Measurement
Part of Measuring startup funding across five layers, from cash need to outcomes
Building startup funding benchmarks from comparable populations and instruments
Build startup funding benchmarks for England using comparable populations, instruments, stages, regions, periods and official source methods.
A useful benchmark compares like with like. England startup funding sources differ in company population, instrument, stage, geography, disclosure and time. Preserve those differences instead of forcing them into a single market average.
What to take away
- Compare like with like, preserving differences in population, instrument, stage, geography, disclosure and time.
- Use medians and distributions rather than a single market average.
- Use benchmarks as context, not a target that overrides company economics.
Write the benchmark question
Name the decision and measure. A founder may need recent seed deal counts in its sector. A programme may compare eligible applications and awards by English region. An adviser could review time from accepted instruction to completed evidence, not total market investment.
Set the company age, legal form, revenue stage, sector, amount, route, region and period before searching for data.
Use an evidence matrix
| Source series | Population | Unit | Geography | Timing issue | Main limitation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ONS business demography | active enterprises and births | counts and rates | UK and regions | annual release and revisions | births are not rounds |
| HMRC EIS and SEIS | companies using defined schemes | companies and investment | UK and registered-office region | recent periods can revise | excludes other equity |
| British Business Bank Equity Tracker | announced smaller-business equity activity | deals and value | UK and regional analysis | dataset and announcement period | undisclosed and large-deal effects need method review |
| Internal process data | users or cases in one service | stage, time and outcome | service coverage | operational definitions can change | not the whole market |
| Worked example: HMRC EIS and SEIS, 2022 to 2023 | Population | Unit | Period | Limitation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EIS: 3,910 companies and £1,525 million | Companies using EIS | Companies and £ million | 6 April 2022 to 5 April 2023 | Scheme-specific; UK and registered-office region; excludes other equity |
| SEIS: 2,110 companies and £195 million | Companies using SEIS | Companies and £ million | 6 April 2022 to 5 April 2023 | Scheme-specific; smaller amounts; registered-office region not operating location |
| Implied average EIS investment: about £390,000 | EIS companies | £ per company | 2022 to 2023 | Average, not median; not England-only |
| Implied average SEIS investment: about £92,000 | SEIS companies | £ per company | 2022 to 2023 | Average, not median; not England-only |
The table uses HMRC UK totals; England-only values must be read from the regional table. For scale, the British Business Bank Equity Tracker 2024 reported £10.9 billion of UK smaller-business equity investment in 2023, down from £13.1 billion in 2022. That is a UK total, not an England-only figure.
Open the ONS business-demography release, HMRC EIS and SEIS publication and British Business Bank Equity Tracker material to inspect current definitions and tables.
Evidence source comparison
ONS demography
- Population
- active enterprises
- Unit
- counts and rates
- Geography
- UK and regions
- Timing issue
- annual, revisions
- Main limitation
- births not rounds
HMRC EIS/SEIS
- Population
- scheme companies
- Unit
- companies, investment
- Geography
- UK, registered office
- Timing issue
- recent periods revise
- Main limitation
- excludes other equity
BBB Equity Tracker
- Population
- smaller-business equity
- Unit
- deals and value
- Geography
- UK and regional
- Timing issue
- announcement period
- Main limitation
- undisclosed deals
Internal process data
- Population
- service users
- Unit
- stage, time, outcome
- Geography
- service coverage
- Timing issue
- definitions change
- Main limitation
- not whole market
Align stage and instrument
Do not compare a grant award with an equity deal as if both were interchangeable funding events. Separate debt, equity, grant and customer finance. Within equity, distinguish announced stage, deal count, value and disclosed size where the source permits it.
Separate funding instruments
Is the funding event equity?
separate stage, deal count, value, disclosed size
is it debt, grant or customer finance?
Use medians and distributions alongside totals when available. A regional sum can move because of a small number of large deals.
Handle geography
State whether England is available directly. Do not calculate an English value from a UK total using population share. For regional work, preserve the source's location basis and avoid reassigning companies without a documented method.
Compare London with other English regions only after considering enterprise population, sector mix and funding stage. A raw total does not measure access for a typical founder.
Build internal benchmarks carefully
Define eligible, contacted, submitted, assessed, offered and completed. Keep dates, route and cohort stable. Report unsuccessful cases and missing data. A provider's clients are a selected population, so do not label its conversion rate the England average.
Internal benchmark stages
- Eligible
- Contacted
- Submitted
- Assessed
- Offered
- Completed
Publish and update
Provide source, extraction date, period, population, unit, formula, revision status and limitation. Archive the table used. Rebuild comparisons when a source revises data rather than silently mixing versions.
Test sensitivity
Recalculate the benchmark after removing the largest disclosed deal where the data allow it. Compare mean and median, alter the stage boundary and show how missing or undisclosed values affect interpretation. Do not select the version that makes a region or provider look strongest.
For internal cohorts, run results with and without repeat clients, incomplete applications and exceptional cases. Explain which definition answers the intended decision. Small groups may require suppressed or combined reporting to protect confidentiality.
Review before use
Ask whether the comparator was available to the decision-maker at the relevant time and whether price, inflation or accounting differences need adjustment. Keep nominal and adjusted values clearly labelled.
Use benchmarks as context, not a target that overrides company economics. A startup should not increase its round solely because the reported median is larger, and a service should not reject suitable cases merely to protect a conversion rate.
Before you act
- Name the decision and measure before searching for data.
- Set company age, legal form, revenue stage, sector, amount, route, region and period.
- State whether England is available directly.
- Provide source, extraction date, period, population, unit, formula, revision status and limitation.
- Recalculate after removing the largest disclosed deal where data allow.
Common questions
Why should a grant award not be compared with an equity deal?
Because a grant and an equity deal have different populations, units and risk. Benchmark them separately and state the limitation.
How should regional comparisons handle geography?
Use the source's own location basis and read the England row where it is published. Do not scale a UK total by population share. Compare London and other English regions only after allowing for enterprise population, sector mix and funding stage.
What should be reported when publishing a benchmark?
Report source, extraction date, period, population, unit, formula, revision status and limitation. Archive the table. Rebuild when the source revises, and label nominal and adjusted values.
