Survey — Bertelsmann Stiftung, Sphaera & Artha — 2018

Survey — Bertelsmann Stiftung, Sphaera & Artha — 2018

Impact Platforms

Impact Platforms

Impact Platforms

Towards an interoperable impact finance ecosystem.

Towards an interoperable impact finance ecosystem.

Towards an interoperable impact finance ecosystem.

Authors

Authors

Dr Astrid Scholz · Sphaera · Dr Audrey Selian · Artha · Dr Brigitte Mohn · Bertelsmann Foundation

Method

Method

150 platforms reviewed · 35 survey responses · 17 key-informant interviews

Dated

Dated

20 September 2018

Portland · Geneva · Gütersloh

Publisher’s note — Cameron Burgess, 2026 · not part of the original report

Publisher’s note — Cameron Burgess, 2026 · not part of the original report

I edited and ghost-wrote this report, published 20 September 2018 by the Bertelsmann Stiftung, Sphaera and Artha. The term impact finance — set against impact investing in the definitions at the back — is mine.

I edited and ghost-wrote this report, published 20 September 2018 by the Bertelsmann Stiftung, Sphaera and Artha. The term impact finance — set against impact investing in the definitions at the back — is mine.

It is reproduced here in full, as written. Where the original’s summary slides and detail slides give different figures for the same measure, both appear and the discrepancy is marked rather than silently reconciled.

It is reproduced here in full, as written. Where the original’s summary slides and detail slides give different figures for the same measure, both appear and the discrepancy is marked rather than silently reconciled.

Pau, France

Pau, France

Introduction

Introduction

We are pleased to share with the impact community our review of 150 impact investing platforms, networks and organisations that promote, support or convene investors in the impact finance area.

We are pleased to share with the impact community our review of 150 impact investing platforms, networks and organisations that promote, support or convene investors in the impact finance area.

Prompted by our own experience as investors, technologists, and system designers, we were interested in better understanding prevailing business models and motivations for sharing — or hoarding — data, innovations, and investors.

Prompted by our own experience as investors, technologists, and system designers, we were interested in better understanding prevailing business models and motivations for sharing — or hoarding — data, innovations, and investors.

35 platforms participated in a detailed online survey about their technical, operational, and business specifications. In addition, we spoke at length with 17 key informants who represent various platforms, pertinent networks, and prospective partners in a collaborative next phase to build a more effective global impact infrastructure.

35 platforms participated in a detailed online survey about their technical, operational, and business specifications. In addition, we spoke at length with 17 key informants who represent various platforms, pertinent networks, and prospective partners in a collaborative next phase to build a more effective global impact infrastructure.

Not surprisingly, of the platforms we reviewed, at least 5 are no longer in business

Not surprisingly, of the platforms we reviewed, at least 5 are no longer in business

Our analysis builds on ongoing work to design and develop an interoperable, global, modular, distributed, and democratic infrastructure for mobilising data, innovations, and capital at the volume and velocity required to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Our purpose, in addition to providing an overview of the platform landscape, is to identify opportunities for alignment of prospective partners around the strategy, design and implementation for such global impact infrastructure; and to explore scenarios for collective action.

Our analysis builds on ongoing work to design and develop an interoperable, global, modular, distributed, and democratic infrastructure for mobilising data, innovations, and capital at the volume and velocity required to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Our purpose, in addition to providing an overview of the platform landscape, is to identify opportunities for alignment of prospective partners around the strategy, design and implementation for such global impact infrastructure; and to explore scenarios for collective action.

The study at a glance

The study at a glance

Scope and response

150

150

150

Platforms reviewed

Platforms reviewed

35

35

35

Detailed survey responses

Detailed survey responses

17

17

17

Key-informant interviews

Key-informant interviews

5+

5+

5+

Already out of business at review

Already out of business at review

Figure 01 — Scope

Figure 01 — Scope

The response rate is stated as 25% in the introduction and as 23% in the key findings. Both appear in the original; 35 of 150 is 23.3%.

The response rate is stated as 25% in the introduction and as 23% in the key findings. Both appear in the original; 35 of 150 is 23.3%.

Summary

Summary

Key findings

Key findings

Key findings

The study confirms that there is widespread duplication of effort, fragile business models, and similarity of value propositions.

The study confirms that there is widespread duplication of effort, fragile business models, and similarity of value propositions.

Platform data is not shareable. Taxonomies for deals, impact metrics, and meta-groupings such as the SDGs are inconsistent at best, and incoherent at worst.

Platform data is not shareable. Taxonomies for deals, impact metrics, and meta-groupings such as the SDGs are inconsistent at best, and incoherent at worst.

Platforms are not sufficiently interoperable. Only 32% of platforms responded ‘yes’ to having an Application Programming Interface.

Platforms are not sufficiently interoperable. Only 32% of platforms responded ‘yes’ to having an Application Programming Interface.

Platforms are not replicable. 47% have custom-built technology, and only 32% have a licensing model.

Platforms are not replicable. 47% have custom-built technology, and only 32% have a licensing model.

Platforms are not generally viable. A majority cannot cover their operating expenses, and most are funded by grants.

Platforms are not generally viable. A majority cannot cover their operating expenses, and most are funded by grants.

Four structural constraints

Four structural constraints

Share of surveyed platforms · n = 31–35

Have an Application Programming Interface

Have an Application Programming Interface

32%

32%

Build their own bespoke technology

Build their own bespoke technology

47%

47%

Can license their technology to others

Can license their technology to others

32%

32%

Cannot cover their operating costs (reported as both 53% and 73.3%)

Cannot cover their operating costs (reported as both 53% and 73.3%)

53–73%

53–73%

Figure 02 — Structural constraints

Figure 02 — Structural constraints

The fourth measure conflicts within the source: the key findings state 53% cannot cover operating expenses; the detail slide states ”nearly 75%” and prints 73.3%. The meter is drawn at the lower, more conservative figure and the range is labelled.

The fourth measure conflicts within the source: the key findings state 53% cannot cover operating expenses; the detail slide states ”nearly 75%” and prints 73.3%. The meter is drawn at the lower, more conservative figure and the range is labelled.

Despite these observations, the survey highlighted a desire for collaboration

Despite these observations, the survey highlighted a desire for collaboration

Collaboration is a core value. The survey response rate is significantly higher than the industry average of 10–15%, suggesting a willingness to work together.

Collaboration is a core value. The survey response rate is significantly higher than the industry average of 10–15%, suggesting a willingness to work together.

Collaboration is highly desirable. A significant majority of respondents indicated a willingness to explore deeper interoperability.

Collaboration is highly desirable. A significant majority of respondents indicated a willingness to explore deeper interoperability.

Collaboration is highly actionable. In addition to existing licensors, 32% are leveraging external platform data, and 50% are preparing to, or willing to, use it.

Collaboration is highly actionable. In addition to existing licensors, 32% are leveraging external platform data, and 50% are preparing to, or willing to, use it.

