# Where does Series A money go? As much to selling as to building

Into more people, split evenly. In the year after a Series A, software companies put 27.0% of net adds into building and 26.9% into selling, and added 13.4 people each, against 7.5 the year before.

By Cristian Frunze, Founder of Ken · Oct 18, 2026 · [Ken Research](/research) No. 10 · Founders and startups, Hiring and org design, Sales teams

## Key findings

- **13.4** people added per company on average in the 12 months after a Series A, against 7.5 in the 12 months before: 79% more.
- **+2.8 points** change in the sales and marketing share of net adds across a Series A (interval -0.4 to 5.8). The round changes the pace more than the mix.
- **30.2%** of net adds went to sales and marketing after a Series B, 3.3 points more than after a Series A (interval 0.2 to 7.6).
- **17.5 vs 10.5** people added in the year after a Series A at companies that raised again within 36 months, against those that did not, with the same mix.

In the 12 months after a Series A, the B2B software companies in our data added 13.4 people each on average, up from 7.5 in the 12 months before. Selling got as large a share of those people as building: 27.0% of net adds went to building the product (engineering, product and data) and **26.9%** to selling it (sales and marketing).

The shares come from 699 Series A rounds raised by US-headquartered B2B software companies from 2016 to 2024, found in SEC Form D filings and matched to the work histories of their staff. Net adds are the change in headcount, joiners minus leavers, over the 12 months from the end of the quarter before the round. The work histories cover people in the US, the UK, Canada, Australia, Ireland and New Zealand, so every number is about staff in these six countries.

**Figure 1. After a Series A, building and selling get the same share**

Share of all net adds in the 12 months after the round, by function. Building the product is engineering, product and data. Dots are shares; lines are 95% intervals. Smaller functions and unclassified titles (a third of net adds) are not shown.

|   | After a Series A | 95% interval | After a Series B | 95% interval |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Building the product | 27.0% | 24.3% to 29.7% | 22.3% | 19.2% to 25.9% |
| Sales and marketing | 26.9% | 24.5% to 29.3% | 30.2% | 25.7% to 34.7% |
| Engineering | 21.5% | 19.2% to 23.9% | 17.7% | 15.0% to 20.7% |
| Sales | 19.8% | 17.3% to 22.1% | 23.1% | 18.8% to 27.3% |
| Marketing | 7.1% | 6.3% to 8.0% | 7.1% | 6.2% to 8.3% |
| Customer success and support | 7.7% | 6.2% to 10.0% | 7.0% | 5.5% to 8.6% |

*Source: Ken internal data (company and career records Ken uses for sales and outreach) and SEC Form D filings, analysed by Cristian Frunze.*

## What counts as a Series A here

A Form D filing doesn't say "Series A", so we labelled rounds by size and order. A company's first round of $4M or more counts as its Series A if it sold shares and was no larger than $30M. The next share sale of at least $10M, and at least 1.5 times the A, counts as its Series B. The median round was $8.0M for a Series A and $22.9M for a Series B.

Against the round type on company records, the label agrees 55.9% of the time for Series A and 59.2% for Series B. Most of the misses are large seed rounds. So read "Series A" here as "the first big priced round".

## Engineering leads, but not clearly

Engineering is the largest named function after a Series A, at 21.5% against 19.8% for sales, but its 1.8-point lead is inside the margin of error (-1.3 to 4.8). Customer success and support took 7.7% of net adds, marketing 7.1%, product 3.7%, operations 2.6%, recruiting and HR 2.0% and data 1.8%. By the end of the year after the round, 69.2% of companies had more engineers than at the start, 66.1% more salespeople and 46.1% more marketers.

A third of net adds (33.8%) carry titles our function rules don't classify, and some of it is not hiring at all. Board members, investors, advisors and gig workers list the company on their profiles: 9.6% of all net adds. "Board member" is the most common unclassified title among people who joined after a Series A: the round itself shows up as hires. Without these listings, building takes 29.9% and selling 29.7%, still level.

