When adolescent ventures choose their scaling strategy for longer-run innovation outcomes, is organic-or acquisition-led-growth preferable? The multifaceted reasons managers may choose an acquisitive path, only some of which are observed and measured, makes this question difficult to address. We study U.S. firms undergoing an initial public offering (IPO) between 1975 and 2016 and track the extent to which they conduct acquisitions, pre-and post-IPO. We use firms’ patenting activity as proxies for innovation. We address endogenous selection of acquisition strategies by employing difference-indifferences and instrumental variable methods and estimate a 6-10% boost in innovation for acquisition relative to organic scaling. These results contrast with naïve analyses, which suggests a negative or null effect of acquisitions on innovation. Managerial summary. Should managers choose organic or acquisition-led venture scaling strategies when innovation is important? Organic growth may be slower but organizational culture is preserved. Acquisitions involve paying for products and personnel rather than for effort (as would be the case with organic growth). We empirically investigate this choice by studying the innovation and acquisition behavior of US firms going public between 1975 and 2016. Using methods to control for managerial selection, we find that the acquisition pathway, on average, is more desirable for longer-run innovation. We discuss managerial implications.