Appetite for interoperability

Appetite for interoperability

Share of surveyed platforms · n = 34

Keen to learn more about or join an interoperability consortium

Keen to learn more about or join an interoperability consortium

91%

91%

Already leveraging external platform data

Already leveraging external platform data

32%

32%

Preparing to, or willing to, use external data

Preparing to, or willing to, use external data

50%

50%

Figure 03 — Appetite

Figure 03 — Appetite

The gap between the appetite for interoperability and the evidence of it is the central finding of the study.

The gap between the appetite for interoperability and the evidence of it is the central finding of the study.

Without exception, platforms surveyed are constrained by outmoded ideas of data ownership, and are at imminent risk of disintermediation. The survey results suggest that platform stakeholders understand the altruistic and commercial imperative to collaborate, but are functionally or financially incapable of advancing this understanding.

Without exception, platforms surveyed are constrained by outmoded ideas of data ownership, and are at imminent risk of disintermediation. The survey results suggest that platform stakeholders understand the altruistic and commercial imperative to collaborate, but are functionally or financially incapable of advancing this understanding.

Market fragmentation is not only ineffective, it is unconscionable; and the path to rationalisation and course-correction is binary — centralise, or federate

Market fragmentation is not only ineffective, it is unconscionable; and the path to rationalisation and course-correction is binary — centralise, or federate

Regardless of which path is chosen, the desired outcomes are essentially the same, moving us more rapidly toward an effective approach to the SDGs through increased innovation liquidity, increased deal liquidity, and increased operational effectiveness throughout the sector.

Regardless of which path is chosen, the desired outcomes are essentially the same, moving us more rapidly toward an effective approach to the SDGs through increased innovation liquidity, increased deal liquidity, and increased operational effectiveness throughout the sector.

Observation

Observation

Observation: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Observation: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Observation: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Advancing beneficial outcomes is the entire focus of the impact finance ecosystem. So it inevitably begs the question: is there a more effective way to harness the skills, resources, and talents within it to greater effect?

Advancing beneficial outcomes is the entire focus of the impact finance ecosystem. So it inevitably begs the question: is there a more effective way to harness the skills, resources, and talents within it to greater effect?

Connecting the various platforms into a more cohesive whole will support finance seekers in attracting funding more quickly; connect funders directly to opportunities that match their investment thesis; and help existing platforms to refine, focus, and leverage their unique offerings.

Connecting the various platforms into a more cohesive whole will support finance seekers in attracting funding more quickly; connect funders directly to opportunities that match their investment thesis; and help existing platforms to refine, focus, and leverage their unique offerings.

Our prototyping around SDG 6 suggests that platforms are willing to share data as long as the value proposition is clear. This means aggregating, curating, refining, and sharing every deal, with every prospective funder on the planet — and doing so in a manner that supports global regulatory compliance, deal syndication, and appropriate sharing of fees.

Our prototyping around SDG 6 suggests that platforms are willing to share data as long as the value proposition is clear. This means aggregating, curating, refining, and sharing every deal, with every prospective funder on the planet — and doing so in a manner that supports global regulatory compliance, deal syndication, and appropriate sharing of fees.

Recommendation: The world doesn’t need another platform.

Recommendation: The world doesn’t need another platform.

What it does need, as apparent from the study we have undertaken, is a concentration on the connective tissue that defines and enables interoperability between platforms.

What it does need, as apparent from the study we have undertaken, is a concentration on the connective tissue that defines and enables interoperability between platforms.

There is great evidence of a desire to be interoperable from both the survey and the interviews. There is not, however, much evidence of doing — likely because the implications in terms of cost and revenues are unclear in a fragmented market where financing for building technology is a challenge and resources are scarce.

There is great evidence of a desire to be interoperable from both the survey and the interviews. There is not, however, much evidence of doing — likely because the implications in terms of cost and revenues are unclear in a fragmented market where financing for building technology is a challenge and resources are scarce.

A lack of market discipline and coherent feedback from a collective of systems has created a situation where messaging is unclear, and patterns as to who has built which part of the continuum are hard to discern among the noise. Communication between platforms in the ecosystem appears to be challenging.

A lack of market discipline and coherent feedback from a collective of systems has created a situation where messaging is unclear, and patterns as to who has built which part of the continuum are hard to discern among the noise. Communication between platforms in the ecosystem appears to be challenging.

There is an affliction related to idiosyncratic lingo. Many are doing the same thing and using different words to describe it

There is an affliction related to idiosyncratic lingo. Many are doing the same thing and using different words to describe it

There are some very strong financial-first players ready to collaborate, who could be a significant part of an emerging, improved impact infrastructure — essentially cross-subsidising the technology we need with their mainstream channels. There is a very real demand for technology development resources, as well as for regulatory and compliance support for operating platforms.

There are some very strong financial-first players ready to collaborate, who could be a significant part of an emerging, improved impact infrastructure — essentially cross-subsidising the technology we need with their mainstream channels. There is a very real demand for technology development resources, as well as for regulatory and compliance support for operating platforms.

The answer does not lie in a shiny new interface, but in a deeply layered process and tech infrastructure that enables true collaboration

The answer does not lie in a shiny new interface, but in a deeply layered process and tech infrastructure that enables true collaboration

Next steps

Next steps

Next steps

Next steps

Next steps

In the centralised approach, one would acquire and otherwise merge all the platforms into a single global platform — ”the one platform to rule them all” — enforcing strict standards and protocols throughout the sector. We give this approach a low likelihood of success.

In the centralised approach, one would acquire and otherwise merge all the platforms into a single global platform — ”the one platform to rule them all” — enforcing strict standards and protocols throughout the sector. We give this approach a low likelihood of success.

In the federated approach, one would develop a distributed data model that operationalises ownership of deal data to the venture seeking financing, increasing interoperability of deal data, and fostering the development of complementary business models that replace data ownership with other value-added offerings. We give this approach a high likelihood of success.

In the federated approach, one would develop a distributed data model that operationalises ownership of deal data to the venture seeking financing, increasing interoperability of deal data, and fostering the development of complementary business models that replace data ownership with other value-added offerings. We give this approach a high likelihood of success.

We have comprehensively described what needs to be built in From Billions to Trillions . Three scenarios follow. They are not mutually exclusive, and alone or in combination advance the needed infrastructure.

We have comprehensively described what needs to be built in From Billions to Trillions . Three scenarios follow. They are not mutually exclusive, and alone or in combination advance the needed infrastructure.

Create federation protocols. Design, develop and deploy a federated data structure, characterised by an open data standard and architecture, API documentation, process and adherence protocols. By putting the venture in control of their deal data, the market mechanism of competition between funders will increase overall market effectiveness and efficiency.

Create federation protocols. Design, develop and deploy a federated data structure, characterised by an open data standard and architecture, API documentation, process and adherence protocols. By putting the venture in control of their deal data, the market mechanism of competition between funders will increase overall market effectiveness and efficiency.

Rationalise existing platforms. Consider consolidating, merging, and streamlining existing systems to create a standard for the impact investing industry. This could include the creation of a transition fund to move existing platforms to more sustainable and compliant service-centric business models.

