Konstantin Dzhengozov, CFO of Payhawk, Bulgaria's first unicorn, says that being a co-founder of the company means more responsibility, but he also says about letting go.
Dzhengozov, a graduate of Bulgarian KPMG, worked for FP&A at Bulgarian Tech Company Telerik when Progress Software was acquired in 2014. The $264 million merger sparked the development of the entire technological ecosystem in Bulgaria.
Dzhengozov, who chose to stay in Bulgaria instead of taking part in progress in the US, worked in the world of VCs and later became Payhawk's third co-founder. With his funding background, he is suitable for running finance. But what does it look like to be a co-founder and CFO at the same time? In an interview with Katie Kuehner-Hebert, Dzhengozov explains how each role affects the other roles and why the two require different skill sets.
How will your role as a co-founder affect your role as a CFO?
As a co-founder, I invest deeply in every part of my business. There are not only numbers, but the stories behind them. I think I'm always acting as an entrepreneur: how do we build long-term value? What risks are we taking and are they intentional? What do you do today to move your business forward in meaningful ways?
Being a co-founder fundamentally reshaping how you approach the role of a CFO. You don't just manage capital. It helps create a blueprint for how the company grows, competes and leads. It gives a much deeper connection to the “why” behind the numbers, constantly enforcing a balance between short-term financial discipline and long-term vision.
As a CFO, that mindset leads to a broader role than traditional financial management. I'm involved in product economics, capital strategy, pricing, and experimenting with the market. It also helps you understand evolving needs, so you spend time with your customers.
Have you found anything surprising about performing both roles?
The founder's lens helps you connect finance to your strategy and make sure you're investing in the right bets. I'm committed to running lean and efficient, but I look forward to my strategic goals and aspirations.
What surprised me most was how being a co-founder changed my relationship with risk. As CFO, you are often the voice of attention and the person who holds a red flag. But as a co-founder, you are also responsible for pushing the company into unknown territory. I had to learn when to be a conservative financial voice and say, “Yes, this is worth a bet, even if it's offensive.”
In short, being a co-founder means that you don't just take control of the company's financial health. You will help shape that ambition.
What advice would you give to a CFO who is interested in becoming a Founders or a co-founder?
The best advice I can give is not to wait for it to be “ready.” If you have an instinct to build, follow it. CFOs have the unique benefits of business models, capital efficiency, and value creation, but establishing a company requires embracing risks and uncertainties.
You have to let go of perfectionism. Startups move fast and not all decisions are supported by a complete dataset. You need to make a call with 70% confidence and coordination during your studies.
The most important thing I've learned is that making your CFO successful doesn't automatically become a successful founder. They are related, but a clear skill set. Be humble and be prepared to learn constantly and remember that your financial insight is just one of the things that will make your company successful.
Finally, surround yourself with co-founders and early team members who complement your strengths and weaknesses. You cannot do it on your own, but you need to deeply believe in the problems you are solving and the beliefs you build through rejection. I was told “no” more than 60 times by VCS before reaching unicorn status.
Payhawk became Bulgaria's first unicorn and recently expanded to the US. What were the important financial or strategic decisions that helped to promote international expansion?
Many doubted they could compete with incumbents who were already supported by major funds. However, we mercilessly focused on two important objectives. It involves building world-class global products that address real customer problems and maintaining strong unit economics from the start.
One of the most strategic decisions we made was to expand with discipline rather than hype. We have expanded to the EU and the UK, reaching a customer base in over 32 countries. This was achieved by approaching the needs of our customers and quickly repeating them.
When we decided to enter the US, we knew we would not succeed simply from copying and pasting our playbook. The number of European startups that do not invade the US is far greater than successful people.
Therefore, initially, we treated the United States as an experiment rather than as a development. We kept the model to the market agile until we found the right fit. Now that we have it, we are focused on implementing our vision and strategy accurately.
