Chloe Dagnell, Isomer Capital: From Saving the World to Backing Europe’s VCs
- ImpactVC
- Aug 27, 2025
- 4 min read
Updated: Apr 10
In this episode, we sat down with Chloe Dagnell from Isomer Capital, one of Europe’s most active LPs, to unpack what institutional investors are looking for, how impact sits alongside returns, and what makes a GP truly stand out.
With more than six years at Isomer Capital and a background that started in international development before moving into venture, Chloe brings a unique perspective on building portfolios that balance financial performance with sustainability, diversity, and long-term alignment.
🎧 Here’s what’s covered:
01:34 Chloe’s Journey: From international development to venture and why local context matters.
06:12 Isomer’s Strategy: Building a diversified portfolio across pre-seed and seed in Europe.
11:08 Impact in the Portfolio: Why ~30% of Isomer-backed companies are SDG-aligned — and how impact sits alongside returns.
17:55 Returns vs. Impact: Revolut, scale, and why the biggest value drivers aren’t always in impact funds.
23:41 Good vs. Great GPs: Evidence over slides, specialist edge, and values alignment.
31:26 Diversification & LP Interests: Corporate LPs and the green transition — why Isomer doesn’t get pushed into one theme.
37:14 DEI as the Next Frontier: Ownership, accountability, and why female-led teams in Isomer’s portfolio are top performers.
44:58 Advice to Emerging Managers: How to prove differentiated access and cut through generic pitch decks.
51:02 Closing Takeaways: Evidence, access, values — what LPs really want in Europe’s next generation of funds.
✍️ A few thoughts and notes from Chloe
A look at the person behind - who is Chloe Dagnell?
Spent my early career consulting, helping governments and IGOs support tech entrepreneurs in sub-Saharan Africa and South East Asia. I soon realised the impact that entrepreneurs could have on the world, but the limitations with government funding and programmatic implementation rather than long term support. Cut a long story short - I discovered venture, was introduced to the founders of Isomer, and almost seven years later here we are!
You are a fund of fund. How much do you focus on impact in your investments? What is the interest in climate/impact that you see from your LPs?
We are focused on performance; our key aim at Isomer is to access the best European tech companies early. We have no real preference on whether we do this from a generalist, specialist or impact focused fund, but over time we’ve noticed about 30% of our underlying portfolio companies align in some way to the SDGs, despite the vast majority of our investments being through generalist funds.
Currently, we see these companies performing in line with the “non-SDG” aligned portion of our portfolio. But many of these companies are still young, our underlying portfolios are still developing and growing, and so only when the funds are older and companies have exited will we feel able to draw solid conclusions.
[Note added by author after interview]: Interestingly, out of the top 10 value drivers by NAV, only one came from a specialist impact fund. Translation: great impact companies aren’t only found in impact funds - generalist managers back them too.
Do you handle impact funds differently from traditional VC funds? Why?
No - we are looking for the same long term outperformance in anything that we do. And benchmarking for the best returns. Which raises a question -apart from LP alignment, is there an angle for financial investors to back more impact aligned funds, or will the best of these businesses be picked up by generalists anyway?
So our focus when we are DDing is really on the GP thesis fit, and the quality of the team. And yes, in some cases, this means that we’ve ended up backing funds that have more of a sustainability or impact focus.
How do you define a good impact fund today? And when you are evaluating funds for investment, what makes a great fund stand out from a good fund? What are successful types of differentiation that you see in the market?
There’s very little difference in assessing one. You’re either raising off the back of experience and therefore track record, or if not you’re raising off of a unique market view, typically developed through academic specialism, or some sort of unique career experience. It always comes down to GP thesis fit - why has this team got an advantage on executing on this strategy?
You have led a lot of really interesting thinking on DEI in the venture ecosystem. What needs to happen as the next frontier? What is the role of VCs? What is the role of LPs?
You really need to look through when it comes to diversity metrics, they are super easy to fein. The equity part to me is the most important part. in funds, it’s carry structures, key man clauses, etc are all usually fairly honest when it comes to who’s voice is actually listened to in investment decision making.
Risk, and predominantly financial risk is often rewarded when setting up firms, and often not all individuals in a team are in the same place to take that financial risk. There should be a path to how this is equalised over time.
What’s your best tip for generalist VC investors about impact?
Figure out if your alignment goals are the same. Do you desire the same outcomes as the GP? But also don’t be afraid of it, judge a team on their merits.
What’s your best tip for impact VC investors raising capital from funds of funds?
Figure out if their goals are the same as yours, otherwise it may not be a long and fruitful marriage…