Rationalise existing platforms. Consider consolidating, merging, and streamlining existing systems to create a standard for the impact investing industry. This could include the creation of a transition fund to move existing platforms to more sustainable and compliant service-centric business models.

Focus on SDG 6 — water and sanitation. Partner with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and other key players ready to co-create a focused, multi-sided distributed market network capable of engaging multiple platforms and stakeholders. The goal is to achieve data, innovation, and capital liquidity via development of a distributed technical and process infrastructure.

Focus on SDG 6 — water and sanitation. Partner with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and other key players ready to co-create a focused, multi-sided distributed market network capable of engaging multiple platforms and stakeholders. The goal is to achieve data, innovation, and capital liquidity via development of a distributed technical and process infrastructure.

The original states ”three scenarios” in one place and ”four scenarios” in another. Three are described. Scenario 3 is the work taken forward in Project 1800 .

The original states ”three scenarios” in one place and ”four scenarios” in another. Three are described. Scenario 3 is the work taken forward in Project 1800 .

A call to action

A call to action

A Call to Action: What’s in it for me?

A Call to Action: What’s in it for me?

A Call to Action: What’s in it for me?

In isolation, the 150+ platforms serving the impact industry will continue to struggle to get to scale at a moment in history when we urgently need to unleash more capital, more quickly, into the solutions for achieving the SDGs.

In isolation, the 150+ platforms serving the impact industry will continue to struggle to get to scale at a moment in history when we urgently need to unleash more capital, more quickly, into the solutions for achieving the SDGs.

As investors , we want to see more relevant deals that are right for our flavour of capital.

As investors , we want to see more relevant deals that are right for our flavour of capital.

As platform operators , we want to provide more value to our customers, members, and users.

As platform operators , we want to provide more value to our customers, members, and users.

As entrepreneurs , we want an easier time finding the funding and partners we need to scale our solutions.

As entrepreneurs , we want an easier time finding the funding and partners we need to scale our solutions.

All of us want to achieve the SDGs more quickly and effectively.

All of us want to achieve the SDGs more quickly and effectively.

After 10 years of trying to emulate the Silicon Valley way of building global platforms, and doing so badly, it’s time for the impact industry to build its own infrastructure that’s fit for the purpose of accelerating social change

After 10 years of trying to emulate the Silicon Valley way of building global platforms, and doing so badly, it’s time for the impact industry to build its own infrastructure that’s fit for the purpose of accelerating social change

Part II

Part II

The impact platform landscape

The impact platform landscape

The impact platform landscape

Summary statistics

Summary statistics

Summary Statistics

Summary Statistics

Summary Statistics

Of the 35 platforms that responded:

Of the 35 platforms that responded:

Over half (18) operate globally, with the remainder spread among major regions

Over half (18) operate globally, with the remainder spread among major regions

Over half (19) focus on financial services, and 16 cover all 19 sectors reviewed

Over half (19) focus on financial services, and 16 cover all 19 sectors reviewed

They have very similar value propositions that can be summarized in just a few key words, and very similar perspectives on the problems they address and what makes them unique.

They have very similar value propositions that can be summarized in just a few key words, and very similar perspectives on the problems they address and what makes them unique.

Three quarters (76%) are not yet live or younger than 5 years

Three quarters (76%) are not yet live or younger than 5 years

Over half (18) have fewer than 1,000 users each, only 3 have more than 100,000 each

Over half (18) have fewer than 1,000 users each, only 3 have more than 100,000 each

Most have raised less than $1M to fund their development and operations, mostly from grants

Most have raised less than $1M to fund their development and operations, mostly from grants

Just 9 platforms account for all of the $2.7B in capital moved

Just 9 platforms account for all of the $2.7B in capital moved

Geographic focus is mostly global

Geographic focus is mostly global

Over half (18) operate globally, with the remainder spread among major regions

Over half (18) operate globally, with the remainder spread among major regions

A third of respondents (11) operate in the Americas (where 36% of total impact AUM is allocated), another third (11) operate in Asia (18% of total impact AUM), and a third (11) operate in E. and W. Europe (21% of total impact AUM)

A third of respondents (11) operate in the Americas (where 36% of total impact AUM is allocated), another third (11) operate in Asia (18% of total impact AUM), and a third (11) operate in E. and W. Europe (21% of total impact AUM)

About a quarter of respondents (9) operate in MENA and Sub-Saharan Africa (17% of total impact AUM)

About a quarter of respondents (9) operate in MENA and Sub-Saharan Africa (17% of total impact AUM)

Source: GIIN Annual Impact Survey 2018

Source: GIIN Annual Impact Survey 2018

Sector focus is comprehensive

Sector focus is comprehensive

56% (19) focus on financial services

56% (19) focus on financial services

47% (16 of 19) are totally sector agnostic

47% (16 of 19) are totally sector agnostic

Of those with existing Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), over 70% take a multi-sector approach

Of those with existing Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), over 70% take a multi-sector approach

Of those with no APIs, nearly 70% are focused on financial services.

Of those with no APIs, nearly 70% are focused on financial services.

Value propositions are similar

Value propositions are similar

A word cloud of most frequently used terms in survey responses reveals a strong congruence and similarity in the language used to articulate ‘value proposition’ or USP amongst the platforms. This is provisionally a good sign.

A word cloud of most frequently used terms in survey responses reveals a strong congruence and similarity in the language used to articulate ‘value proposition’ or USP amongst the platforms. This is provisionally a good sign.

Value propositions are similar

Value propositions are similar

Most frequently used terms in survey responses

Value propositions

Value propositions

A word cloud of most frequently used terms in survey responses reveals a strong congruence and similarity in the language used to articulate ‘value proposition’ or USP amongst the platforms. This is provisionally a good sign.

A word cloud of most frequently used terms in survey responses reveals a strong congruence and similarity in the language used to articulate ‘value proposition’ or USP amongst the platforms. This is provisionally a good sign.

Money moved is highly concentrated

Money moved is highly concentrated

Share of the 24 platforms answering — bar width is platform count, not capital

9 platforms

9 platforms

$2.7bn moved

$2.7bn moved

15 platforms

15 platforms

no capital moved at all

no capital moved at all

Figure 04 — Capital concentration

Figure 04 — Capital concentration

This ratio corresponds to the focus of the majority of platforms on facilitating connection, rather than facilitating transactions. Platforms responsible for moving capital tend to be venture financed, are finance-first, and have SaaS revenue models.

This ratio corresponds to the focus of the majority of platforms on facilitating connection, rather than facilitating transactions. Platforms responsible for moving capital tend to be venture financed, are finance-first, and have SaaS revenue models.

Money raised is largely under $1M, and mostly from grants

Money raised is largely under $1M, and mostly from grants

Of platforms that raised funding · n = 34

Under $1M

Under $1M

64%

64%

$1M – $10M

$1M – $10M

28%

28%

Over $10M

Over $10M

8%

8%

Figure 05 — Capital raised

Figure 05 — Capital raised

76.5% of respondents raised capital to fund the development of their platform. Over a quarter opted out of these questions, suggesting a sensitive topic. 94% of those who built their own bespoke technology had raised outside funding. Between 60% and 61.5% are grant funded — which implies they haven’t figured out a sustainable revenue model yet.

