Table of Contents

  1. How the GCC investor market actually works
  2. Research investor mandates before you reach out
  3. Building a data room that passes investor scrutiny
  4. Narrative and valuation: what GCC investors are actually evaluating
  5. Term sheets in the GCC: what founders consistently miss
  6. Raising from Saudi investors: what regional presence really means
  7. Due diligence preparation: how to avoid killing your own deal
  8. Running a fundraising process that closes
  9. FAQ

Introduction

Raising capital in the GCC is a different process from raising in the US or Europe, and founders who treat it the same way consistently run into the same problems. This guide covers what the process actually requires: how to research investors, what documentation looks like when it is done properly, how to read a term sheet, and how to run a process that closes.

I've spent seven years evaluating companies from the investor side, at Global Ventures, Outlierz Ventures, and AfricInvest Group. I've reviewed more pitches than I can count, sat in partner meetings, and watched deals close and fall apart. Most of what I've seen go wrong was avoidable.

MENA venture capital funding reached $3.8 billion across 688 deals in 2025, up 74% from 2024. Saudi Arabia pulled in $1.72 billion, up 145% year on year. The UAE followed with $1.41 billion. Together those two markets account for 91% of all capital deployed in the region. The capital is available. The problem most founders face is how they approach the process.

How the GCC investor market actually works

The first thing to understand is that the GCC is a small market. Not small in terms of capital, small in terms of people. The active VC ecosystem in the UAE and Saudi Arabia runs on a tight network of investors who know each other well, compare notes, and move in the same circles.

When you pitch one VC, you are effectively pitching all of them. Investors talk. A poor first impression does not stay with one fund. It circulates. A founder who goes into meetings underprepared, misrepresents metrics, or wastes investor time with a pitch that does not fit the fund's mandate will find that reputation travels quickly in a market this size.

A strong first impression travels just as fast. A well-run process and a credible narrative get noticed. Warm introductions from founders that investors have already backed carry significant weight here, more so than in more anonymous markets.

The practical implication is that sequencing matters. Start with investors where you can afford to be imperfect, where a less polished meeting will not close a door you need to stay open. Refine your story with friendlier investors first, then bring it to the funds that matter most.

The GCC also has a distinct investor mix. Government-backed funds and sovereign vehicles sit alongside independent VCs, family offices, and corporate VCs that together made up 28% of all active investors in 2024. Each type has different mandates, different decision timelines, and different things they need to see before they move. Understanding which type you are talking to before you walk in is not optional.

Research investor mandates before you reach out

The most common mistake founders make when raising capital in the UAE or Saudi Arabia is skipping basic mandate research before reaching out. They send the same deck to every fund with a regional presence and hope something sticks.

This fails for two reasons. First, it wastes time on both sides. A fintech-focused fund does not invest in logistics. A late-stage growth vehicle does not write pre-seed checks. Approaching investors outside their mandate signals that you either have not done your research or do not care enough to. Second, and more important in the GCC specifically, it burns introductions. In a small network, a wasted meeting has a cost that does not show up immediately. The fund you approached outside mandate might be an LP in another fund you approach later. The associate who fielded your poorly targeted pitch might be a partner by the time you raise your Series A.

Before reaching out to any investor, you need to know five things: their check size range, their stage focus, their sector mandate, their existing portfolio, and their recent activity. A fund that has not made a new investment in twelve months may be between vehicles. Timing matters.

This research takes a few hours. Founders who skip it lose weeks on meetings that were never going to close.

Building a data room that passes investor scrutiny

Most founders come into a fundraising process believing their documentation is sufficient. In my experience, fewer than one in a hundred has a data room that would survive serious investor scrutiny without gaps.

This reflects the reality that building a company and running a professional fundraising process are two different skills. The documentation gap is one of the most reliable ways to lose momentum at the worst possible time. An investor who gets excited in a first meeting and asks to go deeper does not want to hear that materials will be ready next week.

