# The Co-Investor Invite List: Filling an Open Allocation

*You will convert a committed lead position and open allocation into a ranked, sequenced invite list scored on stage fit, likely check size, and odds of yes.*

- Canonical URL: https://www.refolk.ai/guides/co-investor-invite-list
- Pillar: Investing and deal sourcing
- Format: Playbook
- Published: 2026-08-25
- Last reviewed: 2026-08-25
- Reading time: 7 min

You have committed to a round as lead, the terms are set, and there is allocation left to fill. The job now is not sourcing a company or reaching a founder before the round closes. It is the reverse: assembling the other checks once you are already in. This guide is for the lead or solo GP with an open allocation, and it delivers a ranked, sequenced list of funds and angels to invite, each scored on stage and sector fit, likely available check size, and the odds they actually say yes.

Most investing advice stops at "leverage your network." That is not a method. This is a method built on public co-investment history, SEC filings, and conversion norms, so you can defend every name on the list and know the order to send the invites.

## What the co-investor invite list actually is

A co-investor invite list is a ranked, conflict-cleared set of funds and angels, each carrying an estimated check size and an odds-of-yes score, sequenced so the highest-warmth names go first to build momentum. It is not your address book and it is not a directory dump.

The list answers four questions per candidate: does their documented stage and sector mandate match this round, are they actively deploying capital right now, roughly how big a check can they write, and how likely are they to say yes to your specific lead. A name that passes all four earns a place. A name that passes three does not.

The distinction that separates this from generic network advice: you rank by prior co-investment with your specific lead, not by raw sector fit. The lead's name is the recruiting asset. In practitioner terms, signalling authority is the investor whose participation gave others permission to move. Ranking candidates by whether they have moved alongside your lead before beats ranking by thesis match, because the intro that carries your lead's name converts far better than any cold approach.

> Rank by prior co-investment with your lead, not by raw sector fit. The lead's name does the recruiting.

## The public sources and what each one proves

Three public sources carry this work: co-investment records, SEC Form D on EDGAR, and stage-and-sector directories. Each proves a different thing, and using one to answer the wrong question is the most common way this job goes wrong.

Public LinkedIn and Crunchbase-style investor records expose portfolio composition, stage preference, and named co-investor relationships. Each funding round record lists round type, total amount raised, announcement date, and participating investors. This proves who appeared together in announced rounds, a co-investment graph. It does not prove who declined, and it does not prove the full roster of a round that was never publicized.

SEC Form D on EDGAR is the load-bearing legal source. It is the only source that captures every US funding event, not just the ones companies choose to publicize. It is legally required, comprehensive, and consistently filed within 15 days of the first sale. Form D proves that a raise happened, its size, and the signing insiders. It does not give you the full investor roster. Its second use is reading dry powder: the total amount sold, updated through amendments, tells you fundraise momentum. A fund showing $20M sold against a $200M target 18 months in tells a very different story from one showing $150M sold.

Directory tools let you filter by stage, sector, and geography, but they rely on self-reported theses, so treat their filters as a starting pool, not a truth.

| Source | What it proves | What it does not prove |
|---|---|---|
| Co-investment records | Who appeared together in announced rounds | Who declined; the full private roster |
| Form D on EDGAR | A raise happened, its size, signing insiders, dry powder | The complete investor list |
| Stage/sector directories | Self-reported thesis, stage, geography | That the fund is currently deploying |

One free EDGAR lookup is the cheapest disqualifier you have. It separates a fund with dry powder from one that is effectively closed, before you spend any warmth on an invite.

## The reserve math that caps every invite

Every candidate's usable check is a minority of its fund, because funds reserve most of their capital for follow-on. VCs typically allocate between 40% and 60% of their funds for follow-on, and some run higher, at 50% to 70% reserved. So before you send a single invite, the reserve math has already bounded what any name can bring.

This is why a fund mid-life-cycle with reserves already committed is a false lead even when the thesis matches perfectly. The website says the door is open; the balance sheet says otherwise. Read the current vehicle's Form D amount-sold against target, and combine it with a recency filter: only target investors who made an investment in the last six months. If they have not written a check in a year, they are not active regardless of what the site claims.

Check-size anchors give you the other half of the estimate. The median angel investment per deal reached approximately $30,000 in 2025. Organized angel syndicates of 10 to 30 operators can write $500,000 to $2 million checks. Those two numbers bracket most of the individual and small-group participation you will be filling with, so you can size a candidate's likely check without guessing.