76.5% of respondents raised capital to fund the development of their platform. Over a quarter opted out of these questions, suggesting a sensitive topic. 94% of those who built their own bespoke technology had raised outside funding. Between 60% and 61.5% are grant funded — which implies they haven’t figured out a sustainable revenue model yet.

The sector is young, and small

The sector is young, and small

Age and user base of surveyed platforms · n = 31–35

Not live or under 5 yrs

Not live or under 5 yrs

76%

76%

6 – 10 years old

6 – 10 years old

18%

18%

Under 1,000 users

Under 1,000 users

60%

60%

Over 100,000 users

Over 100,000 users

10%

10%

Figure 06 — Age and scale

Figure 06 — Age and scale

Among those not yet live or under 5 years old, nearly 70% are willing to partner or interoperate. Platforms that have been around longer are not more likely to include APIs. Of the largest systems, the willingness to explore partnering is clear — and all of them employ for-profit structures.

Among those not yet live or under 5 years old, nearly 70% are willing to partner or interoperate. Platforms that have been around longer are not more likely to include APIs. Of the largest systems, the willingness to explore partnering is clear — and all of them employ for-profit structures.

The dysfunction we are trying to solve for in the development sector is mirrored by us, those who are trying to solve the problem

The dysfunction we are trying to solve for in the development sector is mirrored by us, those who are trying to solve the problem

Prevailing patterns

Prevailing patterns

Prevailing Patterns

Prevailing Patterns

Prevailing Patterns

Corporate forms span the spectrum from non-profit to finance-first structures, and many signal a social mission.

Corporate forms span the spectrum from non-profit to finance-first structures, and many signal a social mission.

The majority of platforms focus on entrepreneurs and investors, then accelerators.

The majority of platforms focus on entrepreneurs and investors, then accelerators.

There is no standardized language about what platforms do and how they do it.

There is no standardized language about what platforms do and how they do it.

Motivations and value propositions largely overlap, as does technical functionality.

Motivations and value propositions largely overlap, as does technical functionality.

Business models are mostly impact-first, and service-based.

Business models are mostly impact-first, and service-based.

Raising financing is seen as the biggest challenge, followed by community engagement.

Raising financing is seen as the biggest challenge, followed by community engagement.

The majority of platforms are not earning enough revenue to cover their operating costs.

The majority of platforms are not earning enough revenue to cover their operating costs.

Over 35% of respondents felt the need to specify what they do using different terms than those offered in the survey. There is a high level of idiosyncrasy in narrative and language — what we came to call snowflake syndrome : the conviction that one is, in some way, special and should be treated differently from others.

Over 35% of respondents felt the need to specify what they do using different terms than those offered in the survey. There is a high level of idiosyncrasy in narrative and language — what we came to call snowflake syndrome : the conviction that one is, in some way, special and should be treated differently from others.

Corporate forms are a mix

Corporate forms are a mix

Easily half of the platforms use for-profit structures, and of those the majority signal public benefit (PBCs, Co-Ops, and equivalents), are hybrids or have the flexibility to anchor a social mission (LLCs and equivalents)

Easily half of the platforms use for-profit structures, and of those the majority signal public benefit (PBCs, Co-Ops, and equivalents), are hybrids or have the flexibility to anchor a social mission (LLCs and equivalents)

Irrespective of entity type, nearly all platforms are addressing a perceived lack of impact investors or investment pipeline

Irrespective of entity type, nearly all platforms are addressing a perceived lack of impact investors or investment pipeline

Only a small number of classic, ‘finance first’ structures (C-Corps), and not surprisingly those tend to be associated with businesses that have raised VC

Only a small number of classic, ‘finance first’ structures (C-Corps), and not surprisingly those tend to be associated with businesses that have raised VC

The only cooperative structure surveyed is based in W. Europe

The only cooperative structure surveyed is based in W. Europe

User profiles are typical

User profiles are typical

A relatively uniform view of ‘who matters’ prevails in these platforms: entrepreneurs and investors, followed by accelerators

A relatively uniform view of ‘who matters’ prevails in these platforms: entrepreneurs and investors, followed by accelerators

It is interesting that only one third of platforms include development financiers and government agencies in their systems, when these are by far those positioned to deploy the most capital at scale

It is interesting that only one third of platforms include development financiers and government agencies in their systems, when these are by far those positioned to deploy the most capital at scale

“Other” included corporates, NGOs, service providers, investment managers, indigenous leaders and tribes

“Other” included corporates, NGOs, service providers, investment managers, indigenous leaders and tribes

The brokering of technical expertise / assistance is an unmet need among the platforms surveyed

The brokering of technical expertise / assistance is an unmet need among the platforms surveyed

Shared language is missing

Shared language is missing

Over 35% of respondents felt the need to specify in their language what they do using different terms than those offered in the survey

Over 35% of respondents felt the need to specify in their language what they do using different terms than those offered in the survey

There is a high level of idiosyncrasy in narrative and language aka. “Snowflake syndrome”

There is a high level of idiosyncrasy in narrative and language aka. “Snowflake syndrome”

Many respondents referred to a mix of aggregation, marketplace and advisory services, some mentioned fund structures of one or another type

Many respondents referred to a mix of aggregation, marketplace and advisory services, some mentioned fund structures of one or another type

Raising money for platforms …

Raising money for platforms …

Over a quarter of people opted out of these questions, suggesting it’s a sensitive topic — 64% have raised under $1M; 28% have raised between $1M and $10M; 8% have raised more than $10M

Over a quarter of people opted out of these questions, suggesting it’s a sensitive topic — 64% have raised under $1M; 28% have raised between $1M and $10M; 8% have raised more than $10M

94% of those who have built their own bespoke technology have raised outside funding

94% of those who have built their own bespoke technology have raised outside funding

… appears to be the hardest part

… appears to be the hardest part

Finding financing is by far the more challenging area of activity for most of these platforms; technology seems to be the least of their worries.

Finding financing is by far the more challenging area of activity for most of these platforms; technology seems to be the least of their worries.

Engaging / curating community and maintaining databases are two additional areas of relatively higher concern.

Engaging / curating community and maintaining databases are two additional areas of relatively higher concern.