A fundraising-ready data room for a GCC raise covers the following.

Corporate and legal. Articles of incorporation, shareholder agreements, cap table with full dilution, vesting schedules, board resolutions on key decisions. For ADGM or DIFC-incorporated companies, your structure should be clean and clearly documented. Outstanding disputes, undocumented arrangements, or informal agreements between founders need to be resolved before you enter a process.

Financials. Monthly management accounts going back at least 12 months, a financial model with clear assumptions, and unit economics you can explain in plain language. Investors will stress-test your model. If you cannot walk through every assumption and defend it, that becomes a problem in due diligence.

Commercial. Customer contracts or LOIs, sales pipeline, and any partnership agreements. For early-stage companies without significant revenue, this section needs to show demand signals - pilots, design partners, LOIs - rather than projected numbers alone.

Team. Bios that reflect relevant experience, employment agreements, ESOP documentation if applicable, and a hiring plan tied to the use of proceeds.

Product. A product roadmap connected to your commercial strategy. For tech companies, enough technical documentation that an investor's technical advisor can do a basic assessment.

Risks. Most founders skip this section. A thoughtful risk section covering market risks, execution risks, and regulatory considerations signals maturity and builds more credibility than leaving the investor to identify risks themselves.

The goal is not volume. Investors do not want 200 documents. They want the right documents, organised clearly, with nothing missing that would cause them to pause.

For a detailed breakdown of what goes in each section, read Building Your War Room: Essential Documents Before You Fundraise. If you want a professional audit of your data room before you go to market, the Data Room and Investor Readiness session covers this in 90 minutes.

Narrative and valuation: what GCC investors are actually evaluating

Having the right documents is necessary but not sufficient. The narrative around your raise matters as much as the materials supporting it.

Investors make decisions based on a small number of core questions: what is the upside if this works, how likely is it to work, how long will it take to know, and how much help will this company need along the way. Your pitch needs to give clear, credible answers to all four. For a framework on building that narrative, read Using the Value Equation to Pitch to Investors.

The valuation question is where many founders lose ground they do not realise they are losing. I see two failure modes consistently.

The first is an indefensible valuation - a number that is not grounded in comparable transactions, stage norms, or a coherent path to returns. In the GCC, where comparable data is less abundant than in the US or Europe, founders sometimes apply valuation frameworks from other markets that do not translate. A $10M pre-money valuation for a pre-revenue company with no GCC traction is going to create friction with most seed investors in the region.

The second is a valuation that founders have not thought through from the investor's perspective. Investors need to see a path to a return, typically 10x or more on their entry. If your valuation makes that path implausible given realistic exit scenarios in the regional market, experienced investors will see it immediately.

For help working through this before you meet investors, the Valuation Strategy session is designed specifically for founders setting their pre-seed or seed round price.

Term sheets in the GCC: what founders consistently miss

A term sheet looks manageable on first read. The headline economics - valuation, round size, dilution - are clear. Founders often move through review too quickly as a result.

Fewer than one percent of founders who come through our process have a real working understanding of what they are agreeing to. Term sheets are designed by experienced legal teams to protect investor interests, and the most consequential provisions are not always the most prominent ones.

A few that consistently cause problems in GCC deals:

Liquidation preferences. A 1x non-participating preference is standard and founder-friendly. A 2x participating preference can mean investors double their money before founders see anything in an exit scenario. These look similar on the page and have very different implications.

Anti-dilution provisions. Broad-based weighted average anti-dilution is standard. Full ratchet anti-dilution is aggressive and, in a down round, can severely dilute founders and early employees. The difference is in the fine print.

Pro-rata rights. Investors with pro-rata rights can maintain their ownership percentage in future rounds. Understanding exactly which investors hold pro-rata, and whether it extends across all future rounds, matters when you are structuring your Series A.

Board composition and reserved matters. Who gets a board seat, who gets observer rights, and what decisions require investor approval determine how much autonomy you retain as the company grows. These provisions deserve more attention than they typically get.

