2026-01-13 22:33:32

The Paradox of Scale and Return in Investment Decisions

Suppose you are an LP with $1 billion to allocate. You face a choice:

Option A: Invest $50 million for a 5x return. Final profit: $500 million.

Option B: Invest the entire $1 billion for a 3x return. Final profit: $3 billion.

Most LPs would choose B.

It may seem counterintuitive, but the logic behind it is simple: absolute return size outweighs the multiple. When your base amount is large enough, even a conservative return multiple can lead to significantly higher actual gains than those flashy high-multiple stories.

This also explains why large-scale funds tend to be more favored by LPs — not because they can deliver astonishing multiples, but because the scale itself acts as a multiplier for profitability.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

13 Likes

Reward
13
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

FantasyGuardian

· 01-16 17:54

Haha, that's why the big players are all stacking scale. It may not look as sexy, but the money is really substantial.

View OriginalReply0

OnchainDetective

· 01-15 14:43

Haha, isn't this what we often call "too big to fail"? Basically, the scale itself is a cheat... Honestly, seeing this comparison makes me think of those small funds that boast 5x or 10x returns. It sounds super sexy, but in the end? They manage 1 billion and still make more profit than you. This thing is just reality 😂 A large base is the key to success. Small LPs are still dreaming of 10x, while others are already steadily earning absolute returns...

View OriginalReply0

LayoffMiner

· 01-14 03:53

Speaking of which, I feel a bit heartbroken about this logic... The big players are just playing with numbers, while we retail investors are still trying to figure out how to multiply a few times.

View OriginalReply0

LiquiditySurfer

· 01-13 22:57

Haha, stop joking. Investing 1 billion only yields 3 times the return, you still have to risk your life.

View OriginalReply0

DeFiCaffeinator

· 01-13 22:54

Well... Basically, if you have money, you're the boss. No matter how high the multiplier is, it can't withstand a small base.

View OriginalReply0

rugdoc.eth

· 01-13 22:51

Basically, it's the game rules for the wealthy; once the base amount is large enough, the multiplier doesn't matter anymore.

View OriginalReply0

RugPullAlarm

· 01-13 22:43

It's just a math problem, but in real investing, it's not that simple. How can you guarantee a 3x return? Let's look at the on-chain fund flows and see.

View OriginalReply0

DegenRecoveryGroup

· 01-13 22:38

Basically, this is the game rule for big players... Small investors are always chasing the dream of 5x or 10x returns, while large capital accounts directly based on absolute numbers. Understand? Scale is the moat.

View OriginalReply0

PaperHandsCriminal

· 01-13 22:36

Haha, this is probably why I keep losing... I don't have 1 billion, only 1000 bucks, and I still insist on chasing that 5x dream. Scale is just a cheat device. I’ve done the math: I need to multiply my money by 100 to catch up with their 3x absolute return. Just thinking about it is despairing. Is this how big players play? No wonder the rich keep getting richer... Honestly, we retail investors are just being fooled by multiples, while they’ve been playing the scale game all along. But on the other hand, this logic is basically just throwing money at money. If the principal is big enough, I’ve never lost.

View OriginalReply0