Business models are mostly service-based

Business models are mostly service-based

The half of platforms are impact first (17), and another 9 are both impact and finance focused

The half of platforms are impact first (17), and another 9 are both impact and finance focused

The highest revenue generating business surveyed is running on a subscription/license model, and is not an impact platform per se

The highest revenue generating business surveyed is running on a subscription/license model, and is not an impact platform per se

Business models are leaning towards service models, with only 6 pure marketplaces that are presumably transaction-fee based — that said, smaller systems (under 100 users or members) appear to be relying on the transaction fee model

Business models are leaning towards service models, with only 6 pure marketplaces that are presumably transaction-fee based — that said, smaller systems (under 100 users or members) appear to be relying on the transaction fee model

A smattering of platforms are integrated with banks, family offices, private equity firms, advisory firms, or adjacent businesses

A smattering of platforms are integrated with banks, family offices, private equity firms, advisory firms, or adjacent businesses

Platform revenue usually does not cover opex

Platform revenue usually does not cover opex

Nearly 75% of platforms surveyed do not generate enough revenue to cover their operating costs, which raises serious questions regarding their sustainability

Nearly 75% of platforms surveyed do not generate enough revenue to cover their operating costs, which raises serious questions regarding their sustainability

Those who do generate enough revenue to cover costs appear to operate in the sweet spot of between 1K – 10K users

Those who do generate enough revenue to cover costs appear to operate in the sweet spot of between 1K – 10K users

Limited licensing limits spread and adoption of tech

Limited licensing limits spread and adoption of tech

Only 32% of those surveyed operating active platforms currently have the capacity and plan to license their technology

Only 32% of those surveyed operating active platforms currently have the capacity and plan to license their technology

Relative majority of respondents stated that their platform is not licensed to others. A number of respondents are either working on it (9%) or thinking about it (24%).

Relative majority of respondents stated that their platform is not licensed to others. A number of respondents are either working on it (9%) or thinking about it (24%).

Focus of platform development tends to be focused on in-house needs, rather than potential synergies with other actors

Focus of platform development tends to be focused on in-house needs, rather than potential synergies with other actors

Model

Model

Problem being solved

Problem being solved

Claimed unique offering

Claimed unique offering

Marketplace

Marketplace

Duplication of effort; time spent fundraising and searching for deal flow; lack of capital flow at scale; financing gap under $1M; ability to provide a service that banks can’t

Duplication of effort; time spent fundraising and searching for deal flow; lack of capital flow at scale; financing gap under $1M; ability to provide a service that banks can’t

Centralised repository of critical business intelligence; first to market with pre-IPO impact ventures; investor-focused; partnership with a big bank; crowdlending approach raises accessibility

Centralised repository of critical business intelligence; first to market with pre-IPO impact ventures; investor-focused; partnership with a big bank; crowdlending approach raises accessibility

Marketplace-as-a-service

Marketplace-as-a-service

SDG financing

SDG financing

Brings together a dynamic ecosystem of entrepreneurs, investors, large and small companies, NGOs, UN agencies, incubators

Brings together a dynamic ecosystem of entrepreneurs, investors, large and small companies, NGOs, UN agencies, incubators

Platform-as-a-service

Platform-as-a-service

Aggregating deal flow; bringing together actors that would otherwise not cooperate; helping institutions manage digital marketplaces; supporting accelerators; democratising capital; transparency; meritocracy

Aggregating deal flow; bringing together actors that would otherwise not cooperate; helping institutions manage digital marketplaces; supporting accelerators; democratising capital; transparency; meritocracy

Universal impact profiles that create a global standard; comprehensive interactive ecosystem map; support of the full accelerator programme life cycle; built with top-tier institutions; scale and reach; standardised reporting

Universal impact profiles that create a global standard; comprehensive interactive ecosystem map; support of the full accelerator programme life cycle; built with top-tier institutions; scale and reach; standardised reporting

Membership network

Membership network

Lack of awareness; building an equitable economy

Lack of awareness; building an equitable economy

Active network; eclectic group of foundations, high-net-worth families, and investment managers

Active network; eclectic group of foundations, high-net-worth families, and investment managers

Consulting / advisory

Consulting / advisory

Sustainability challenges in low-income markets; building bridges between phases of capital requirement; education and awareness building to justify infrastructure; access to business mentors and online resources

Sustainability challenges in low-income markets; building bridges between phases of capital requirement; education and awareness building to justify infrastructure; access to business mentors and online resources

Partnership approach sharing risk and return; global network of mentors and experts; connection of investors with enterprises; work with both buy and sell side; sector and geographic specificity

Partnership approach sharing risk and return; global network of mentors and experts; connection of investors with enterprises; work with both buy and sell side; sector and geographic specificity

Table 01 — Key motivations are often overlapping

Why platforms fail

Why platforms fail

Why Platforms Fail

Why Platforms Fail

Why Platforms Fail

They solved the hard part and missed the easy one. They solved for the tricky regulatory and compliance issues in at least one market — typically the US — but didn’t get to the volume of transactions required by their revenue model.

They solved the hard part and missed the easy one. They solved for the tricky regulatory and compliance issues in at least one market — typically the US — but didn’t get to the volume of transactions required by their revenue model.

They built proprietary pipelines that were too narrow. They invest in building proprietary pipelines of investors and entrepreneurs in overly narrow sectors, or using narrow theories of change, and don’t get to the volume of members to make their fee-based revenue models work — while confronting high costs for curation.

They built proprietary pipelines that were too narrow. They invest in building proprietary pipelines of investors and entrepreneurs in overly narrow sectors, or using narrow theories of change, and don’t get to the volume of members to make their fee-based revenue models work — while confronting high costs for curation.

Field of Dreams. They fall into the trap of thinking that if you build it, they will come — overestimating the readiness of market actors to form trusted relationships using online technologies.

Field of Dreams. They fall into the trap of thinking that if you build it, they will come — overestimating the readiness of market actors to form trusted relationships using online technologies.

On the surface, impact investing looks like a simple market-creation problem of matching the demand from capital owners with the supply of impactful ventures.

On the surface, impact investing looks like a simple market-creation problem of matching the demand from capital owners with the supply of impactful ventures.

In reality, technology cannot replace trusted relationships

In reality, technology cannot replace trusted relationships

One notable failure in this space reported having used old-fashioned relationship banking to close the deals that garnered some headlines. There are many marginal platforms in the impact investing landscape, and one of them indicated during our interviews that they are looking for an acquisition or other soft landing. There are other potential acquisition targets, as well as the opportunity for partnering with commercial actors who have strong technology offerings for whom impact is a lesser, but interesting, market.

One notable failure in this space reported having used old-fashioned relationship banking to close the deals that garnered some headlines. There are many marginal platforms in the impact investing landscape, and one of them indicated during our interviews that they are looking for an acquisition or other soft landing. There are other potential acquisition targets, as well as the opportunity for partnering with commercial actors who have strong technology offerings for whom impact is a lesser, but interesting, market.

Prospective partners

Prospective partners

Partner Potential

Partner Potential

Partner Potential

Perceptions of the competitive space are skewed and un-nuanced.

Perceptions of the competitive space are skewed and un-nuanced.

Technology is key to what platforms do, and about half build their own technology — but there is openness to outsourcing.

Technology is key to what platforms do, and about half build their own technology — but there is openness to outsourcing.

Top choices for outsourcing are technology itself, regulatory compliance and customer service, suggesting some avenues for mutual benefit.

Top choices for outsourcing are technology itself, regulatory compliance and customer service, suggesting some avenues for mutual benefit.

There is interest in using data from other platforms, and many are already doing so.

There is interest in using data from other platforms, and many are already doing so.

