We show that venture capitalists' (VCs) on-site involvement with their portfolio companies leads to an increase in (1) innovation and (2) the likelihood of a successful exit. We rule out selection effects by exploiting an exogenous source of variation in VC involvement: the introduction of new airline routes that reduce VCs' travel times to their existing portfolio companies. We confirm the importance of this channel by conducting a large-scale survey of VCs, of whom almost 90% indicate that direct flights increase their interaction with their portfolio companies and management, and help them better understand companies' activities.

We examine whether male investors are biased against female entrepreneurs. To do so, we use a proprietary dataset from AngelList covering fundraising startups. We find that female founders are less successful with male investors compared to observably similar male founders. In contrast, the same female founders are more successful than male founders with female investors. The results do not appear to be driven by differences across founder gender in startup quality, sector focus, or risk. Given that investors are predominately male, our results suggest that an increase in female investors is likely necessary to support an increase in female entrepreneurship.

for research assistance and are grateful to Shai Bernstein and attendees of the Harvard Business School "COVID and entrepreneurship" brown-bag lunch for helpful comments. Lerner has received compensation from advising institutional investors in venture capital funds, venture capital groups, and governments designing policies relevant to venture capital. Lerner and Nanda thank the Division of Research and Faculty Development at HBS for financial support. All errors are our own. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.

We examine how an increase in stock option grants affects CEO risk-taking. The overall net effect of option grants is theoretically ambiguous for risk-averse CEOs. To overcome the endogeneity of option grants, we exploit institutional features of multi-year compensation plans, which generate two distinct types of variation in the timing of when large increases in new at-themoney options are granted. We find that, given average grant levels during our sample period, a 10 percent increase in new options granted leads to a 2.8-4.2 percent increase in equity volatility. This increase in risk is driven largely by increased leverage.

for helpful comments. We thank Matt Turner at Pearl Meyer, Don Delves at the Delves Group, and Stephen O'Byrne at Shareholder Value Advisors for helping us understand the intricacies of executive stock option plans. This research was funded in part by the Initiative on Global Markets at the University of Chicago. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peerreviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.

In this paper, I investigate whether venture-backed companies can be negatively affected when others that share the same investor perform poorly. To this end, I examine the impact of the collapse of the technology bubble on non-information-technology (non-IT) companies held alongside internet companies in venture portfolios. Using a difference-in-differences framework, I find that the end of the bubble was associated with a 26% larger decline in the probability of raising continuation financing for these non-IT companies in comparison to others. This does not appear to be driven by unobservable company characteristics such as IT-relatedness; for the same portfolio company receiving capital from multiple venture firms, investors with greater internet exposure were significantly less likely to continue participating in follow-on rounds. Overall, these results suggest that structuring intermediaries to be less fragile, as venture intermediaries have been, does not eliminate the possibility of contagion among portfolio companies.JEL Classification: G11, G24

for research assistance and are grateful to Shai Bernstein and attendees of the Harvard Business School "COVID and entrepreneurship" brown-bag lunch for helpful comments. Lerner has received compensation from advising institutional investors in venture capital funds, venture capital groups, and governments designing policies relevant to venture capital. Lerner and Nanda thank the Division of Research and Faculty Development at HBS for financial support. All errors are our own. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.

for helpful comments and suggestions. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.