Global venture funding to financial technology startups totaled $12 billion across 751 deals in 2026 as of April 6, per Crunchbase . That’s a 5% increase in dollars raised compared to the $11.4 billion raised across 1,097 — or 31.5% fewer —��deals during the same time period in 2025.

This trend signals larger deal sizes. Indeed, late-stage or growth funding in the first quarter of 2026 totaled $6.9 billion, up 8% compared to $6.4 billion raised at those stages in the 2025 first quarter.

However, sequentially, the $12 billion raised is down 33% compared to the fourth quarter of 2025, when fintech startups raised $17.8 billion globally. The $6.9 billion raised in late-stage or growth funding is also down markedly — by 43% — compared to the $12.1 billion raised by fintech startups in Q4 2025.

The trend in the first quarter also mirrors what we saw in 2025 as a whole, with global venture funding to fintech startups climbing to its highest level in several quarters, boosted by later-stage deals.

Total global funding to VC-backed financial technology startups totaled $53.8 billion in 2025, per Crunchbase . That’s an approximately 29.3% increase from 2024’s total of $41.6 billion raised.

US booms

U.S.-based startups have historically raised more fintech funding than any other country in the world, and the first quarter of 2026 was no different.

Of the $12 billion raised by startups globally, just over half — or $6.3 billion — flowed to fintech companies based in the U.S. That was an impressive 47% increase compared to the $4.3 billion raised by U.S. fintech startups in the 2025 first quarter. However, it was down 50% from the $12.6 billion that U.S. financial technology startups raised in the fourth quarter of 2025.

The United Kingdom was the second-largest recipient of venture capital, with startups in the region raising a total of $1.2 billion. India came in third, raising $900 million.

Big deals for unicorns

Several fintech startups raised nine-figure rounds in the first quarter, with some doubling their valuations since their last venture financings.

Predictions marketplace was the largest recipient of capital in the first quarter. In March, the company doubled its valuation to $22 billion in just three months with a $1 billion raise led by . The New York-based startup had just raised $1 billion in Series E funding at an $11 billion valuation in December.

In February, , a digital savings platform, raised $385 million in a Series E funding round co-led by and . The New York-based startup said its new valuation was $2 billion, double it achieved when raising its $125 million Series D round in December 2023.

And in January, , which is building infrastructure for payments with stablecoins, raised $250 million in a Series C funding round led by . Its post-money valuation was $1.95 billion, up 17x from last March.

Investors remain bullish

, partner and head of U.S. at , said his firm has been investing at a slightly slower pace so far in 2026 than in years past. But he cited it as “more a quirk of deal flow” and where it gets conviction, rather than a decision to slow the firm’s investing pace.

“It’s certainly true that macroeconomics and geopolitics play a role,” he told Crunchbase News, “but mostly we’re just focused on finding high-conviction companies to back.”

QED is extremely bullish on the application layer for AI in fintech and stablecoin opportunities, and has backed several startups that Gerety said “harness the power of LLMs with the security and reliability guarantees that finance needs.” (, which raised a $45 million Series B in January and is building an AI assistant for financial advisers, is one of those companies.)

“Just in the last few months, agents are now actually able to be effective in many processing tasks, but the stakes in finance are too high for LLMs to conquer financial workflows alone,” Gerety said. “Finance runs on trust, not probability.”

Looking ahead, he said QED remains bullish on fintech overall for the year. Part of the excitement is around the fact that larger companies are “transforming” their operations with agentic workflows, Gerety noted.

“More and more transformation is moving from the ‘co-pilot’ phase, and we’re moving into the ‘OpenClaw’ phase, when reasoning agents will start to actually do all the work that was too tedious and slow to be done manually,” he added.

The geopolitical situation will likely hinder some companies from taking the IPO plunge, in Gerety’s view, although a few companies in QED’s portfolios are “bubbling.”

, partner at , said his firm is on track to make eight to 10 core investments in Seed or Series A companies this year — about the same number as in previous years.

“We’re investing in AI-enabled applications while maintaining patience and focus in our deployment of capital,” he said. “We look for durable, enduring businesses that we believe will withstand the current hype cycle and investment frenzy.”

While TTV is investing in AI-enabled companies, Kapur said it also agrees with that “an AI reset is coming.”