Founder vesting and good leaver/bad leaver provisions. If a co-founder leaves under circumstances defined as bad leaver, what happens to their equity? These provisions exist in most GCC deals and can create significant disputes if they are not clearly understood upfront.

The right approach is to review a term sheet with legal counsel who has done GCC venture transactions specifically. Before that review, you should have a clear internal position on what you will and will not accept. If you have just received a term sheet and need to understand it quickly, the Term Sheet Strategy session is built for exactly that situation.

Raising from Saudi investors: what regional presence really means

Saudi Arabia raised $1.72 billion in venture funding in 2025, up 145% year on year, and is now the largest single VC market in the region by capital deployed. For many founders, it is also the market they understand least when they start engaging with Saudi investors.

Saudi investors - sovereign-backed funds, family offices, or independent VCs - generally expect meaningful Saudi commercial activity from the companies they back. A real business case for Saudi as a primary revenue market, with a credible go-to-market plan and timeline.

Founders who come to the region primarily to raise capital, with limited intention of building in Saudi, struggle to raise from Saudi-based investors. Some raise anyway from investors who do not fully understand their actual model. The first outcome closes doors that would otherwise be open. The second creates a mismatch between investor expectations and founder intentions that surfaces at the worst time.

If Saudi is genuinely part of your expansion plan, come to investor conversations with a clear picture of what that means: your go-to-market, your timeline, and the regulatory or commercial requirements for your sector. Vague Saudi expansion slides read as placeholder thinking.

If Saudi is not part of your near-term plan, be honest about it. Target UAE-focused investors with mandates that do not require regional distribution. There are plenty of them.

The related point is on regulatory requirements. Foreign companies signing contracts with Saudi government entities are required to maintain a regional headquarters in the Kingdom. For early-stage startups, the requirement may not apply immediately. But if your commercial strategy involves government or quasi-government contracts in Saudi, this becomes a real operational question worth resolving before you raise from Saudi investors.

Due diligence preparation: how to avoid killing your own deal

Most deals that fall apart in due diligence do not fall apart because of something that cannot be fixed. They fall apart because the founder was not prepared for the questions, or because something that could have been disclosed early was discovered late.

The GCC due diligence process has matured significantly. Institutional investors now apply practices similar to what you would see in more developed VC markets. A founders' agreement that was never properly documented. An equity split that was agreed verbally and is now disputed. An undisclosed regulatory issue. Outstanding litigation. Tax filings that do not align with the financial statements. These things do not disqualify companies in most cases. Finding them mid-process, rather than having them disclosed upfront, damages trust in a way that often proves fatal.

The right approach is to do your own due diligence before you go to market. Review your corporate documents as if you were the investor. Where are the gaps? Where is the documentation incomplete? Where are there informal arrangements that need to be formalised? Resolve those issues before the process starts.

The other consistent issue is founders who cannot answer basic questions about their own company under pressure. What are your customer acquisition economics? What is your churn by cohort? What is your burn and runway at various revenue scenarios? These questions come up in every serious diligence process. Not knowing the numbers precisely is acceptable at very early stages. Not having thought about them is not.

Having someone with genuine investor experience on your side of the table during due diligence changes the dynamic materially. Someone who has built data rooms, answered diligence questions, and seen what investors are actually looking for knows how to anticipate questions rather than react to them.

Running a fundraising process that closes

A fundraising process is a project. It has a start date, milestones, a target close, and it needs to be managed actively. Read Why Building Your Own Race Car Is a Great Way to Crash for a longer treatment of why DIY fundraising without process discipline is one of the most common ways founders destroy their own deals.

The most common failure I see is a lack of structure. Founders start conversations with multiple investors simultaneously, lose track of where each relationship stands, fail to create urgency, and end up in a process that drags on for six months without closing. The longer a process runs, the more it signals to investors that something is wrong.