## The round changes the pace, not the mix

After a Series A, net adds rose 79%, from 7.5 to 13.4 people per company.

**Figure 2. Companies add 79% more people in the year after a Series A**

Average net adds per company in the 12 months before and the 12 months after the round, counting staff in the six countries.

| Round | 12 months before | 12 months after |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Series A | 7.5 | 13.4 |
| Series B | 18.9 | 31.1 |

*Source: Ken internal data (company and career records Ken uses for sales and outreach) and SEC Form D filings, analysed by Cristian Frunze.*

The split barely moved. Sales and marketing took 24.1% of net adds in the year before a Series A and 26.9% in the year after, a change of 2.8 points that is within the margin of error (-0.4 to 5.8).

Small teams are the exception. At companies with 5 to 24 people in the data when they raised, the sales and marketing share was 17.7% two years before the round, 19.7% in the year before and 28.8% in the year after. That jump is bigger than the drift before it, by 7.0 points (0.5 to 14.3). Teams of 25 to 99 were already at 30.7% the year before. We added this split after seeing the first results, so treat it as a lead.

**Figure 3. Small teams shift toward selling after the round**

Sales and marketing share of net adds in three 12-month windows around a Series A, by team size in the data at the round. Split by size after seeing the first results, so treat it as a lead.

| Window around the Series A | 5-24 people | 25-99 people |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Two years before | 17.7% | 26.3% |
| Year before | 19.7% | 30.7% |
| Year after | 28.8% | 29.8% |

*Source: Ken internal data (company and career records Ken uses for sales and outreach) and SEC Form D filings, analysed by Cristian Frunze.*

## After a Series B, selling pulls ahead

After a Series B, the 272 companies put 30.2% of their net adds into sales and marketing and 22.3% into building: 3.3 points more for selling than after a Series A (0.2 to 7.6). Series B companies are bigger (a median 38 people at the round, against 14), but size does not explain the gap. Among companies of the same size it is about as large (3.1 points at 5 to 24 people, 2.2 at 25 to 99), just less certain.

## Companies that raised again hired more, not differently

About half (50.6%) of the Series A companies we could follow for three years filed another Form D raise within 36 months, a median 17.7 months later. In the year after their Series A they added 17.5 people on average, against 10.5 at the rest (difference 7.1, interval 3.6 to 11.2). Their mix was the same: 26.6% of net adds to sales and marketing, against 27.1%.

The one function that differed was marketing: 6.3% of net adds at companies that raised again, 8.9% at the rest. We compared eleven groups, so one gap of that size could be chance. All of this is a correlation: companies that were already growing may both hire faster and raise again.

## Since 2022, a round buys fewer hires

Companies that raised a Series A in 2020 to 2021 added 17.1 people in the following year. Those that raised in 2022 to 2023 added 8.8. The mix held: sales and marketing took 31.0% and 26.9%. We had expected recent rounds to buy fewer sellers, but the 2022 to 2023 share is not below the 23.0% of 2016 to 2019 rounds. The efficient-growth years show up in how many people a round buys, not in which jobs.

**Figure 4. Series A rounds raised in 2022 to 2023 bought fewer hires**

Average net adds per company in the 12 months after a Series A, by the year the round was raised. Rounds from 2024 are fewer than 50 and not shown.

| Year the Series A was raised | Net adds per company after a Series A |
| --- | --- |
| 2016-2017 | 18.8 |
| 2018-2019 | 12.4 |
| 2020-2021 | 17.1 |
| 2022-2023 | 8.8 |

*Source: Ken internal data (company and career records Ken uses for sales and outreach) and SEC Form D filings, analysed by Cristian Frunze.*

## What we expected, and what held

We wrote down five predictions before pulling any data. One held: selling takes a bigger share after a Series B. One held in part: companies that raised again added more people, but not a more sales-heavy mix. Three failed: a clear engineering lead over sales, a tilt toward selling after the round, and fewer sellers in 2022 to 2023 rounds.