“Many investors have already made their money by getting in on the ground floor, and others are trying to replicate their success,” he told Crunchbase News. “We’re focused on investing in the application layer of AI, and we’re still in the early days with more widespread prosperity and a democratization of enterprise value creation yet to come.”

In particular, TTV sees the biggest opportunity in early-stage AI-native companies that are solving problems in mission-critical workflows “while building durable moats.”

“These platforms will earn the right to be distribution endpoints for financial products … and are even more valuable in the age of AI,” he said.

He believes we may see some fintech IPOs in 2026, but that they will largely depend on how the potential mega IPOs (from the likes of , and ) perform.

“If those IPOs underperform, others may opt to stay private longer,” Kapur said.

Looking ahead, he predicts we’ll continue to see accelerated adoption of AI in financial services, first through straightforward applications, then more operationally complex use cases.

“More broadly, we’re watching how the foundational LLMs further move up into the application layer, which is imperative to the long-term sustainability of their business models,” Kapur said. “We think financial services and fintech are unique enough categories where de novo startups and standalone businesses will beat platforms building experimental applications.”

Related Crunchbase query:

Related reading:

• Fintech Funding Jumped 27% In 2025 With Fewer Deals But Bigger Checks
• Kalshi Secures $1B To Expand Predictions Market Platform
• Digital Savings Startup Vestwell Lands $385M, Doubles Valuation
• Stablecoin Startup Rain Raises $250M Series C at $1.95B Valuation – Its Third Round In Less Than A Year
• Exclusive: Zocks Raises $45M Series B From Lightspeed, QED For AI Assistant To Financial Advisers

Illustration:

The first quarter of 2026 was unlike any other for venture investment, driven by unprecedented spending on AI compute and frontier labs. Crunchbase data shows investors poured $300 billion into 6,000 startups globally in the quarter, up over 150% quarter over quarter and year over year.

That marks an all-time high for global venture investment not approached by any other quarter on record. In fact, startup investment in the first quarter of 2026 alone totaled close to 70% of all venture capital spending in 2025. The quarterly sum also tops all full-year investment totals prior to 2018.

Q1’s startup investment largely went to AI startups and disproportionately to a handful of U.S.-based companies in record-setting deals. Four of the five largest venture rounds ever recorded were closed in Q1 2026, with frontier labs ($122 billion), ($30 billion), ($20 billion) and self-driving company ($16 billion) collectively raising $188 billion, or 65% of global venture investment in the quarter.

Overall, AI shattered records last quarter, with $242 billion — 80% of total global venture funding in Q1— going to companies in the sector. The previous record was set in Q1 2025, when AI accounted for 55% of global venture funding.

Table of Contents

• Valuation surge, capital concentration
• US above 80%
• Late-stage hike
• Early stage up over 40%
• Seed funding up over 30%
• IPO slowdown, M&A pick up
• Public pressure
• Methodology
• Glossary of funding terms

Valuation surge, capital concentration

Along with the three major frontier labs and Waymo, another 10 companies raised funding rounds of $1 billion or more in Q1, in sectors spanning generative and physical AI, autonomous vehicles, semiconductors, data centers, robotics, defense and prediction markets.

Those outsized rounds pushed overall startup valuations higher in Q1. The Crunchbase ������Ƶ added $900 billion in value during the quarter, marking the largest valuation bump in a single quarter.

US above 80%

U.S.-based companies raised $250 billion, or 83% of global venture capital in Q1, Crunchbase data shows. That’s up significantly from 71% in Q1 2025, which was already well above historical averages in the decade before 2024.

The second-largest market globally for venture funding in Q1 was China, with $16.1 billion invested. The U.K. followed, with $7.4 billion invested. Both countries were up quarter over quarter and even more significantly year over year.

Late-stage hike

The Q1 funding surge was concentrated in late-stage funding, which reached $246.6 billion — up 205% year over year — across 584 deals. A total of $235 billion was invested in 158 late-stage companies that raised rounds of $100 million and more.

Early stage up over 40%

Early-stage funding totaled $41.3 billion across 1,800 deals, Crunchbase data shows.

Funding was up marginally quarter over quarter but up 41% year over year from $29.4 billion. Much of that increase went to Series A rounds, Crunchbase data shows. Series B deals were down quarter over quarter but still up year over year.

