"be the market" is the advice that comes out of portfolio theory. To say that it applies to one type of investor but not to venture investors is to basically announce that you have absolutely no understanding of portfolio theory.
Or do you think an alternate explanation might be more likely? Is it possible that you misunderstood something? Or is it possible that, if Marc is challenging this thesis of portfolio theory, he might be doing so from a place of great experience and be worth listening to?
He doesn't need to be above average there. Just like PG, he (mostly) invests in technology he actually comprehends, unlike some other delusionary VC from the investment banking world.
If you could somehow invest in a startup "index", it would be great, but there really is no such thing (especially not for the VCs).
- 4,000 startups a year.
- 3,000 seen by a16z.
- 200 are "fundable."
- 15 of those generate 95% of returns.
That said, if you want an example of a seed fund with a pretty broad approach, take a look at the aptly-named 500 Startups.