The Accelerator Conundrum: Are Accelerator Success Rates Misleading?

Let’s talk about “success.” Accelerators love to tout impressive-sounding statistics: “80% of our graduates raise follow-on funding!” “Our alumni are valued at $X billion!” But dig beneath the surface, and you’ll find these numbers are often misleading.

What does “follow-on funding” mean? 

Does it indicate a thriving, profitable business, or simply the ability to convince another VC to pour more money into a still-unproven venture? 

Valuation is another vanity metric. A high valuation on paper doesn’t equate to real-world revenue, sustainable growth, or a viable business model. 

Many of these “successful” startups are simply riding a wave of hype, burning through cash, and perpetually chasing the next round of funding.

The truth is, a tiny fraction of accelerator graduates achieve genuine, independent success. 

Most are either acquired for a pittance (a polite term for a failure), limp along as “zombies,” or quietly fade into oblivion. 

The accelerator model is designed to maximize the chances of a home run, not to guarantee the success of every participant. 

They’re playing a numbers game, and unfortunately, most entrepreneurs end up as mere data points in their self-serving narrative. 

Don’t be fooled by the glossy headlines. Demand deeper scrutiny of these so-called success stories.

Here are some sobering numbers of 3-month accelerator graduates:

• Dead: 15.2%
• Walking Dead: 68.7% (stagnant, unable to raise, merely sustaining)
• Failed (Dead + Walking Dead): 83.9%

These figures resonate with the broader startup failure rates: 

~75% of venture-backed startups still fail despite securing capital 

~90% of all startups eventually fail

Ask instead: How many sustainable businesses have been built?

This segment is a part in the series : The Accelerator Conundrum