Seed funding up over 30%

Seed funding totaled $12 billion, up 31% year over year, though the increase was entirely due to larger rounds, with deal counts falling 30% year over year to 3,800.

IPO slowdown, M&A pick up

Record venture investment in U.S. companies did not translate into a stronger IPO market in Q1.

In fact, the U.S. market for new listings slowed in Q1 amid a broader stock market selloff in software, although China’s IPO market picked up.

A total of 21 venture-backed companies exited globally above $1 billion in Q1. Thirteen of those were from China, four more from elsewhere in Asia, and four from the U.S.

The largest IPO in Q1 was Japan-based , a fintech for mobile payments valued at $10 billion upon listing.�� Two foundation lab companies from China — and — debuted on the , each valued at more than $6 billion.

While the IPO market was somewhat lackluster, startup M&A was strong in Q1 with exits cumulatively valued north of $56.6 billion, Crunchbase data shows. That marked the third-highest startup M&A quarter since the downturn of 2022.

The largest M&A deals in Q1 were ’s $6 billion planned acquisition of ’s gaming platform , and ’s planned $5.15 billion acquisition of fintech startup .

Public pressure

While frontier lab megarounds defined Q1 2026, a closer look at the data shows every startup funding stage grew last quarter, as did round sizes across the board.

And unlike the cloud and mobile era, this cycle is also being built in the physical world, with massive capital flowing not just into software, but infrastructure, autonomous vehicles, robotics and manufacturing.

Now, with startup valuations surging and a backlog of companies with unprecedented sums of private capital behind them, pressure is intensifying on the IPO markets to reopen in 2026.

Related Crunchbase queries:

Methodology

The data contained in this report comes directly from Crunchbase, and is based on reported data. Data is as of March 31, 2026.

Note that data lags are most pronounced at the earliest stages of venture activity, with seed funding amounts increasing significantly after the end of a quarter/year.

Please note that all funding values are given in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted. Crunchbase converts foreign currencies to U.S. dollars at the prevailing spot rate from the date funding rounds, acquisitions, IPOs and other financial events are reported. Even if those events were added to Crunchbase long after the event was announced, foreign currency transactions are converted at the historic spot price.

Glossary of funding terms

Seed and angel consists of seed, pre-seed and angel rounds. Crunchbase also includes venture rounds of unknown series, equity crowdfunding and convertible notes at $3 million (USD or as-converted USD equivalent) or less.

Early-stage consists of Series A and Series B rounds, as well as other round types. Crunchbase includes venture rounds of unknown series, corporate venture and other rounds above $3 million, and those less than or equal to $15 million.

Late-stage consists of Series C, Series D, Series E and later-lettered venture rounds following the “Series [Letter]” naming convention. Also included are venture rounds of unknown series, corporate venture and other rounds above $15 million. Corporate rounds are only included if a company has raised an equity funding at seed through a venture series funding round.

Technology growth is a private-equity round raised by a company that has previously raised a “venture” round. (So basically, any round from the previously defined stages.)

Illustration:

To understand what’s holding the IPO market back and what could unlock it, Crunchbase News recently spoke with , U.S. IPO services leader at , via email. He discussed how companies are rethinking IPO timing this year, how investor expectations have shifted since the 2021 boom, and why the next wave of large listings could raise the bar for smaller and mid-cap tech companies.

This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.

Crunchbase News: How are companies thinking about timing, pricing and capital needs in this uncertain market?

Bellin: The companies we work with have become significantly more sophisticated in their approach to all three dimensions, and the most important shift we’ve seen is a move away from calendar-driven thinking toward readiness-driven thinking.

On timing, companies are no longer asking “when is the window?” They’re asking, “Are we ready when the window opens?” That’s a meaningful evolution.

After years of intermittent issuance windows, late-stage companies have learned hard lessons about the cost of being caught flat-footed. The companies that priced successfully in 2025 had invested 18 to 24 months in advance in governance upgrades, financial reporting infrastructure, and refinement of their equity story.

That institutional preparation is now table stakes. As we’ve noted in our , market windows can open and close quickly, which makes continuous readiness and flexibility essential, regardless of where macro conditions stand on any given day.

On pricing, there’s been a healthy reset in expectations. The exuberance of 2021, when companies could access the market at growth multiples untethered from near-term fundamentals, is not what we’re operating in today.