## What this data cannot show

- **Matched filings only.** Form D covers US companies, and not every round is filed. Filings match a company record for only 4.0% of US B2B software companies, so the sample is the companies we could match.
- **Inferred labels.** Series A and B come from round size and order, not from the filing.
- **Six countries, self-reported.** Engineers hired abroad are missing, so engineering's share is likely understated, and people add new jobs late.
- **No cause.** These are patterns around a dated filing, not the effect of the money.

## What it means for B2B teams

- **A new Series A is a hiring signal.** The average company added 13.4 people in the next 12 months, and sales and marketing took 26.9% of net adds. If you sell to new sales teams, that year is the window.
- **Small teams change most.** Companies with 5 to 24 people at the round moved from 19.7% to 28.8% of net adds in sales and marketing.
- **Series B is where selling pulls ahead.** Sales and marketing took 30.2% of net adds after a Series B, against 22.3% for building.
- **Founders: hiring sellers is not the ticket to the next round.** Companies that raised again hired more people, with the same mix as those that did not.

## Data and method

- **Data:** Ken internal data: the public work histories and company records Ken uses for sales and outreach, reused by Cristian Frunze for this study, matched to SEC Form D filings for the funding rounds. Work histories cover people currently in six English-speaking countries.
- **Sample:** 699 Series A and 272 Series B rounds raised by US-headquartered B2B software companies with 5 to 500 people in the data at the round.
- **Date range:** Rounds dated April 2016 to December 2024, with quarterly headcount from 2015 to March 2026.
- **Method:** Pre-registered event study of net adds by function in the 12 months before and after each round, with bootstrap 95% intervals. Rounds labelled Series A or B by size and order. A separate analysis recomputed 107 numbers, and all matched.
- **Excluded:** US B2B software companies with no Form D filing matched to their record (only 4.0% have one); Teams with fewer than 5 or more than 500 people in the data at the round; Interns, and founders, who are reported apart from the function groups.
- **Privacy:** Aggregates only. Any group smaller than 50 people is suppressed, and no individual is named.

[Full methodology as Markdown](/research/series-a-hiring/methodology.md) · [Download the full methodology (PDF)](/research/series-a-hiring.pdf)

## Related studies.

- No. 11: [How many reps does a sales manager have now?](/research/sales-manager-span-of-control.md) - Oct 20, 2026 · Sales teams, Hiring and org design. 4.99 sales reps per manager title in software and IT, 2026. About five. Software and IT sales teams had 4.99 reps per manager title in early 2026, up from 4.16 at the end of 2016. The 2023 cuts nudged that up 2.8% rather than resetting it. Full methodology: [Markdown](/research/sales-manager-span-of-control/methodology.md) · [PDF](/research/sales-manager-span-of-control.pdf).
- No. 9: [Half of B2B software homepages now say AI. Did it pay off?](/research/ai-homepages.md) - Oct 16, 2026 · Websites and pricing, AI and work, Founders and startups. 49.0% of B2B software homepages mentioned AI in 2026. 49.0% of B2B software homepages mentioned AI in 2026, up from 11.7% in 2019. Companies that made AI their main claim grew headcount no faster than matched peers afterwards. Full methodology: [Markdown](/research/ai-homepages/methodology.md) · [PDF](/research/ai-homepages.pdf).
- No. 8: [Who gets cut first in a B2B layoff? Recruiters, then SDRs](/research/who-gets-cut-first-in-layoffs.md) - Oct 14, 2026 · Hiring and org design, Sales teams. 4.1% of the people lost were recruiters, 2.2% of staff. Recruiters. At software and IT companies that shrank in 2022 to 2024, recruiters were 2.2% of staff at the peak but 4.1% of the people lost, and they were the slowest team to come back. Full methodology: [Markdown](/research/who-gets-cut-first-in-layoffs/methodology.md) · [PDF](/research/who-gets-cut-first-in-layoffs.pdf).

## Put the data to work.

No card · Or we run it for you

[Get early access](https://app.ken.so/auth/sign-up)