Venture Capital interview preparation
Sourcing, unit economics, term sheets, cap tables, fund economics and the India venture market. Every question is either traced to a named firm from a public candidate report, or tagged at desk level when we could not trace it — answers lead with the point, then the mechanism, then the limitation.
100 questions, mapped to the firms that asked them
- Questions
- 100
- Traced to a firm
- 31
- Firms
- 12
- Updated
- September 2026
025A company shows net revenue retention of 140 percent and logo churn of 30 percent. What is going on?Growth equitySaaS-focused funds
Say this
A small number of large accounts are expanding hard while a long tail of small accounts is falling out the bottom. The 140 is real but it is concentration, not health, and the business has two entirely different customer bases being reported as one.
Then walk it
- Mechanically: if your top 10 percent of accounts double and your bottom 30 percent disappear, dollars grow while customer count shrinks. Both numbers are honest and together they describe a business that only works upmarket.
- The first thing I would ask for is the retention table split by initial contract size. I would expect something like 130 percent net retention above $100k ACV and 60 percent below $20k. That split is the actual finding.
- Why it matters: the company is spending sales and marketing to acquire small customers who leave, which drags the blended payback out. If they stopped selling to the bottom segment, revenue growth would slow and efficiency would jump sharply.
- The risk in the 140 is concentration. Ask what share of revenue the top ten accounts represent. If it is over 40 percent and the expansion is usage-based, one customer's budget cycle can flip the whole retention number negative.
- Also test whether the expansion is real adoption or a pricing artefact. A seat-based product growing with customer headcount compounds. Expansion driven by a one-time land-and-expand from a pilot to an enterprise licence does not repeat.
- The conclusion I would take to the partnership: this is probably a good enterprise business wearing a bad SMB business as a costume. The diligence question becomes whether they can kill the low end without breaking the growth story they have sold to previous investors.
Where candidates lose it
Reading the 140 as unambiguously good and stopping. Paired with 30 percent logo churn it is a signal about segment mix, not quality. The candidates who do well here immediately ask for the metrics split by cohort and contract size rather than commenting on the blended figures.
Expect next
- What would you tell them to do about the low end?
- How much customer concentration would make you pass?
- How do you tell adoption-driven expansion from a pricing artefact?
Firm tags come from public, anonymous candidate reports on Wall Street Oasis: strong signal, not sworn testimony. Firms are named as the places a question was reported, not as partners of Fin Maverick. Answers are written for this page to show how to think out loud; they are not scripts to recite.
