Meet Sung Cho, Founder of Fortitude Ventures

Sung Cho, Founder of Fortitude Ventures

From rural Virginia to Seoul to Silicon Valley, Sung Cho's journey is a story of navigating identity, opportunity, and conviction across vastly different worlds. Now as Founding GP of Fortitude Ventures, he’s applying that unique lens to backing deeply technical, mission-driven founders, often before the rest of the market fully sees it.

In this conversation, Sung shares how early experiences shaped his worldview, why he optimizes for outsized outcomes over downside protection, and how themes like autonomy, robotics, and global supply chain shifts are defining his investment strategy. He also offers a candid look into the mindset of building a fund from scratch, balancing intensity, family, and a long-term mission to expand Asian representation in venture.

Judy: Let’s start from the beginning…how did your background and upbringing shape your path into venture?

Sung: I was born in LA but grew up mostly in rural Virginia.  I was one of maybe two Asian kids in my entire school, and at the time I didn’t consciously think much about it - it was just the environment I knew.

That changed in 7th grade, when my family moved to Seoul.  The shift was dramatic.  I went from being the only Korean kid in my school to being surrounded by people who all looked like me, at an international school that was largely Korean American.  It was the first time I really became aware of how much environment shapes identity.  In hindsight, I think I had always been an outsider in some way, but it wasn’t until that transition that I could actually see both sides.

That perspective has stayed with me.  Even now, raising kids in Silicon Valley (which is its own kind of bubble), I think a lot about making sure they understand how varied the world really is.

Academically, I was on a pretty traditional path.  I studied electrical engineering at the University of Illinois and assumed I would follow my dad into academia. I even went back to Korea for a master’s program with the goal of eventually getting a PhD.  During that time, I realized research just wasn’t for me.  I remember nervously sitting down with my dad and telling him I didn’t think I wanted to pursue a PhD after all.  He was completely fine with it and that moment gave me permission to rethink everything.

In 2006, I joined Samsung, and that’s where things really began to shift.  Early on, I worked on processors that went into some of the first smartphones. But more importantly, I found myself in a unique position as one of the only Korean Americans on the team.  I naturally became a bridge between the Korean teams and global partners, especially companies in the U.S. and Israel.

That exposure was defining.  I got to see firsthand how large companies operate, but also how startups engage with them…and more importantly, how uneven the playing field was.

I worked with major companies like ARM, Google, and Microsoft, alongside a range of startups. What stood out wasn’t just the technology, but how differently those startups operated depending on their environment.

The U.S. and Israeli startups we worked with typically had much more capital. They were well-funded, had strong conviction in their long-term vision, and weren’t afraid to push back, even with a partner like Samsung.  They were building toward something big and weren’t optimizing for short-term survival.

In contrast, many of the Korean startups we worked with had equally strong technical talent and very capable founders, but they operated under entirely different constraints.  They had raised less capital, and at the time, that capital often came with more personal liability.  If things didn’t work out, the consequences were much more severe at an individual level.  As a result, their behavior was fundamentally different.  They were optimizing to survive and maintain the Samsung relationship, rather than to build something independent at scale.

That contrast really stuck with me.  There was a difference in access to capital and the ability to take long-term risk.  You had founders with similar potential, but completely different trajectories based on the ecosystems around them.

That was probably the first time I seriously started thinking about venture and questioned: why does access to capital shape outcomes so dramatically? And how do you create an environment where founders can actually pursue big, ambitious ideas, rather than being forced to compromise early?  From there, the interest just kept building.

Judy: How did it all come together?

Sung: After working on the semiconductor side at Samsung, a somewhat unexpected opportunity came up where I got pulled into working more closely with the Samsung family.  I ended up serving as an executive staffer to Jay Y. Lee, who is now the chairman of Samsung.

That experience was pretty unique because Samsung operates across so many industries.  Up until that point, I had mostly seen the company from the ground level, focused on building chips.  But in this role, I spent a lot of time helping with international engagement, working with U.S. and other non-Korean partners, and getting a sense of how decisions were made across different parts of the business.  Within a relatively short period of time, I had seen Samsung from both the ground floor and close to the very top, which gave me a much more holistic view of how a large global organization operates.

After a couple of years, I decided to go to business school at Columbia University.  I went in pretty clear on wanting to do venture capital, but this was around 2011, when the VC ecosystem was much smaller.  There just weren’t that many entry points, especially for someone coming from a somewhat non-traditional background and from Korea. My mentors encouraged me to keep my options open, so I ended up going into consulting as a bridge back into the U.S.  I joined McKinsey in the New Jersey office and spent about two years there working mostly on technology-related projects, things like semiconductor operations, a cybersecurity project for a bank, and even some work with the Department of Defense.  It was really interesting work, and I learned a lot, but at some point, I had almost forgotten about venture as a near-term goal.

Then someone forwarded me a job description that felt almost too specific to my background.  I went through the process, and that’s how I ended up joining Formation 8 in early 2015.  Not long after I joined, the firm went through a split, which led to successor firms like Eclipse and 8VC.  From there, I moved to a smaller fund called Amasia, and then eventually started a single-LP fund called D20 Capital.  D20 was really my “fund zero”, a $20 million fund with one LP.  From that experience, I went on to build Fortitude, where that same LP became the anchor, and we’ve since brought on additional investors.

Across all of these steps, there’s been a consistent thread.  Most of the funds I’ve been involved with have had large Asian business families as LPs.  A big part of what I’ve been thinking about is how to leverage those relationships - not just as sources of capital, but as partners who can help shape investment ideas and, over time, support U.S. startups as they scale globally.