A few things that consistently separate processes that close from ones that do not:

Run a process, not a series of conversations. Target a defined group of investors, engage them on a similar timeline, and create natural decision points. Investor interest compounds when others are moving. It evaporates when a founder is still in early conversations six months after the first meeting.

Create genuine momentum. Real urgency comes from business progress: a customer win, a product milestone, a data point that was not there before. Build those into your process timeline.

Know your numbers cold. Every number in your deck should be something you can defend in detail: revenue, burn, runway, unit economics, cohort data. The moment a founder says they will need to get back to an investor on a financial question, the meeting changes tone.

Follow up consistently. Investor ghosting is common and often structural. Weekly follow-up on initial outreach, fortnightly after substantive conversations, is appropriate and expected. For more on handling investor silence, read Why Investors Ghost You, And How to Turn Silence into Success.

Close clean. When you get to a term sheet, move through negotiation and close efficiently. Drawn-out term sheet negotiations signal either inexperience or lack of conviction, and either one gives investors a reason to revisit their decision.

The bottom line

Raising capital in the GCC is genuinely possible for founders building credible companies. The capital is there, investor appetite at early stages has grown consistently, and 2025 numbers confirm the region is now a serious global VC destination.

What it requires is preparation, research, honest self-assessment, and execution discipline. The founders who close rounds in this market are not always the ones with the best businesses. They are the ones who treat the process seriously, know who they are talking to, have their documentation in order, and can defend their narrative under pressure.

Work with Dopamine on your raise

If you are preparing to raise a pre-seed or seed round in the UAE or Saudi Arabia, Dopamine's Founder Sessions are built around the specific decisions that determine whether a GCC process closes. From investor readiness audits to term sheet review to pitch simulation, each session is run by a former fund associate who has been on the other side of these conversations.

Get started

FAQ

How long does it take to raise a seed round in the GCC?
A well-prepared process typically takes three to five months from first investor meetings to close. Founders who enter the process without investor-ready documentation or a clear investor target list often see this extend to eight or nine months, and a process that long starts working against you.

What documentation do investors in the UAE and Saudi Arabia require?
At minimum: a clean cap table with full dilution, monthly management accounts or financial model, shareholder agreements, corporate documents, and a data room covering team, product, and commercial traction. The specific depth depends on your stage and the investor type, but gaps discovered mid-diligence are one of the most common reasons deals slow down or fall apart.

How do investors in the GCC think about valuation at pre-seed and seed?
GCC seed investors typically look for a credible path to a 10x return on entry. Valuation needs to be grounded in regional comparable transactions and your company's actual traction, not US or European benchmarks. A defensible valuation at pre-seed in the region typically sits between $3M and $8M pre-money depending on team, traction, and sector, but comparables vary significantly.

Do I need a Saudi presence to raise from Saudi investors?
Most Saudi investors - sovereign funds, family offices, and sector VCs - expect meaningful Saudi commercial activity from the companies they back. If Saudi is not a primary market in your near-term plan, you are better served targeting UAE-focused investors rather than pitching a Saudi expansion you cannot credibly commit to.

What is the difference between ADGM and DIFC for early-stage fundraising?
Both ADGM and DIFC are common law jurisdictions widely understood by international investors. ADGM is Abu Dhabi-based and increasingly favoured for VC structures; DIFC is Dubai-based and has a longer track record for financial services and fund structuring. For most early-stage GCC startups, the choice matters less than having a clean, properly documented structure in either jurisdiction.

What happens if a term sheet has aggressive liquidation preferences?
Liquidation preferences above 1x non-participating are worth pushing back on in most cases. A 2x participating preference means investors recoup double their investment before you see any proceeds in an exit, then continue participating in the upside. This is uncommon in standard GCC seed deals but does appear, particularly with less founder-friendly investors. Review any term sheet with counsel who has done GCC venture transactions, not general corporate lawyers.

Related reading