Radical impact — open source, evergreen investing, and rethinking venture
In short
Owning nothing let 2050 take over the running of two other funds
Marie Ekeland explained why 2050's management company belongs to a trust, and how that made deals possible that usually end in fights over ownership.
2050 has just done two deals to take over the management of other venture funds. Such deals are rare, Marie Ekeland said, because one management company buying another usually ends in a fight over who gets what. At 2050 nobody gets anything. Marie gave away 100% of their shares in the management company to a perpetual purpose trust, so the parties only had to share the funds' performance and agree a budget for running them. Marie never planned for 2050 to manage other people's funds. It was a side effect of rebuilding the venture fund, after 20 years in classic digital venture, around two flaws Marie sees in the model.
The first is the product. A ten-year closed-end fund forces companies into hypergrowth at all costs and a full exit within seven or eight years, which is very short for the sustainable transformation. Marie took as the example Paebbl, a 2050 portfolio company co-founded and co-run by the moderator. Its first-of-a-kind plant is about three years away and its real performance five to ten years off, so a forced sale at year seven makes no sense. 2050 is therefore evergreen. To keep LPs patient, after five years it puts 5% of the whole fund and 25% of any proceeds into buying back shares from LPs who want out. Investors who see returns every year can afford to wait.
The second flaw is less visible. Management fees are 2% of fund size, whatever the performance. Seen as a business, Marie said, a management company sells one product and gets ten years of guaranteed revenue. A €1 billion fund brings about €20 million a year for the first five years. A second one brings €40 million, while costs do not double. The value piles up in the management company, and managers are rewarded for raising more money and putting it where the trend is. At 2050 the team's operating budget is voted each year by a board of investors, portfolio companies, experts representing society and the planet, and 2050's founders. Paebbl's other co-founder and co-CEO sits on it. Carry depends on financial, environmental and social performance, and on liquidity.
We are a new asset class, so there's zero mandate for us
The structure has paid off in other ways. Founders love having an investor that will still be there next round. Because 2050 publishes its research as open source, scientists want to work with it, including the Stockholm Resilience Centre. The evergreen fund also has to invest at several stages, to have liquidity for LPs within a few years. One of its first investments, a late-stage company with €125 million in revenue and two years at break-even, is now in a secondary sale. The growth funds that co-invested in 2020 are selling all their shares. 2050 is selling 35%, which brings LPs cash and shows that the valuation on which subscriptions, redemptions and carry all depend is a market value.
Raising money is the hard part. Money is drawn to AI and defence, but the problem is also structural. Asset managers have mandates to invest in existing asset classes. "We are a new asset class, so there's zero mandate for us," Marie said. So 2050 goes to people who decide over their own money. Family offices are often evergreen themselves. Corporates can direct up to 70% of their commitment to one of 2050's three themes, the low-carbon economy, regenerative food systems or the regenerative blue economy, while earning returns on the whole fund. Insurers and mutual funds with a long-term, systemic view complete the list. Next, 2050 is working on closed-end thematic funds that would co-invest with the evergreen, as a bridge to traditional money.
At 60 million, the fund is still too small. Diversification and liquidity need about 30 companies, or roughly 200 million, and running other funds buys time to get there. Marie expects to earn less than under the old carried-interest model, and is much happier and more aligned.
An investor in hardware for decarbonisation, whose companies' timelines clash with what their own LPs expect, asked what the biggest risk was. The risk is external, Marie said. Money is not pouring into these sectors.
Marie Ekeland gave this Expert Session at The Drop 2026 on 16 September, moderated by Andreas Saari of Paebbl.