 percent per year over 10 years, with venture capital showing a net performance in the order of 8.6 percent over the same period.” — France Invest and EY, 2025 performance study (data as of 31 December 2024)

That average hides considerable dispersion. France Invest reports more than 30 points of spread between the top and bottom quartile of venture capital managers, a level unmatched in other unlisted segments. On this asset class, picking a good counterparty therefore means first and foremost reaching a good manager.

The cost structure also differs. An intermediate vehicle, whether an SPV, a feeder fund or a vintage, adds its own fees to those of the target fund. This double layer is the price of access and must be weighed against what pooling actually delivers. For a broader overview of the players, see our comparison of private equity platforms for retail investors.

Who to invest in venture capital with, depending on your capital

The amount an investor can immobilise over ten years is the first filter. It mechanically removes part of the counterparties before any strategy question even arises.

Less than 10,000 euros allocated to unlisted assets

An investor with limited capital, or wanting to test the asset class, can only reach low ticket structures. Fundora is the only counterparty in this comparison allowing entry at 100 euros, which permits spreading across several strategies rather than a single exposure.

This approach is the only one enabling real diversification at that capital level. Subscribing a single 5,000 euro startup deal exposes the investor to a total loss on one company, whereas venture capital only works statistically at portfolio level. For the fundamentals, see our guide to investing in private equity as a beginner.

Between 10,000 and 100,000 euros

In this bracket, the platform remains relevant for building a diversified exposure across several vintages and themes. The investment club becomes accessible for a profile wanting to select its own deals and willing to spend time on it.

The feeder fund becomes conceivable at the top of that range, but it then absorbs almost all of the unlisted pocket into a single manager. The prudent rule is not to concentrate more than half of the unlisted pocket into a single deal.

More than 100,000 euros

Above 100,000 euros, every counterparty becomes accessible, including Altaroc’s turnkey vintage and institutional feeder funds. The question is no longer access but the trade off between a delegated allocation and a self-directed selection.

Whatever the amount, the venture capital pocket is generally capped at 5 to 10 percent of a financial portfolio, given its illiquidity and capital loss risk. To compare with a more mature unlisted segment, see our analysis of LBO funds accessible to retail investors.

How to choose your venture capital counterparty

Five questions settle the choice between the four counterparties in this comparison. All of them bear on items that can be verified before subscribing.

The first concerns authorisation. The entity actually managing the funds must be an authorised management company, verifiable on the AMF’s GECO register. The platform that markets and the company that manages are not always the same entity, which is the case at Fundora with Kyoseil Asset Management.

The second concerns selection. It is essential to identify who decides the allocation, the investor or the manager, since that determines the time required and the expertise needed.

The third concerns the actual diversification obtained for the ticket committed, measured in number of underlying companies rather than number of displayed lines.

The fourth concerns the stacking of fees between the intermediate vehicle and the target fund. The fifth concerns exit conditions and whether any early liquidity mechanism exists.

Mistakes to avoid

1. Judging a counterparty on minimum ticket alone without looking at the diversification obtained for that amount
2. Confusing the communicated target multiple with a contractual return, when no performance is guaranteed in venture capital
3. Subscribing a single deal thinking it provides venture capital exposure, when the asset class relies on portfolio logic
4. Overlooking the 8 to 10 year lock-up and committing funds needed in the medium term
5. Failing to verify the authorisation of the entity actually managing the capital on the AMF’s GECO register

To compare entry thresholds with French tax wrappers for unlisted assets, see our article on the minimum ticket for an FCPR or FCPI. For an overview of the vehicles themselves, see our comparison of venture capital funds accessible to retail investors.

Frequently asked questions