**40-60% - Share of a fund typically reserved for follow-on**

A candidate's new-deal check is a minority of its capital, so reserves already committed make it a false lead.

## The channel effect: warmth compounds faster than fit

Warmth outperforms fit. A warm intro from a founder your lead previously funded is 15x more likely to result in a meeting than a cold email, which means a slightly-off-thesis fund reached warmly will usually convert better than a perfect-fit fund reached cold. This single ratio should reshape how you order the list.

The conversion numbers underneath are published and worth memorizing. The most famous VC firms fund only 0.25% to 0.5% of inbound. Active angel groups fund a higher share, 0.5% to 1.0%. Once a company is screened in and invited to present to an angel group's full membership, its chances rise to about 18%. Market-wide, the angel yield rate, the share of pitches that result in an investment, was 24.2% in 2023.

#### Co-investor conversion by gate

| Stage | Figure | Note |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cold inbound to a VC | 0.25%-0.5% | baseline |
| Cold inbound to an angel group | 0.5%-1.0% | roughly double |
| Screened-in, presenting to full angel group | ~18% | the real gate |
| Market-average angel yield | 24.2% | for pitches that get seen |
| Syndicate soft-commit to wire | 15-20% | where allocation leaks |

*Getting screened in matters more than the pitch itself; the jump from cold to screened-in dwarfs everything downstream.*

Read that funnel as a claim about where effort pays. The distance between cold inbound and screened-in is the whole game. When you invite a co-investor through your lead's prior relationship, you are effectively starting them at the screened-in stage, which is why the ranking weights warmth so heavily.

| Stage / channel | Odds of a check |
|---|---|
| Cold inbound to VC | 0.25%-0.5% |
| Cold inbound to angel group | 0.5%-1.0% |
| Screened-in, presenting to full angel group | ~18% |
| Any angel pitch, market average yield | 24.2% |
| Syndicate soft-commit to actual wire | 15-20% |

## Where the supply sits: US and UK angel pools

Geography still concentrates supply, so a lead's local bench depends heavily on which market they sit in. In Refolk's index of professional profiles, 5,825 US profiles self-identify as angel investors against 1,427 in the UK, a ratio of about 4.08 to 1.

```stat
number: 4.08x
label: US angel pool vs UK, in Refolk's index
note: 5,825 US profiles self-identify as angel investors against 1,427 in the UK.

## Frequently asked questions

### How do I find out who co-invests with a specific fund?

Read the fund's public co-investment graph. Investor profiles on public records expose portfolio composition and named co-investor relationships, and each funding round record lists the participating investors. Look for two or more shared rounds across multiple years, not a single overlap, because one shared party round proves co-occurrence, not preference. Cross-check against SEC Form D on EDGAR to confirm which of those co-investors are still actively deploying a current fund.

### How many co-investors should I invite to fill the remaining allocation?

Over-invite by roughly a fifth beyond your gap. Syndicates convert only 15% to 20% of soft commits into actual wires, so a list sized exactly to the allocation will close short. If you need $2M in remaining checks and expect average commits of $250K, line up enough soft commits to cover about $2.4M, then move the firm ones to signed docs and a capital call fast to lock them before they drift.

### Is a fund's website enough to tell if it is actively investing?

No. A fund with a live thesis page may be out of dry powder. Confirm activity two ways: a last announced check within the past six months, and a Form D amount-sold figure that shows the current vehicle still has capital to deploy. A fund showing $20M sold against a $200M target reads very differently from one showing $150M sold. If they have not written a check in a year, treat them as inactive regardless of the site.

### When in the process should I invite co-investors?

After the lead sets terms and secures its allocation, and before the round closes. In the traditional structure the lead takes at least half the round and sets the valuation, then invites others to fill the rest. Sequence highest-warmth, highest-signal names first to build momentum, then run to a capital call. Form D must be filed within 15 days of the first sale, so the paperwork clock starts once anyone wires.

### What should disqualify a fund from my co-investor list?

Three things. First, strategic or corporate investors whose parent competes downstream, which can trigger rights of first refusal, matching rights, or acquisition restrictions. Second, funds already holding a direct competitor in the portfolio. Third, a marquee name whose later non-participation would create a signaling problem in your next round. Verify each from public records: scan the candidate's portfolio for a rival, read the corporate parent's product lines, and confirm they reserve for follow-on.

---

*From the Refolk guide library. I revise these guides rather than replacing them, so the current version is always at https://www.refolk.ai/guides/co-investor-invite-list*