Vesting Acceleration (Single vs. Double Trigger)

A contract term that speeds up unvested equity vesting when a company is acquired — single trigger accelerates automatically on the acquisition itself, double trigger requires both the acquisition and the person's termination or demotion afterward.

Why does Vesting Acceleration (Single vs. Double Trigger) matter?

It decides who bears the risk in an acquisition where the acquirer wants to keep the team. Without any acceleration, a founder or early employee can be fired the day after close and lose years of unvested equity they were counting on the deal to realize. Single trigger protects them completely but makes the company less attractive to acquire, because a buyer who wanted to retain and incentivize the team just watched everyone's equity fully vest and their reason to stay disappear. Double trigger is the standard compromise: it protects people specifically from being pushed out to avoid paying them, without handing everyone a payday the moment the deal closes regardless of what happens next.

What does Vesting Acceleration (Single vs. Double Trigger) look like in practice?

Suppose a founder has two years of unvested shares left when the company is acquired. Under a double trigger, those shares keep vesting on the original schedule as long as the founder stays in a comparable role at the acquirer; if the acquirer terminates them or meaningfully changes their role within some window after close, the remaining unvested shares accelerate immediately. Under single trigger, all of it would have accelerated at the moment the deal closed, whether or not the founder stayed a single day afterward.

What are the common mistakes with Vesting Acceleration (Single vs. Double Trigger)?

  • Negotiating single trigger acceleration for founders, which can make later acquirers structure around them or discount the deal to account for it.
  • Having no acceleration terms at all, leaving a founder's post-acquisition fate entirely at the buyer's discretion.
  • Not defining what counts as a triggering termination or demotion precisely enough, which invites disputes exactly when trust is lowest.
  • Assuming the same acceleration terms are appropriate for both founders and early employees, when investors and acquirers usually expect narrower terms for the latter.

Related concepts

Stop looking these up one at a time

Lev works through the whole arc with you — customers, positioning, pricing, the pitch — and explains the vocabulary as it goes.

Start with your idea