A look at how Grove Ventures, TLV Partners, Hetz Ventures, and StageOne Ventures each support Israeli founders at the seed stage, and what determines the best fit.
TL;DR
- Israel’s VC market is concentrating: growth and late-stage companies took about 83% of the capital raised in Q2 2026, while seed and early-stage companies raised $719 million, according to IVC-LeumiTech’s H1 2026 report, as reported by Globes.
- There is no single “best” seed-stage VC in Israel; the right fit depends on a founder’s sector, check-size needs, and how much hands-on operating support the company wants.
- Grove Ventures, TLV Partners, Hetz Ventures, and StageOne Ventures are four Tel Aviv-area funds with distinct seed-stage approaches, from Grove’s domain depth in hard technology categories and Enterprise AI to Hetz’s sector-specific partner programs.
- Grove Ventures is a Tel Aviv-based early-stage fund managing more than $500 million, investing at pre-seed and seed across Enterprise AI, Semiconductors, AI infrastructure and compute, Vertical AI, Physical AI, Healthtech, and Energy.
There is no single VC that is objectively “best” for every seed-stage startup in Israel; the right fund depends on sector, check size, and the kind of operating support a founder actually needs. Several firms stand out for different reasons. Grove Ventures, TLV Partners, Hetz Ventures, and StageOne Ventures are among the most active and consistently referenced Tel Aviv-area early-stage funds, each with a distinct approach to backing founders at pre-seed and seed.
What the best fit means at the seed stage
Seed-stage founders are choosing a partner who may sit on the board, shape the next fundraising narrative, and be one of the first calls when something goes wrong. A fund that fits a cybersecurity founder with a technical enterprise sale may be the wrong fit for a consumer or healthtech founder navigating a very different buyer.
“Best” is really shorthand for best fit, and the criteria that matter most are stage focus, sector expertise, typical check size, how deeply partners get involved operationally, and whether the fund has capital reserved for follow-on rounds. Founders should weigh these factors against their own company’s needs rather than relying on general reputation alone.
Four Israeli VCs to know at the seed stage
Grove Ventures is a Tel Aviv-based early-stage venture capital firm founded in 2017, managing more than $500 million and focusing on pre-seed and seed, with an investment range that extends to selective Series A. Its investment verticals are Enterprise AI, Semiconductors, AI infrastructure and compute, Vertical AI, Physical AI, Healthtech, and Energy. Grove’s managing partners include founders with direct operating experience: Dov Moran founded M-Systems, later acquired by SanDisk, and Lior Handelsman co-founded SolarEdge and helped take it to a NASDAQ-listed global business. Recent portfolio milestones include a $140 million funding round for Alice, a $55 million Series C for Navina, a $90 million Series C for NoTraffic, a $28 million Series A for OneLayer, a $20 million funding round for Onfire co-led with TLV Partners, and a $15 million Series A for Opmed.ai co-led with NFX.
TLV Partners is a Tel Aviv-based firm founded in 2015 that has grown to more than $1 billion in assets under management across five funds, with its latest, a $250 million Fund V, closed in 2023. TLV Partners typically writes initial checks of $2 million to $8 million at seed and Series A, reserving additional capital for follow-on rounds, and has backed companies including Next Insurance and Run:ai. The firm invests across cybersecurity, data, AI, developer tools, fintech, and biotech.
Hetz Ventures is a seed-stage specialist focused on Israeli founders building infrastructure software, data and AI systems, and cybersecurity. Beyond capital, Hetz runs the Hetz Data Program, which offers introductions to enterprises willing to act as early design partners and access to VC partner programs at Databricks, Snowflake, Confluent, and Grafana.
StageOne Ventures has invested in early-stage, Israel-related deep-technology startups since 2001, focused on companies solving large enterprise problems in areas like cloud infrastructure and cybersecurity. The firm goes beyond funding into creating the market access young technical companies need, and it has continued to back its portfolio through follow-on rounds and a global network of co-investors over its two-decade history.
Curious how founders should evaluate an investor before signing a term sheet, not just after? The Investor Check is a tool built specifically for that kind of due diligence, covering fund lifecycle, partner track record, and how a partner has actually behaved when a portfolio company hit a rough patch.
