Maple IV, L.P. is a newly filed $75 million venture capital vehicle, but the organization behind it has a substantially longer public investment history than the new fund name alone suggests. The September 29, 2026 Form D identifies the issuer under CIK 0002156530, reports a $75 million total offering, zero dollars sold, zero investors and a first sale that had not yet occurred when the filing was submitted. It also identifies Maple IV, LLC together with Andre Charoo, John Edgar and Jane Lee as related persons. Those names and the fund's Ferry Building address line up directly with Maple VC's current public-facing organization, making this considerably easier to authenticate than a newly created private fund whose managers cannot be independently linked to an operating investment firm. At the same time, investors should interpret the $75 million figure correctly: it represents the proposed offering size rather than capital already raised, and the initial filing gives no evidence that investors had committed to the new fund as of September 29.
The management trail is particularly strong because all three individuals named around Maple IV can be independently matched to Maple VC. The firm identifies Andre Charoo as Managing Partner and describes him as an early Uber employee, an HBS Executive Fellow, a C100 co-chair and a former Inovia Venture Partner; John Edgar is presented as a partner with experience on DigitalOcean's founding team and more than 15 years building, advising and investing in technology companies; Jane Lee is identified as a partner, former early Shopify employee and entrepreneur-in-residence who has advised Maple since 2019. These biographies provide meaningful outside context for the investment team, but they should still be separated from Maple IV's own performance because the fund had not yet begun reporting investor commitments. Maple IV investors are therefore underwriting not only a recognizable team but also a newly launched legal vehicle whose economics, portfolio construction, reserves and limited-partner protections must be evaluated from the actual Fund IV documents rather than inferred solely from individual résumés.
There is also unusually useful evidence that Maple IV is part of an existing sequence rather than a first-time fund using a newly created brand. SEC-filed portfolio reports from StepStone Private Venture and Growth Fund list an investment in Maple 3 VC, L.P., classified as venture capital, as well as a separate investment in Maple SPV-C2, LLC. In StepStone's March 2026 disclosure, Maple 3 VC was carried at approximately $848,572 against reported cost of roughly $618,902, while Maple SPV-C2 was shown at approximately $11.48 million against cost of roughly $1.75 million. Those figures belong to StepStone's own holdings and should not be interpreted as the overall performance of either Maple fund, but they independently establish that institutional investment vehicles have held interests in earlier Maple structures. Maple SPV-C2's own SEC Form D strengthens the organizational connection because that filing identifies Maple VC, LLC as the issuer's manager and Andre Charoo as a related person and signer. In other words, the "IV" in Maple IV is supported by a broader historical fund trail rather than appearing to be an unexplained numbering convention.
Maple VC's investment activity can also be checked outside regulatory filings. Its current portfolio page lists a broad group of seed investments across AI, fintech, SaaS, consumer, climate, crypto, defence and health, while the firm publicly describes itself as a first-check investor rather than a later-stage growth platform. One of its most visible portfolio examples is Clay: Maple states that Clay was among the first investments made by its first fund in 2017 and reports that the company later surpassed $100 million in annual recurring revenue. Maple also publishes investment histories involving businesses such as Finny, Fey and Bench IQ, giving prospective LPs more company-level material to examine than is available for many newly filed venture managers. These portfolio claims are useful for identifying Maple's strategy and sourcing history, but investors should still ask which investments belonged to which prior fund, how realized and unrealized returns were calculated, whether continuation or SPV positions sit outside the flagship vehicles, and how much of Fund IV's expected strategy differs from the earlier funds.
The initial Form D nevertheless leaves several material Fund IV questions unanswered. Maple IV reports a $0 minimum investment, but that should not be interpreted as meaning that outside investors can enter the fund with no minimum commitment; the actual subscription threshold, accredited-investor or qualified-purchaser requirements and GP discretion normally sit in the limited partnership agreement and subscription materials. The filing also reports no sales commissions or finder's fees, yet public Form D data alone does not provide the management-fee rate, carried interest, organizational-expense cap, recycling rules, key-person provisions, concentration limits or GP commitment. Because Maple publicly focuses on very early-stage companies, valuation methodology is also important: early venture portfolios can contain large unrealized gains long before liquidity occurs, meaning reported portfolio value is not equivalent to distributable cash or realized return. Investors comparing Fund IV with Maple's earlier vehicles should therefore request gross and net fund-level performance, DPI, TVPI and RVPI where available, rather than relying solely on selected successful portfolio-company examples.
From a scam-risk and identity-verification perspective, Maple IV has a relatively deep public trail: the SEC filing names people who appear on Maple VC's genuine website, the address matches the firm's current San Francisco office, earlier Maple investment vehicles can be found in SEC records, an independent SEC-filed institutional portfolio contains Maple 3 VC and Maple SPV-C2 positions, and Maple publishes an extensive operating and portfolio history. Those factors materially reduce the ambiguity seen with funds whose only public evidence is a single Form D. They do not, however, make every solicitation using the Maple IV or Maple VC name legitimate. Because the actual fund had reported no first sale and no investors when the Form D was filed, anyone considering a commitment should verify subscription materials directly through Maple VC's established channels, confirm the precise legal identity of Maple IV, L.P. and Maple IV, LLC, verify wiring instructions independently, and review the partnership agreement, management-fee and carried-interest terms, auditor or administrator arrangements, capital-call process and GP ownership structure. A genuine fund and real investment manager can still be impersonated, so the strongest use of this public record is to establish a verified reference point against which any investment approach can be checked.