Investors today are paying a premium for scaled, cash-generative stories with clear paths to profitability. That means founders and their boards have had harder conversations about the right price relative to where comparable public companies trade, rather than anchoring to the last private-round valuations.

The good news is that median pre-money valuations have begun to rise for the first time since 2021, particularly for AI-enabled businesses and later-stage companies with clear profitability trajectories. The reset isn’t a permanent discount; it’s a quality filter.

On capital needs, we’re seeing more disciplined thinking about sizing. Nearly every company going public targets a raise that covers 18 to 24 months of operations, ideally through to profitability.

What’s changed is that companies are also thinking harder about their post-IPO capital structure: How do the IPO proceeds interact with existing debt, what is the all-in cost of capital as a public company, and how does the public currency (stock) open doors for strategic M&A or talent retention?

The best-prepared companies treat the IPO not just as a fundraiser but as a balance-sheet transformation.

It feels like the IPO market is moving more slowly so far this year than expected. Why do you think that is? Do you expect it will pick up?

There are several factors at play, and it’s worth separating the structural from the situational.

On the situational side, the October-to-November 2025 government shutdown had a materially disruptive effect on the capital markets calendar that is still being felt. The SEC reported that issuers filed more than 900 registration statements during the shutdown, all of which required review and processing once operations resumed. That backlog doesn’t clear overnight.

Companies that had been in process for a Q4 2025 or early Q1 2026 launch found themselves delayed, recalibrating roadshow timing, and in some cases choosing to wait for the market to absorb other supply first. So, some of the slowness we’re seeing in early 2026 is the shadow of that disruption.

On the structural side, macro uncertainty — including tariff policy, interest rate trajectory, and geopolitical volatility — has raised the bar for when boards and investors feel confident enough to move forward. Companies are increasingly patient because they have deep pools of private capital supporting them. That optionality is valuable, but it also means that when uncertainty spikes, the default decision is to wait.

That said, we do expect the market to pick up, and we’re cautiously optimistic about the balance of the year. The underlying fundamentals for the IPO market are strong: 2025 demonstrated healthy investor appetite for high-quality offerings, traditional IPOs raised the most proceeds since 2021, and the backlog of IPO-ready companies entering 2026 is among the largest in a decade, with more than 800 unicorns that have now spent additional years strengthening their balance sheets and operating discipline.

As the clears its backlog and macro visibility improves, we expect activity to accelerate, particularly in AI infrastructure, software and specialty risk. The first few deals of any re-opening tend to be conservatively priced to rebuild confidence, and if those hold their post-IPO performance, the door widens for the cohort behind them.

What sorts of companies do you expect to hit the public market this year?

Based on where investor appetite is concentrated, we see the strongest IPO pipeline in several distinct sectors. AI infrastructure, including data centers, power capacity, and chip-adjacent services, leads the pack.

Physical AI: Investor demand for direct exposure to the physical layer of the AI economy is significant, and large-scale, capital-intensive businesses in this space have been able to command premium valuations. The 2025 AI infrastructure IPO set a powerful precedent: Institutional investors proved willing to underwrite capital-intensive, high-growth models when the contracted revenue visibility is strong.

AI-enabled software: This also continues to be a top investor preference. The key distinction from earlier software cycles is that investors are no longer willing to pay high multiples purely on growth. They want to see that AI is genuinely embedded in the product, that net dollar retention is strong, and that the path to margin expansion is credible. Platforms with high switching costs and essential utility are commanding the best multiples.

Insurance and specialty risk: This sector had a strong 2025, and that momentum is continuing into 2026. These businesses tend to offer the cash-flow predictability that institutional investors increasingly prize.

Industrials, aerospace and defense: These are also moving up the IPO pipeline, supported by reshoring policy tailwinds and supply-chain realignment.

How are these listings influencing the strategies of smaller and mid-cap tech companies?

It is real and somewhat sobering. High-profile listings serve as both a benchmark and a warning.

When a well-known, scaled company prices and trades well post-IPO, it recalibrates expectations across the sector, validating the category and giving smaller companies a comparable reference.

But it also raises the implied bar. Investors who have a scaled, cash-generative AI infrastructure company available at a $40 billion to $50 billion valuation will apply that lens to every software or infrastructure company in their pipeline.

