// STARTUP COMPARISON
Increase (Argentina) vs Silicon Valley Bank
Increase (Argentina) failed in 2022 due to Founder Chaos. Silicon Valley Bank failed in 2023 due to Unit Economics. Different causes, different sectors, different eras — but the same simulation outcome.
| METRIC | 🔥 Increase (Argentina) | 🔥 Silicon Valley Bank |
|---|---|---|
| Sector | Fintech | Fintech |
| Country | Argentina | USA |
| Founded | 2015 | 1983 |
| Died | 2022 | 2023 |
| Raised | $20M | Public company (SIVB) |
| Peak | $20M raised | $209B assets |
| Primary Cause | Founder Chaos | Unit Economics |
// WHY EACH FAILED
Co-founder agreements must specify conflict resolution mechanisms before the conflict exists. By the time a co-founder dispute is irreconcilable, the damage to the team and product is already done.
Asset-liability duration matching is not optional for banks. Investing short-term deposits in long-term bonds is a structural bet against rising rates. SVB had $80B in long-duration bonds when the Fed began the fastest rate rise cycle in 40 years.
// IN THE SIMULATION
Increase triggers COFOUNDERS_DISPUTE — the simulation models co-founder exits as the second most common cause of Series A-stage company failure after unit economics. When technical co-founders leave, product velocity drops 60%+ and team morale collapses.
SVB triggers DURATION_MISMATCH_BANK_RUN — the simulation models banks with long-duration bond portfolios as having existential rate sensitivity. A 400bps rate rise on a long-duration portfolio creates mark-to-market losses that exceed capital when forced to sell.
// EXPLORE FURTHER