Perceived benefits from collaboration include sharing investors and data.

Perceived benefits from collaboration include sharing investors and data.

Among survey respondents, all but a few are interested in learning more about a collaborative consortium.

Among survey respondents, all but a few are interested in learning more about a collaborative consortium.

Competitive insights are blurry

Competitive insights are blurry

Perceptions of competition are disparate, and include companies that present themselves as networks, off the shelf SaaS products, fund or funder offerings, membership organizations, mobile payments platforms, and blockchain systems.

Perceptions of competition are disparate, and include companies that present themselves as networks, off the shelf SaaS products, fund or funder offerings, membership organizations, mobile payments platforms, and blockchain systems.

There is mixed and overlapping signalling in this ecosystem, pointing to a need to juxtapose complementary offerings and functionalities effectively and intelligently.

There is mixed and overlapping signalling in this ecosystem, pointing to a need to juxtapose complementary offerings and functionalities effectively and intelligently.

Global Innovation Exchange · F6S · Screen door · Sales Force · FrontFundr · OMX · Purpose Capital · M-Pesa · New Chip · NextGen · duurzaaminvesteren.nl · Envestry · Sharein · Hub · dealroom · Grand Challenges Canada · Mission Investors Exchange · Crunchbase · Angellist · Social Capital · Right Side Capital · 500 Startups · Regen Network · Toniic · Investors’ Circle · Confluence · sdg-investments.org · younoodle

Global Innovation Exchange · F6S · Screen door · Sales Force · FrontFundr · OMX · Purpose Capital · M-Pesa · New Chip · NextGen · duurzaaminvesteren.nl · Envestry · Sharein · Hub · dealroom · Grand Challenges Canada · Mission Investors Exchange · Crunchbase · Angellist · Social Capital · Right Side Capital · 500 Startups · Regen Network · Toniic · Investors’ Circle · Confluence · sdg-investments.org · younoodle

Open to outsourcing

Open to outsourcing

What platforms would outsource if it were an option · n = 31

Technology development

Technology development

29%

29%

Regulatory compliance

Regulatory compliance

19%

19%

Figure 07 — Outsourcing appetite

Figure 07 — Outsourcing appetite

Those who have not built their own technology tend to be slightly more likely to be impact-first. For those who have built their own, maintaining it is less of a challenge than finding deals and managing regulatory compliance. Even amongst those who built their own technology, 50% have not built APIs.

Those who have not built their own technology tend to be slightly more likely to be impact-first. For those who have built their own, maintaining it is less of a challenge than finding deals and managing regulatory compliance. Even amongst those who built their own technology, 50% have not built APIs.

Some already use APIs & data from other platforms

Some already use APIs & data from other platforms

Only 6% of those with APIs in place are not interested in or using data from other platforms and databases; all the rest are open to doing so

Only 6% of those with APIs in place are not interested in or using data from other platforms and databases; all the rest are open to doing so

Of those who ‘don’t know’ about APIs, the majority categorize themselves as ‘impact first’

Of those who ‘don’t know’ about APIs, the majority categorize themselves as ‘impact first’

What could peer platforms bring you?

What could peer platforms bring you?

Among survey respondents, 91% are keen to learn more about or participate in a consortium of platforms working on interoperability.

Among survey respondents, 91% are keen to learn more about or participate in a consortium of platforms working on interoperability.

What’s next?

What’s next?

We are committed to advancing a collective, collaborative approach to building better impact infrastructure.

We are committed to advancing a collective, collaborative approach to building better impact infrastructure.

Fall / winter 2018: Convene the collaborators. At industry gatherings such as the GSG Summit, SOCAP, the GIIN Summit, and the EVPA meeting, we will convene and consult with aligned organisations and networks, to uncover a joint use case for building better impact infrastructure. The goal is to forge a roadmap that serves the objectives of all stakeholders in the social capital market, writ large.

Fall / winter 2018: Convene the collaborators. At industry gatherings such as the GSG Summit, SOCAP, the GIIN Summit, and the EVPA meeting, we will convene and consult with aligned organisations and networks, to uncover a joint use case for building better impact infrastructure. The goal is to forge a roadmap that serves the objectives of all stakeholders in the social capital market, writ large.

Recommendations

Recommendations

Observation: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Observation: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Observation: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Advancing beneficial outcomes is the entire focus of the impact finance ecosystem. So it inevitably begs the question, is there a more effective way to harness the skills, resources, and talents within it to greater effect?

Advancing beneficial outcomes is the entire focus of the impact finance ecosystem. So it inevitably begs the question, is there a more effective way to harness the skills, resources, and talents within it to greater effect?

Connecting the various platforms into a more cohesive whole will have the following key benefits: support finance seekers in attracting funding more quickly; connect funders directly to opportunities that match their investment thesis; help existing platforms to refine, focus, and leverage their unique offerings.

Connecting the various platforms into a more cohesive whole will have the following key benefits: support finance seekers in attracting funding more quickly; connect funders directly to opportunities that match their investment thesis; help existing platforms to refine, focus, and leverage their unique offerings.

Our prototyping around SDG6 suggests that platforms are willing to share data as long as the value proposition is clear. This means aggregating, curating, refining, and sharing every deal, with every prospective funder on the planet. And doing so in a manner that supports global regulatory compliance, deal syndication, and appropriate sharing of fees.

Our prototyping around SDG6 suggests that platforms are willing to share data as long as the value proposition is clear. This means aggregating, curating, refining, and sharing every deal, with every prospective funder on the planet. And doing so in a manner that supports global regulatory compliance, deal syndication, and appropriate sharing of fees.

Recommendation: The world doesn’t need another platform.

Recommendation: The world doesn’t need another platform.

What it does need, as apparent from the study we have undertaken, is a concentration on the connective tissue that defines and enables interoperability between platforms.

What it does need, as apparent from the study we have undertaken, is a concentration on the connective tissue that defines and enables interoperability between platforms.

There is great evidence of a desire to be interoperable from both the survey and the interviews we have undertaken. There is not, however, much evidence of ‘doing’, likely because the implications in terms of cost and revenues are unclear in a fragmented market where financing for building technology is a challenge and resources are scarce.

There is great evidence of a desire to be interoperable from both the survey and the interviews we have undertaken. There is not, however, much evidence of ‘doing’, likely because the implications in terms of cost and revenues are unclear in a fragmented market where financing for building technology is a challenge and resources are scarce.

A lack of market discipline and coherent feedback from a collective of systems has created a situation where messaging is unclear, and patterns are as to who has built which part of the continuum are hard to discern among the noise. Communication between platforms in the ecosystem appears to be challenging.

A lack of market discipline and coherent feedback from a collective of systems has created a situation where messaging is unclear, and patterns are as to who has built which part of the continuum are hard to discern among the noise. Communication between platforms in the ecosystem appears to be challenging.

There are some very strong financial-first players ready to collaborate, who could be a significant part of an emerging, improved impact infrastructure, essentially cross-subsidising the technology we need with their mainstream channels.