Smaller companies are watching their larger peers closely and, in many cases, extending their private timelines. They use the interval to strengthen unit economics, hit profitability milestones, and build out the public company infrastructure (board composition, financial controls, investor relations capability) that institutional investors now expect to see in place on day one.

Given that 2026 has seen a massive surge in venture secondaries, is an IPO still the “Gold Standard” exit? Or is PwC seeing founders use secondaries to delay their IPO even further?

This is one of the most important structural questions in the private markets right now, and the honest answer is nuanced.

The IPO remains the aspirational end-state for most venture-backed companies. It provides the broadest access to capital, the most liquid currency for acquisitions and talent retention, and the clearest signal of institutional legitimacy. In that sense, it retains its status as the gold standard. But what has clearly changed is the sequencing and the role that secondaries play in getting there.

The secondary market has undergone a structural transformation. What was once considered a signal of distress — such as an insider selling before a company was “ready” for the public markets — has been normalized as a sophisticated liquidity tool.

As noted in our , nearly half of asset managers are already using continuation funds to unlock liquidity, and GP-led secondaries and continuation vehicles are now mainstream instruments. Secondary transaction volume surpassed $60 billion in 2025, and the market is projected to continue growing significantly in 2026. Secondaries are expected to remain the dominant exit route for private equity, with IPOs still accounting for only a limited share of total private equity exits.

For founders specifically, we see secondaries being used for several distinct and legitimate strategic purposes:

First, personal liquidity without forced exit timing. Founders who are a decade or more into building their companies have reasonable personal financial planning needs. Secondaries allow them to diversify without forcing the company into a public exit on a suboptimal timeline.

Second, employee retention. Extended hold periods have put pressure on the equity value of employees who joined years ago and expected a liquidity event. Secondary programs provide a release valve, allowing companies to retain talent they might otherwise lose.

Third, valuation discovery in a more forgiving setting. Private secondary pricing, while increasingly sophisticated, is still conducted without the full scrutiny of a public offering, allowing companies to establish a market-clearing price on their own terms.

What we caution founders about, however, is treating secondary access as a reason to indefinitely postpone the public markets journey. The median time to IPO for companies that went public in 2025 has reached over 11 years, the longest in a decade.

Extended private holding periods can be constructive, but they also delay price discovery, compress LP distributions, and ultimately reduce the competitive tension that keeps acquisition valuations high.

The IPO window is selective but open, and companies with the right fundamentals shouldn’t mistake the availability of secondary liquidity for permission to wait indefinitely.

Is PwC advising late-stage founders to prioritize GAAP profitability over top-line growth to satisfy the current “flight to quality” among institutional investors?

We’re not advising founders to make a binary choice between growth and profitability, but we are advising them to have a credible, investor-grade answer to both.

The market signal from 2025 and into 2026 has been clear: Institutional investors are no longer willing to pay premium multiples on growth alone. The “Rule of 40,” the principle that a company’s revenue growth rate plus its profit margin should exceed 40%, and which may now be more a rule of 60, has re-emerged as a baseline screening metric for public market investors evaluating software and tech businesses.

Investors are paying a premium for scaled, cash-generative stories with clear paths to profitability. The emphasis is on paths.

GAAP profitability at the IPO date is not a requirement, but an articulated, credible, time-bound roadmap to it absolutely is.

What has changed is the tolerance for ambiguity. In 2021, investors were willing to fund a narrative about future profitability at an indefinite horizon.

Today, they want to see demonstrated progress in unit economics, such as improving gross margins, reducing customer acquisition costs as a percentage of revenue, and expanding net dollar retention, paired with a specific operating-leverage story. When do sales and marketing efficiency improve? When does R&D spend as a percentage of revenue compress? Where does operating margin land at scale? These are questions that founders must be able to answer with precision, not just aspiration.

The GAAP-versus-non-GAAP debate is also something we work through carefully with companies. Adjusted EBITDA and non-GAAP operating income are widely used and accepted, but institutional investors have become more sophisticated in looking through those metrics to understand certain adjustments as a real economic cost, and to evaluate true free cash flow generation.

Companies that present GAAP financials in a clear, transparent, investor-friendly way, rather than burying them under adjustments, tend to build more durable institutional credibility.

Our practical advice to late-stage founders is this: Make sure your growth spending is efficient and that every dollar of investment is generating measurably improving unit economics.