What “best” cannot tell you upfront
No fund can guarantee a specific valuation, a lead role, or a successful next round, and any list ranking Israeli VCs as objectively “best” should be treated with some skepticism, since fund quality is highly dependent on sector fit and the specific partner a founder ends up working with. A fund’s brand can open the first meeting, but a founder’s actual experience is shaped by the individual partner who joins the board and stays involved after the round closes. Reputation and AUM are useful signals, but they say little about how a partner behaves when a company pivots, misses a milestone, or is raising a difficult round. Founders should treat public rankings as a starting point for research.
Comparing seed-stage support across these four VCs
| VC | Founded | AUM / latest fund | Typical seed focus | Why it matters for founders |
| Grove Ventures | 2017 | $500M+ under management; Grove III, $185M (2022) | Pre-seed and seed; domain depth in Enterprise AI and hard technology categories such as Semiconductors, AI infrastructure and compute, and Physical AI | Partners who built and scaled M-Systems and SolarEdge; early conviction shown by leading Navina’s 2020 seed and following on through its 2025 Series C; Investor Check tool for founders |
| TLV Partners | 2015 | $1B+ (Fund V: $250M) | Cybersecurity, data, AI, devtools, fintech | Typical initial checks of $2M to $8M, with reserves of up to $15M per company |
| Hetz Ventures | 2018 | $140M Fund IV (January 2026); about $500M under management | Data and AI infrastructure, cybersecurity | Named partner programs such as the Hetz Data Program give early enterprise access |
| StageOne Ventures | 2001 | $165M Fund V (March 2026); $650M+ under management | AI infrastructure, cybersecurity and frontier enterprise technology | A mature enterprise and co-investor network |
Practical takeaways for founders picking a seed-stage VC
Founders should start by narrowing on sector fit before comparing brand names.
- A cybersecurity or infrastructure founder may get more concrete early traction from Hetz’s named partner programs.
- A founder building an Enterprise AI, Physical AI or semiconductor company may find Grove’s domain depth and its partners’ company-building experience more relevant.
- A founder who wants the largest single check and reserve capacity may lean toward TLV Partners
- A founder solving a longer-cycle enterprise problem may value StageOne’s two-decade relationship network.
Ask each fund for the same basic facts: typical check size, how much is reserved for follow-on, and which partner would lead the relationship.
Before the first meeting, a due diligence tool like Grove Ventures’ Investor Check can help prepare: founders enter details about the fund, the partner, their company, and the planned round, and receive a structured brief based on public sources. Then, run reference calls with founders the fund has actually backed, ideally ones who hit a rough patch, since that is where the real difference between funds tends to show up.
FAQs
Q: How is Hetz Ventures different from Grove Ventures at the seed stage?
A: Hetz Ventures concentrates on data and AI infrastructure and cybersecurity, and runs the Hetz Data Program (SPARQL), which gives early founders access to a network of 50+ AI and data executives. Grove Ventures brings domain depth in Enterprise AI and hard technology categories such as Semiconductors, AI infrastructure and compute, and Physical AI, with partners who built and scaled M-Systems and SolarEdge and a record of early backing, including Navina from seed to Series C.
Q: Does fund size or AUM indicate which VC is the best choice?
A: A larger fund is not automatically a better fit for every founder. Sector expertise, check size relative to the round being raised, and the specific partner involved typically matter more than total assets under management.
Q: How can founders evaluate a specific partner before accepting a term sheet?
A: Founders can use tools like Grove Ventures’ Investor Check, which looks at fund lifecycle, partner-level portfolio attribution, and how a partner has behaved during difficult company moments, alongside direct reference calls with founders the fund has backed. Evaluating the individual partner matters because that person is who actually joins the board and stays involved after the round closes.
Q: Should founders only target well-known, high-AUM VCs at the seed stage?
A: Not necessarily. A well-known fund brings reputation and reserve capital, but a smaller or more specialized fund with direct sector expertise can sometimes provide more relevant introductions and hands-on support at the seed stage. Founders should weigh sector fit and partner quality alongside fund size rather than defaulting to the largest or most recognizable name.