There are some very strong financial-first players ready to collaborate, who could be a significant part of an emerging, improved impact infrastructure, essentially cross-subsidising the technology we need with their mainstream channels.

There is an affliction related to idiosyncratic lingo. Many are doing the same thing and using different words to describe it. This creates confusion and mixed signals that does not serve the collective.

There is an affliction related to idiosyncratic lingo. Many are doing the same thing and using different words to describe it. This creates confusion and mixed signals that does not serve the collective.

There is a very real demand for technology development resources, as well as for regulatory and compliance support for operating platforms. The answer does not lie in a shiny new interface, but in a deeply layered process and tech infrastructure that enables true collaboration.

There is a very real demand for technology development resources, as well as for regulatory and compliance support for operating platforms. The answer does not lie in a shiny new interface, but in a deeply layered process and tech infrastructure that enables true collaboration.

A Call to Action

A Call to Action

In addition to the four scenarios we have described, are there others that we should consider? Please get in touch and share your ideas!

In addition to the four scenarios we have described, are there others that we should consider? Please get in touch and share your ideas!

We believe there is an opportunity to harness the talent, creativity and ingenuity evinced by the platforms we surveyed, and to overcome the fragmentation of the impact industry by taking a collaborative approach to building better digital, legal, and financial infrastructure.

We believe there is an opportunity to harness the talent, creativity and ingenuity evinced by the platforms we surveyed, and to overcome the fragmentation of the impact industry by taking a collaborative approach to building better digital, legal, and financial infrastructure.

The Observation, Recommendation, Next steps, Scenarios and Call to Action appear twice in the original — once in the Summary and once in the Recommendations section. Both instances are reproduced. The scenario count differs between the two (”three” and ”four”); three are described.

The Observation, Recommendation, Next steps, Scenarios and Call to Action appear twice in the original — once in the Summary and once in the Recommendations section. Both instances are reproduced. The scenario count differs between the two (”three” and ”four”); three are described.

Appendices

Appendices

Appendices

Appendices

Appendices

Definitions

Definitions

Impact investment vs impact finance

Impact investment vs impact finance

Impact investing is the practice of making debt or equity investments into companies, organisations, and funds with the intention to generate a measurable, beneficial social or environmental impact alongside a financial return. Return expectations can vary from below-market rate to above-market rates. Typically impact investors are focused on particular geographies and sectors, and in aggregate are estimated to make $228B across a range of asset classes and vehicles (GIIN 2018 annual survey).

Impact investing is the practice of making debt or equity investments into companies, organisations, and funds with the intention to generate a measurable, beneficial social or environmental impact alongside a financial return. Return expectations can vary from below-market rate to above-market rates. Typically impact investors are focused on particular geographies and sectors, and in aggregate are estimated to make $228B across a range of asset classes and vehicles (GIIN 2018 annual survey).

By contrast, impact finance contemplates the full range of vehicles from grants to debt and equity investments, as well as loan guarantees and other financial tools for attracting capital from a range of sources, and blending or braiding it in the pursuit of beneficial outcomes.

By contrast, impact finance contemplates the full range of vehicles from grants to debt and equity investments, as well as loan guarantees and other financial tools for attracting capital from a range of sources, and blending or braiding it in the pursuit of beneficial outcomes.

The meaning of ”platform”

The meaning of ”platform”

”Platform” is one of those near-ubiquitous, poorly understood terms that describe a plethora of artefacts and initiatives. Following Choudary, we find it useful to think of platforms as a contemporary business model that connects people to each other, for the purpose of creating or exchanging value. As such, platforms consist of three layers:

”Platform” is one of those near-ubiquitous, poorly understood terms that describe a plethora of artefacts and initiatives. Following Choudary, we find it useful to think of platforms as a contemporary business model that connects people to each other, for the purpose of creating or exchanging value. As such, platforms consist of three layers:

A network, marketplace, or community;

A network, marketplace, or community;

A technology infrastructure where users engage with each other; and

A technology infrastructure where users engage with each other; and

Data that are generated by user interactions.

Data that are generated by user interactions.

The impact platforms surveyed use different configurations of these layers — some focusing more on the network, others more on the technology, very few (yet) on data.

The impact platforms surveyed use different configurations of these layers — some focusing more on the network, others more on the technology, very few (yet) on data.

What typifies these systems

What typifies these systems

Searchable profiles of funders · searchable profiles of ventures seeking funding, including non-profit and for-profit · possibly one or another connected additional profile type that is searchable · automated or manual filtering mechanisms for connecting funders and ventures · internal messaging for connecting members · a model for monetising these connections.

Searchable profiles of funders · searchable profiles of ventures seeking funding, including non-profit and for-profit · possibly one or another connected additional profile type that is searchable · automated or manual filtering mechanisms for connecting funders and ventures · internal messaging for connecting members · a model for monetising these connections.

Glossary

Glossary

API

API

A set of functions and procedures that allow one program to access the data or features of another.

A set of functions and procedures that allow one program to access the data or features of another.

Funder

Funder

A person or organisation providing financial resources — grants, investments — to a venture.

A person or organisation providing financial resources — grants, investments — to a venture.

Platform

Platform

A business model consisting of a configuration of community, technology infrastructure, and data that facilitates the creation and exchange of value. In this project we considered both transaction platforms and those focused on exposing innovations and solutions without facilitating investment transactions.

A business model consisting of a configuration of community, technology infrastructure, and data that facilitates the creation and exchange of value. In this project we considered both transaction platforms and those focused on exposing innovations and solutions without facilitating investment transactions.

Snowflake syndrome

Snowflake syndrome

The conviction that one is, in some way, special and should be treated differently from others.

The conviction that one is, in some way, special and should be treated differently from others.

USP

USP

Unique Selling Proposition: the element or consideration that makes a product or service stand out from the competition.

Unique Selling Proposition: the element or consideration that makes a product or service stand out from the competition.

Venture

Venture

Any for-profit or non-profit entity that produces goods or services.

Any for-profit or non-profit entity that produces goods or services.

Interview participants

Interview participants

Rosemary Addis (National Australia Bank) · Adam Bendell (Toniic) · Carolien de Bruin (C-Change) · Geoff Chapin (SDG Engine) · Jeff Cohen (SDG Engine) · Allie Ettenger (Global Innovation Exchange) · Sweta Govani (Global Innovation Exchange) · Emily Hawkins (Crowdrise) · Luni Libes (InvestorFlow) · Kelly McCarthy (GIIN) · Stuart Minnaar (Fundie Ventures) · Dave Newman (Delio) · David Oehm (Enable Impact) · Urmi Sengupta (MacArthur Foundation / ImpactUs) · Adam Spence (SVX) · Krisztina Tora (GSG) · Jeff Tuller (Mission Markets, SDG Marketplace) · Robert Wolfe (Crowdrise).