The investors we work with are sophisticated enough to reward capital-efficient growth with premium valuations and to discount growth that appears to require permanently escalating spending to sustain it.

Governance maturity, financial reporting infrastructure, and a compelling, data-supported equity story are as important to IPO success today as the top-line numbers themselves.

Related Crunchbase query:

Related reading:

• IPOs Are Holding Up In 2026, But SaaS Debuts Aren’t Happening
• ‘Why Not?’ How Sales Automation Unicorn Clay Uses Tender Offers To Reward Employees Without An Exit In Sight
• The IPO Window Won’t Stay Open On Its Own

Illustration:

In the less imaginative realm of venture funding, the term denotes a far less magical but much more visible creature: A space tech company with major funding and a valuation north of $1 billion.

These days, this more staid version of space unicorn is moving up the funding tallies at a faster-than-usual clip. More than two dozen companies in the sector have raised rounds of $100 million or more in the past year, per Crunchbase data.

Meanwhile, the biggest unicorn of all — 24-year-old — is reportedly seeking a valuation of around $1.5 trillion for an anticipated IPO later this year, featuring rocketry and satellite technology that should make even marshmallow lasers look primitive.

The broad trend: Unlike most startup sectors, which have seen uneven rebounds after hitting a funding peak over four years ago, space tech is hitting fresh highs. Contributing factors include public market enthusiasm for the sector, increased appetite for defense-related investments, and of course advances driving cheaper, more scalable and more technologically sophisticated orbital operations.

The numbers: Venture funding to companies in Crunchbase space tech and satellite categories hit a high last year of over $12 billion. So far, 2026 is off to a brisk start as well, with more than $2 billion in reported investment.

While investment is way up, round counts have remained flatter, as charted below.

Noteworthy rounds

Megarounds have been stacking up over the past six months.

By far the biggest of these was Kent, Washington-based , a developer of reusable rockets. The company announced a Series D extension in October that brought the total round size to $860 million.

Houston-based , which is developing a successor to the International Space Station, was a more recent mega-fundraiser, in new financing in February.

And in the satellite communications space, one of the larger financings came this week, as spinout , a developer of software that configures communications satellites to meet demand, secured funding.

For a bigger-picture view, below we put together a list of eight significant space- and satellite technology-related financings of the past six months.

Exits and more

The IPO market has also been receptive to space tech of late, although companies haven’t always held on to early gains.

One exemplar of this pattern is , a provider of launch, land and in-space services for national security and commercial customers, that went public in August. Shares of the Cedar Park, Texas-based company soared higher in initial trading but have subsequently shed about half their value.

, a Denver-based defense and space tech startup that went public in June, is also down from its initial trading price. On the flip side, , which went public early last year, is on a tear and was recently valued over $11 billion.

Meanwhile, it’s still early innings for space tech company , which went public just four weeks ago.

Heating up

Overall, in recent quarters space and satellite tech are looking like a sector in vogue. With large financings, regular IPO activity and a giant SpaceX offering on the horizon, we’re not seeing clear signs of a slowdown ahead for the space unicorn crowd.

Related Crunchbase queries:

Related reading:

• SpaceX IPO At $1.5T Valuation Would Be 10x Larger Than Biggest VC-Backed Listing Of All Time
• Voyager Technologies Sets Price Range For IPO As Spacetech Funding Takes Off
• Spacetech Startup Funding Charts A New Course
• In The Era Of Unicorn Valuation Escalation, A Trillion Dollars Isn’t What It Used To Be
• Northwood Space Raises $100M Series B And Lands $50M Government Contract As Space Tech Funding Rockets Higher

Illustration:

Over the past two calendar years, acquirers have agreed to pay more than $38 billion to purchase��1 venture-backed companies in Crunchbase biotech industry categories. So far, 2026 is off to a brisk start as well, with this month to pay up to $2.4 billion for , a startup focused on engineering immune cells in vivo.

Per Crunchbase data, 2025 and 2024 were two of the strongest years on record for biotech M&A. While we’re still below the 2021 peak, we’re also well past the subsequent low point, as charted below.

Largest deals in recent quarters

Since last year, at least nine funded U.S. biotech companies have sold in transactions valued at $1 billion or more, including potential milestone payments. Using Crunchbase , we assembled a list, ranked by deal size.

