Kevlar Capital

The Kevlar Fund is an evergreen fund that is ever-invested in 3–5 unique, founder-led, deep-tech companies at a time, which all have a significant role to play in the future we envision. We invest across the public and private markets.

Philosophy

Portfolio Construction

Why prioritize deep tech companies?

We focus on companies solving the hardest technical problems because the difficulty itself creates enduring competitive advantages. When a problem is genuinely hard to solve, the solution is genuinely hard to replicate — giving these companies durable moats that don’t depend on brand, network effects, or switching costs alone. The caliber of talent required to work on these problems provides meaningful downside protection. As a secondary benefit, deep tech companies carry a built-in call option — they are best placed to capture entirely new markets as those markets are created, offering asymmetric upside on top of an already strong base case.

Why invest across public and private markets?

We are committed to owning the best companies of our time, regardless of whether they are public or private. That said, we find the most compelling opportunities — both in company quality and entry valuation — in the private markets. Our public portfolio serves a dual purpose: it compounds capital in high-conviction positions while providing liquidity to deploy into private opportunities when they arise. Crucially, this structure allows us to be highly selective in private deals — any private investment must be materially more attractive than the best public companies available to us. The evergreen nature of the fund eliminates the pressure to force capital into private markets when exceptional opportunities are not present.

Why concentrate into 3–5 holdings?

We only invest in what we have high conviction in — and given the bar we set, we rarely have conviction in more than three to five companies at a time.

Why hold indefinitely?

Our ideal holding period is indefinite. We want to own great companies for as long as they remain great — allowing our investments to compound tax-efficiently and capturing the full growth trajectory of the businesses we own. Trading in and out of positions erodes returns through taxes, transaction costs, and the near-impossibility of timing re-entry correctly. The default is to hold; the burden of proof lies with selling.

Selection

Selection Criteria

Why require founder CEOs?

The growth we seek requires a specific kind of leadership — one that only a founder CEO can provide. Founders carry the authority to make bold, unconventional decisions and the personal incentive to endure through difficulty. This is not just a job for them; it is their life’s work. We look for an intense, top-down leadership style — the kind exemplified by Jensen Huang, Elon Musk, Alex Karp, and Brian Chesky.

  • Highly technical: These leaders operate at the detail level — engaging directly with engineers on technical problems and making granular product decisions. We believe the best CEOs are distinguished by their ability to go deeper into the business, not further from it.
  • Publicly visible: The CEO is the unambiguous face of the company and its most effective evangelist. There should be no question that the company exists to execute the founder’s vision.
  • Missionary: The company is the founder’s vehicle to pursue a mission larger than the business itself. Musk aims to make humanity multi-planetary, Luckey to build the arsenal of democracy, Karp to defend western civilization. A grand, unifying mission sharpens company focus and is one of the most powerful tools for attracting and retaining exceptional talent.
  • Extremely demanding: The best CEOs hold exceptionally high standards and demand the same from their teams. Paired with a compelling mission, this intensity attracts top-tier talent that thrives under pressure. The companies led by Steve Jobs, Elon Musk, and Jensen Huang are known for this demanding culture — and for consistently producing extraordinary results.

Why demand a 10+ year growth runway?

We require that a company can sustain 20%+ growth rates for at least the next decade. This typically means it operates at the center of a secular megatrend — AI, space, defence, or similar — where the addressable market is expanding faster than the company can capture it. Positioning within these trends also provides embedded optionality: the company is best placed to capitalize on adjacent markets as they emerge, which supports premium valuations over extended periods.

Why invest in companies that attract the top 1% of talent?

Where the best people choose to work is one of the strongest leading indicators of where value is being created. Before a company’s dominance shows up in its financials, it shows up in its ability to attract world-class talent. We pay close attention to this signal. Concentrated talent also provides meaningful downside protection — companies with exceptional teams are attractive acquisition targets even in adverse scenarios.

Why invest in 1-of-1 companies?

Monopolies make great investments. The test we apply is straightforward: could a competitor replicate this company’s position, even with unlimited capital? Google has indexed and organized the world’s information over two decades. Amazon has built a logistics network that spans the globe. Apple has cultivated an ecosystem of over a billion locked-in users. SpaceX has solved reusable rocketry through thousands of iterative launches. In each case, the technical and operational complexity is so great that capital alone cannot close the gap. We invest in companies that already dominate their niche — or have a clear path to doing so.

Why look for compounding moats?

We look for companies whose competitive advantages compound over time — where the moat widens with every passing year, not narrows. Tesla accumulates more self-driving data with every mile driven, making its autonomy increasingly difficult to replicate. Apple’s ecosystem grows more entrenched as users add apps, services, and devices — raising the cost of switching with each passing year. Google Search and YouTube become more powerful the more people use them, creating a flywheel where scale itself is the advantage. The defining characteristic is that time is an ally — the longer the company operates, the more insurmountable its position becomes.

Why does entry valuation matter?

Valuation discipline is essential, even when investing in exceptional companies. Our test is simple: if the company executes as expected over three years and the valuation multiple stays flat, would we still want the entire portfolio in it? If yes, the entry price is attractive. This framework naturally steers us toward companies where growth will compress the multiple over time — making today’s price look increasingly conservative in hindsight.

Sell Discipline

Our ideal holding period is indefinite. Selling a position is a rare and serious decision — we would rather hold through volatility than trade in and out of names we have conviction in. That said, we are not dogmatic about holding forever, and we maintain a clear framework for when an exit is warranted.

  • Thesis break: The original investment thesis no longer holds. This could mean the company’s growth runway has meaningfully shortened, its competitive moat has stopped compounding, or it is no longer attracting top-tier talent. We re-underwrite every position regularly against our investment criteria — if a company no longer meets them, we exit.
  • Leadership change: The founder CEO departs or is no longer the driving force behind the company. Our entire investment framework is built around founder-led businesses with a specific leadership style. A transition to professional management — no matter how capable — fundamentally changes the investment case.
  • Valuation extremes: The market assigns a valuation so stretched that even our most optimistic three-year scenario would not justify buying the stock at that price. We are comfortable holding through high multiples when growth supports them, but we will trim or exit when the price completely disconnects from any reasonable future outcome.
  • Better opportunity: A materially more attractive opportunity presents itself and we need to free up capital. This is particularly relevant for our public holdings, which serve as a war chest for compelling private market investments. We will not sell a great company for a marginally better one — the bar for reallocation is high.

Team

[Name] is the founder and General Partner of Kevlar Capital. [He/She/They] graduated from [University] with a degree in [Field of Study]. Prior to founding Kevlar Capital, [Name] [describe prior experience — e.g., worked at Company X in Role Y, where they gained exposure to Z]. [Name]’s investment background spans [placeholder — e.g., X years across public and private markets, with a focus on deep tech and growth equity].

Fund Structure & Terms

Legal Entity

[placeholder]

Redemption Terms

[placeholder]

Lock-Up Period

[placeholder]

Minimum Investment

[placeholder]

Reporting Cadence

[placeholder]

Auditor

[placeholder]

Fee Structure

2% management fee, paid through issuance of new fund units only.

Get in Touch

For inquiries about the Kevlar Fund or to learn more about our investment approach.

Contact us