Rosemary Addis (National Australia Bank) · Adam Bendell (Toniic) · Carolien de Bruin (C-Change) · Geoff Chapin (SDG Engine) · Jeff Cohen (SDG Engine) · Allie Ettenger (Global Innovation Exchange) · Sweta Govani (Global Innovation Exchange) · Emily Hawkins (Crowdrise) · Luni Libes (InvestorFlow) · Kelly McCarthy (GIIN) · Stuart Minnaar (Fundie Ventures) · Dave Newman (Delio) · David Oehm (Enable Impact) · Urmi Sengupta (MacArthur Foundation / ImpactUs) · Adam Spence (SVX) · Krisztina Tora (GSG) · Jeff Tuller (Mission Markets, SDG Marketplace) · Robert Wolfe (Crowdrise).

Enable Impact, ImpactUs and Mission Markets were already defunct at the time of publication.

Enable Impact, ImpactUs and Mission Markets were already defunct at the time of publication.

Platforms reviewed

Platforms reviewed

Platforms Reviewed

Platforms Reviewed

Platforms Reviewed

This index is the study’s single most eloquent artefact. Marked entries responded to the survey.

This index is the study’s single most eloquent artefact. Marked entries responded to the survey.

1bank4all

1bank4all

Admiral Capital Group

Admiral Capital Group

agir & co

agir & co

Align17

Align17

Aligned Intermediary

Aligned Intermediary

Allied Crowds

Allied Crowds

ANDE

ANDE

AngelList

AngelList

Anthos

Anthos

Aqua Spark

Aqua Spark

Artha Networks Inc

Artha Networks Inc

Arvo

Arvo

Ask the Circle

Ask the Circle

AVPN

AVPN

AXiiS

AXiiS

Baraka Networks

Baraka Networks

Barclays

Barclays

bettervest

bettervest

BiD Network

BiD Network

Big Exchange

Big Exchange

Blueprints

Blueprints

buzzbnk

buzzbnk

CAGIX

CAGIX

Calvert

Calvert

Case Foundation

Case Foundation

C-Change

C-Change

Chroma Fund

Chroma Fund

Confluence Philanthropy

Confluence Philanthropy

Conveners.org

Conveners.org

Convergence

Convergence

CREO

CREO

Crowdrise

Crowdrise

Crowdworks

Crowdworks

Deal Market

Deal Market

Delio

Delio

DFAT Australia

DFAT Australia

DFAT Canada

DFAT Canada

Duke Case School

Duke Case School

Eclat Impact

Eclat Impact

ECrowd

ECrowd

Enable Impact

Enable Impact

Ennovent

Ennovent

Equilibrium Capital

Equilibrium Capital

ESRI

ESRI

Ethex

Ethex

EVPA

EVPA

Financing Agency for Social Entrepreneurs

Financing Agency for Social Entrepreneurs

Flight Ventures

Flight Ventures

Fundie Ventures

Fundie Ventures

GIINMAP

GIINMAP

Global Innovation Exchange

Global Innovation Exchange

GOJI

GOJI

Grand Challenges Canada

Grand Challenges Canada

GreenCrowd

GreenCrowd

Gust

Gust

Homestrings

Homestrings

HubX

HubX

Hult Prize

Hult Prize

IIX

IIX

ImpactAlpha

ImpactAlpha

Impact Base (GIIN)

Impact Base (GIIN)

Impact.tech

Impact.tech

Impactbase

Impactbase

ImpactHub

ImpactHub

Impact Investing Hub

Impact Investing Hub

Impact Investor Landscape

Impact Investor Landscape

Impact Platform Germany

Impact Platform Germany

ImpactAssets

ImpactAssets

ImpactSpace

ImpactSpace

ImpactUs

ImpactUs

Inclusive Business Accelerator

Inclusive Business Accelerator

Inclusive Business Action Network

Inclusive Business Action Network

Intellecap

Intellecap

International Development Innovation Network

International Development Innovation Network

Invest Americas

Invest Americas

Invest with Values

Invest with Values

investibule

investibule

Investorflow

Investorflow

Investors’ Circle

Investors’ Circle

IXO

IXO

Kiva

Kiva

La Bolsa Social

La Bolsa Social

Lelapa Fund

Lelapa Fund

lendahand

lendahand

Liquidnet

Liquidnet

lumo

lumo

MacArthur

MacArthur

MaRS

MaRS

Maximpact

Maximpact

MissionMarkets

MissionMarkets

Mission Investor Exchange

Mission Investor Exchange

Movement Capital

Movement Capital

MyC4

MyC4

Nex Exchange

Nex Exchange

OECD

OECD

Omidyar

Omidyar

oneplanetcrowd

oneplanetcrowd

Onevest

Onevest

Open Society Foundations

Open Society Foundations

OpenImpact

OpenImpact

Orbitt

Orbitt

Ouisa

Ouisa

Palico

Palico

Peer Water Exchange

Peer Water Exchange

Posible LA

Posible LA

PreIgnition

PreIgnition

PreSeries

PreSeries

pymwymic

pymwymic

Rabble

Rabble

Refugee Investment Network

Refugee Investment Network

Renew

Renew

Rockefeller Foundation

Rockefeller Foundation

Safe Water Network

Safe Water Network

Samhita.org

Samhita.org

SASIX / KASIX

SASIX / KASIX

SDG Investments

SDG Investments

Seed Stars Summit

Seed Stars Summit

SharedImpact

SharedImpact

Sharein

Sharein

ShareNett

ShareNett

SOCAP

SOCAP

Social Stock Exchange

Social Stock Exchange

Sphaera

Sphaera

startgreen capital

startgreen capital

Startgrid

Startgrid

SVX

SVX

SVX Mexico

SVX Mexico

Switchmed

Switchmed

tbn

tbn

Tech4Impact Seed Fund

Tech4Impact Seed Fund

The Ground Up Project

The Ground Up Project

The Hub Exchange

The Hub Exchange

The Impact

The Impact

The Legacy Funds

The Legacy Funds

Toniic

Toniic

Total Impact Capital

Total Impact Capital

Transform Finance

Transform Finance

Trine

Trine

UBS / Align17

UBS / Align17

UN SDSN

UN SDSN

Urban Logic

Urban Logic

USAID

USAID

VC4A

VC4A

Wakibi

Wakibi

Waterpreneurs

Waterpreneurs

Women Effect

Women Effect

WoMena

WoMena

World Startup Wiki

World Startup Wiki

younoodle

younoodle

Figure 08 — The index Marked entries responded to the survey. The list is reproduced as published; a small number of entries appear twice in the original, and at least five were already out of business at the time of review.

Figure 08 — The index Marked entries responded to the survey. The list is reproduced as published; a small number of entries appear twice in the original, and at least five were already out of business at the time of review.

Further reading

Further reading

uncompromise · Impact Platforms — towards an interoperable impact finance ecosystem · © 2018 Bertelsmann Stiftung, Sphaera & Artha · 20 September 2018 · Republished 2026 · Written in International English

© 2026 Uncompromise Pty Ltd. All Rights Reserved · Pau, France

© 2026 Uncompromise Pty Ltd. All Rights Reserved · Pau, France

© 2026 Uncompromise Pty Ltd. All Rights Reserved · Pau, France