The largest deal was ’s purchase of , a developer of targeted oral therapies for solid tumors, for $3.05 billion in cash late last year. The pharma giant expressed particular interest in adding Halda’s clinical stage oral therapy for prostate cancer to its portfolio.

The two next-biggest acquisitions were both in the area of in vivo therapeutics, which enable a patient’s own body to generate cell therapies that can treat underlying disease.

One was Lilly’s aforementioned purchase of Watertown, Massachusetts-based Orna, which had�� previously raised over $320 million in venture funding from lead backers including , and .

The other was ’s mid-2025 acquisition of , a clinical-stage biotech developing targeted in vivo RNA technologies, with an initial focus on autoimmune diseases. AbbVie agreed to pay up to $2.1 billion in cash to acquire the San Diego-based startup,which previously raised $340 million in venture funding.

Biotech funding share slides, and IPO volume remains weak

While some large acquisitions are happening, the overall picture for biotech funding and exit activity looks more muted.

Last year, less than 9% of all U.S. startup funding went to companies in Crunchbase biotech categories. That’s the lowest share in years, and largely a function of more capital going to companies in other hot sectors like generative AI.

In terms of total finding, biotech looks more stable. In 2025, just over $25 billion went to U.S. startups in the space, roughly flat year over year.

IPO activity is lower than usual. Last year, just 21 biotech, pharma or medical device companies went public, per Crunchbase data, the lowest number in years.

So far this year, we’ve had four debuts, including most recently the debut this month of , a developer of cancer therapies recently valued around $900 million.

Not a slump, and not a boom

Overall, biotech funding and exit data paints a picture of a sector that’s neither booming nor in a protracted slump. That’s not the most exciting place to be, but it can be quite viable for quite a long time.

Related Crunchbase query:

Related reading:

• In The Era Of Unicorn Valuation Escalation, A Trillion Dollars Isn’t What It Used To Be
• Biotech Share Of US Funding Hits Lowest Point In Crunchbase History
• Biotech Isn’t Partaking In The IPO Rebound

Illustration:

The U.S. again dominated global funding with $38.7 billion — or around 70% of capital — invested in American companies last month, and capital also continued to concentrate into AI-centric startups.

However, on the IPO front, China led with two foundation model companies, and , debuting on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange.

Capital concentration

Capital concentration was pronounced in January as AI continued to lead. A total of $40.9 billion (74% of all funding) went to rounds of $100 million and more, and $31.7 billion (57% of funding) went to AI-related companies.

More than a third, or 36%, of global venture funding in January went to a single U.S.-based model company. That was -led with its $20 billion Series E, which was funded by a mix of private equity, sovereign funds and strategic investors. (Early in February, Musk’s space exploration company announced its merger with xAI.)

Overall, the largest funding deals in January were in sectors that showed increased investor appetite unleashed by AI.

Ranked in order of largest first, investments between $500 million to $2 billion last month went to:

• Singapore-based data center provider ;
• Pittsburgh-based robotics intelligence company ;
• Toronto-based autonomous driving ;
• Shanghai-based model company ;
• San Francisco-based drone delivery ; and
• Cupertino’s Bay Area-based AI chip startup .

After AI, the leading sectors in January were hardware, with an emphasis on deep tech, followed by healthcare and biotech.

China model exits

While the U.S. led funding totals, China led on the exit front. Two AI model companies went public: Z.ai (also known as Zhipu AI) and MiniMax. Each was valued above $6 billion and listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. MiniMax on its debut.

On the M&A front, the largest deal was banking giant ’s acquisition of spend management company for $5.15 billion, half its 2021 valuation of $12.3 billion.

Methodology

The data contained in this report comes directly from Crunchbase, and is based on reported data. Data reported is as of Jan. 4, 2026.

Note that data lags are most pronounced at the earliest stages of venture activity, with seed funding amounts increasing significantly after the end of a quarter/year.

Please note that all funding values are given in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted. Crunchbase converts foreign currencies to U.S. dollars at the prevailing spot rate from the date funding rounds, acquisitions, IPOs and other financial events are reported. Even if those events were added to Crunchbase long after the event was announced, foreign currency transactions are converted at the historic spot price.

Glossary of funding terms

Seed and angel consists of seed, pre-seed and angel rounds. Crunchbase also includes venture rounds of unknown series, equity crowdfunding and convertible notes at $3 million (USD or as-converted USD equivalent) or less.

