Can you elaborate what you mean by startups that have raised in the last 6 months being a good choice?
My understanding is those companies could be high risk for being overvalued and will have difficulty raising funds in 18-24 months. The RSUs maybe taxed at the current value, but actually be worthless after a down round.
My interpretation is companies that raised 18-24 months ago and are still hiring now would show stronger signals, because their last valuation missed the tech book of 2020 and they seem to think they can continue hiring despite the current economic situation.
My reasoning: if they raised in the last 6 months, they should be good to go for the next 18-24 months, which is hopefully enough to get through the storm.
I didn't consider RSUs or the possibility of a down round (but frankly, everyone who raised in the last 2 years has that, to your point). I'm cynical enough that I typically value options or RSUs of private companies close to $0 ("whee, a lottery ticket!"). Now, stock grants of public companies are a different situation.
> My interpretation is companies that raised 18-24 months ago and are still hiring now would show stronger signals
That's a good point. Sure, and stronger yet would be startups that are profitable or cash flow positive (or could be by flipping a few switches). The problem is that knowing from the outside if a company is profitable is as difficult as knowing if someone is going to hit the brakes on hiring in the next few months.
My understanding is those companies could be high risk for being overvalued and will have difficulty raising funds in 18-24 months. The RSUs maybe taxed at the current value, but actually be worthless after a down round.
My interpretation is companies that raised 18-24 months ago and are still hiring now would show stronger signals, because their last valuation missed the tech book of 2020 and they seem to think they can continue hiring despite the current economic situation.