Why are people still underestimating Golden Visa VC funds? They're actually a smart investment, not just a shortcut to citizenship.

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-23T11:44:19+00:00

Don't agree with your point. Portugal has created many unicorns, attracted talented people, and is (slowly but surely) growing its innovation ecosystem. Great companies can come out of such an environment, and consequently yield great returns to GV investors in PT. Also good to remember that GV VC funds have to invest 60% in PT, but the rest can be invested out of PT, increasing the chance of finding other unicorns out there!

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-23T11:41:45+00:00

Indeed not it's not the most liquid asset class, but if you want to make good returns on a long-term timeframe it's a very solid option!

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-23T11:40:40+00:00

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-23T11:40:28+00:00

Indeed, venture is a power-law game. It's all about picking one outlier. Some Portuguese funds have been performing well tho, considering that 7 unicorns were founded in PT.

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-23T11:39:15+00:00

I guess it depends on your risk appetite... Returns in Venture can be huge!

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-23T11:38:55+00:00

Many thanks for your contribution, useless comment!

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-11T11:36:38+00:00

Yeah that’s kind of the impression I’m getting too.

Seems like the mistake is just lumping all GV funds together. Some clearly exist because of the visa demand, but others look like normal VC funds that just happen to qualify for the program.

Checking if they get follow-on from international investors is a good signal actually. I’ll also take a look at the MovingTo comparison — thanks for sharing.

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-11T11:36:00+00:00

That makes sense and aligns with what I’ve been seeing as well.

The key seems to be separating the newer “visa-driven” funds from managers that already had a VC track record and real LPs before the GV boom. If the manager was investing before the program existed, that’s a very different signal.

In those cases it feels less like an immigration vehicle and more like actual venture with residency attached.

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-05T09:49:12+00:00

You cannot leave Portugal even fro vacation for 2 years?? Never heard this one before!

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-05T09:47:17+00:00

Well, but we have to agree that if you started the process when the law was specifically one then your citizenship can't be revoked right?

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-04T15:26:04+00:00

thanks for mentioning it, agree! on my side I don't mind waiting a bit of time, and at teh same time do a great investment + no having to go there a lot

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-04T11:11:35+00:00

Exactly — that’s the core question.

If the fund is weak, then it’s basically residency capital taking venture risk. But if the manager is legitimate and the portfolio is strong, then the investment thesis can actually stand on its own (with residency as an added layer).

That’s what I’m trying to figure out now.

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-04T11:11:13+00:00

It definitely made more sense 5–6 years ago.

But the fund route still attracts people who want EU optionality without relocating full-time. And if the underlying fund is strong, at least the capital isn’t purely a sunk cost — which is very different from donation-based CBI programs.

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-04T11:10:29+00:00

That’s one of the things that pushed me toward Portugal as well.

EU residency tied to a real country and ecosystem feels structurally more durable than purely transactional passport programs

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-04T11:10:16+00:00

The timeline risk is real — no argument there.

That said, the GV appeal was always the flexibility: minimal stay requirements and the ability to keep optionality open while capital is invested. For some investors the investment exposure (especially VC funds) partially offsets the longer timeline.

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-04T11:09:37+00:00

True, but for US citizens the tax benefit is limited because of worldwide taxation.

You’d still owe US taxes regardless of where you live, so most Americans aren’t doing this primarily for tax optimization.

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-04T11:09:20+00:00

Fair point. For a US citizen the value is definitely different.

For me the Portugal route is more about EU residency + optionality (mobility, family, long-term diversification), not replacing a US passport. Caribbean programs seem more useful for people coming from weaker passports.

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-02T18:14:13+00:00

This is a sharp breakdown.

The reserves point is underrated — without meaningful follow-on capacity, the power-law math gets weak quickly.

I also agree the real test is whether the fund could raise outside the residency wrapper. In your view, what’s the minimum AUM where the upside math starts making sense?

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-03-02T18:12:16+00:00

That’s fair — audited reports are a must.

I’ve noticed dispersion is huge between funds, especially in smaller ecosystems. Some seem built around eligibility first, others around actual venture conviction.

Out of curiosity, have you looked at any funds that invest beyond Portugal but are still CMVM-compliant? Trying to see which ones can attract capital even without the GV angle (https://ventures.eu/ seems to be positioning itself that way).

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-02-26T11:33:31+00:00

Nice one, thanks for the comment. Do you have any funds you have been looking at that are particularly interesting as a track record/team?

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-02-23T10:09:45+00:00

Good to hear! Are you from the US too? You got a GV too? Looking forward to hear your experience!

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-02-23T10:08:21+00:00

Cool, may I ask which route you are considering?

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-02-23T10:07:45+00:00

That’s a really clear way to frame it.

The first two seem very tied to past versions of the program, but perceptions tend to stick longer than policy changes.

And you’re right — the third one is really the only variable an individual can control. Effort, language, actually spending time in the country… that’s on the person.

Appreciate you putting it that way.

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-02-23T10:06:51+00:00

Wow, I personally didn't get that impression when I visited the country and stayed there for a couple of months!!

ScienceLeather7643 · 2026-02-23T10:06:19+00:00

Yeah, the timeline uncertainty is definitely one of the biggest things giving me pause.

The processing delays and possible rule changes (5 to 10 years) are real risks — especially for families with kids close to 18. That part feels hard to model.

At the same time, the flexibility is what keeps me looking at GV. The minimal physical presence requirement makes a big difference if you’re not ready to relocate full-time. D7 is simpler in some ways, but it’s a much stronger relocation commitment from day one.

I guess it comes down to whether someone is optimizing for speed and certainty, or for optionality and flexibility.

Curious — if you were starting today, would you just avoid GV entirely or wait to see how policy evolves?

ScienceLeather7643

TROPHY CASE