When I zoom out, the path wasn’t really linear.  It was a combination of a few different experiences coming together.  But the common theme has been sitting at the intersection of different worlds: technology, global businesses, and capital - and trying to connect them in a meaningful way.

Judy: How do you think about Fortitude’s investment strategy today and what’s shaped how you make decisions as an investor?

Sung: At a high level, our strategy is to back the best U.S. founders at the earliest stages and much of our focus today is on being intentional around where we invest.  One of our core themes is autonomy, whether that’s knowledge work through AI or physical work through robotics.  If you’re trying to augment or replace human labor, you need a really deep understanding of the workflow, so we spend a lot of time looking for founders who have lived that problem firsthand.

That ties into how my investment approach has evolved.  Earlier in my career, I thought you could optimize for different outcomes - building toward smaller exits versus something bigger.  Over time, I’ve come to believe that you really have to optimize for a very large outcome.  Trying to model downside protection at the early stage is, in many ways, a futile exercise.

Alongside that, I’ve also become more comfortable leaning into technically difficult areas.  Coming from semiconductors, I’ve never been shy about hardware.  If something is hard and you can actually build it, that becomes your moat.  That’s part of why we’ve spent time in areas like robotics, which is now termed “physical AI”.  It wasn’t talked about as much a few years ago, but it’s becoming much more mainstream.

Overall, we’re really focused on two things: backing founders who can build truly large, enduring companies, and leaning into technically deep areas where that level of defensibility actually matters. And when those two things come together, that’s where things get really interesting.

Judy: What themes are you most excited about right now?

Sung: One of the areas we’re spending time on is what’s happening across global supply chains. There’s a lot of discussion around U.S. re-industrialization and “American dynamism,” which is directionally the right focus.  But rebuilding an industrial base is incredibly complex - it takes time, deep expertise, and very robust supply chains.  It’s not something that can happen overnight.

In the interim, there are going to be real bottlenecks, especially with the level of geopolitical tension we’re seeing today, particularly with China.  Historically, the U.S. relied heavily on China for manufacturing, and as that relationship shifts, there’s a gap that needs to be filled.

So how do those supply chains evolve? And where are the opportunities that come out of that disruption?  I think part of the answer lies in strengthening relationships with key allies - places like Korea, Japan, and Taiwan.  These countries already have strong manufacturing capabilities and can play a critical role in bridging that gap while longer-term re-industrialization in the U.S. plays out.

While we work through how to rebuild domestically, we think it is also equally important to spend time thinking about what happens in the transition period and what kind of companies can support that shift.  For us, it all ties back to the same core idea: leaning into technically hard problems where there’s real structural change happening. Whether that’s robotics, physical AI, or supply chain transformation, those are the areas where we think there’s potential to build something large and enduring.

Judy: Any companies you’re particularly excited about right now?

Sung: One company I’m really excited about right now is Katalyst Space. The founder is a Korean American, Ghonhee Lee.  He went to Embry-Riddle, which is a very specialized aerospace school, and he’s been building this company largely under the radar, heads down, without going down the traditional venture funding path.  To date, he’s raised a relatively modest amount of equity but has already scaled meaningful revenue through government contracts, with strong momentum heading into this year.

What’s even more compelling is the actual mission they’re working on.  They’re preparing to launch a space robot into low Earth orbit to attach to a NASA satellite - the Swift Observatory - that’s currently drifting and at risk of burning up in the atmosphere.  It’s a $500 million asset, and without intervention, it would be lost.  Their approach is to use robotic arms to grab the satellite and push it back into orbit so it can continue to be used for scientific research.  It’s effectively a rescue mission in space.

The team reflects that same level of depth.  Their CTO spent about a decade at SpaceX, and their chief architect was at NASA JPL for nearly 18 years.  It’s a very experienced group that has been quietly executing without a lot of noise.

I think that’s what makes it so refreshing.  In a market where a lot of attention is on AI or more crowded themes, this is a company solving a very real, very technical problem with clear impact.  It also fits very well with how we think about investing more broadly: leaning into technically difficult areas where, if you can execute, the defensibility becomes very strong.

Now that they’ve proven out a lot of the early pieces, the next phase is about helping them access the right capital to scale.  It’s a good example of the kind of company we get excited about - one where the ambition is big, the execution is real, and the opportunity isn’t just theoretical.

Judy: On a personal note - What’s been grounding you lately and what’s driving you personally as you build Fortitude?

Sung: At this stage, my focus really comes down to two things: work and family.

Building a fund from scratch is intense. Fundraising never really stops, and you’re constantly balancing supporting your portfolio companies while building relationships with new founders. There’s always something to do.

But what gives me energy is the trust from both LPs and founders.  LPs trusting you with their capital, and founders choosing to partner with you, especially when you don’t yet have a big brand - that creates a real sense of motivation and responsibility. 

Family plays a big role in that too.  Having kids keeps everything in perspective.  It keeps you focused on what actually matters and helps cut through a lot of the noise that naturally comes with being in Silicon Valley.

At the same time, there’s a broader mission behind what we’re building at Fortitude.  A big part of it is around representation.  There just aren’t many venture funds in Silicon Valley that have been built by and backed by majority Asian communities (especially Korean) and that’s something I care deeply about.  We started by partnering with large Korean business families, and over time the goal is to build a platform that can support not just founders, but also future GPs coming up behind us.

If we can help create more pathways, where diverse founders and investors have better access to capital and opportunity, that’s something I’d be really proud of.