Early-stage consists of Series A and Series B rounds, as well as other round types. Crunchbase includes venture rounds of unknown series, corporate venture and other rounds above $3 million, and those less than or equal to $15 million.

Late-stage consists of Series C, Series D, Series E and later-lettered venture rounds following the “Series [Letter]” naming convention. Also included are venture rounds of unknown series, corporate venture and other rounds above $15 million. Corporate rounds are only included if a company has raised an equity funding at seed through a venture series funding round.

Technology growth is a private-equity round raised by a company that has previously raised a “venture” round. (So basically, any round from the previously defined stages.)

Related reading:

• Capital One To Buy Fintech Startup Brex At Less Than Half Its Peak Valuation In $5.15B Deal

Illustration:

Today, an estimated 50 million men and 30 million women in the U.S. face androgenetic alopecia, or heredity-linked hair thinning or baldness, the . And while there are some longstanding treatments, they commonly come with high cost, discomfort, side effects or inconsistent effectiveness.

Startups and their backers have taken note. Over the years, investors have poured hundreds of millions into companies working on hair-loss treatments and platforms to make them more widely available.

This week, public investors are also getting a fresh entry into the space. , a developer of an oral treatment for pattern hair loss, began trading on the . Its shares closed up 122% to $137.65 despite a mostly down day for broader markets, indicating investors are enthused about the product. The 7-year-old company trades under the ticker symbol MANE.

Veradermics itself raised around $256 million in the offering, which priced slightly above the projected range. The New Haven, Connecticut-based company plans to use the proceeds from the offering to help secure approval for its hair-loss drug and to support commercialization.

Not receding

Among startups working on hair regrowth, Veradermics has one of the more further-along treatment candidates. It plans to report topline results from one advanced trial in the first half of the year and from a Phase 3 trial in the second half. If all goes well, the company says it could be the first oral, nonhormonal FDA-approved therapy for pattern hair loss.

That said, it’s far from the only venture- or seed-backed company addressing the space. Using Crunchbase data, we put together a list of 10 startups funded in the past couple years with businesses centered around developing hair-loss treatments or making them more widely available.

Los Angeles-based is the largest funding recipient on the list, mostly due to a $120 million October Series B co-led by and . The startup is applying stem cell biology to develop regenerative medicines for hair loss and plans Phase 3 trials for its lead candidate later this year.

, an Irish startup focused on enabling at-home treatment for cancer patients, raised $21 million in an expanded Series A this month. It’s currently pursuing trials for a device aimed at reducing hair loss for chemotherapy patients.

And back in San Francisco, longevity startup has raised more than $46 million for a lineup of self-care products including a scalp serum that promotes thicker, denser hair.

Hair attracts high spending

It helps that hair is one of those aesthetic areas where people are more comfortable spending what it takes to get desired results. From premium shampoos and hair-care products to salon visits, many of us spend hundreds of dollars annually on our hair.

Hair-loss treatment represents a particularly large market. Per Veradermics, the current U.S. commercial opportunity for pattern hair-loss treatments is valued around $9 billion annually, despite low patient engagement and high dissatisfaction with today’s options.

������Ƶ would be willing to spend more too, if there were treatments they liked. Veradermics says its internal research found that 93% of pattern-hair-loss patients would like to address the condition, yet only 9% are satisfied with their current treatment.

Investors have put considerable capital behind backing that big market vision. Between 2021 and 2025, Veradermics raised more than $260 million from a long list of venture backers. Per its IPO prospectus, the current largest stakeholders are (11% post-IPO stake), followed by and , with about 6% each.

For now, it looks like public investors see plenty to support in that vision as well.

Illustration:

All that sets the stage for what the industry insiders we spoke with expect will be another robust year for startup investment, acquisitions and new public-market listings. At the same time, there’s growing concern about capital concentration as venture dollars accumulate in a relatively small cohort of companies, many of them based in the San Francisco Bay Area.

With that, here’s a closer look at six trends we expect to see unfold in 2026.

1. A strong showing from the IPO market

Although the IPO window didn’t stay open the whole year, 2025 turned into an unexpectedly strong one for new offerings. At least 23 U.S.-based companies listed above $1 billion in value in 2025 compared to nine in 2024. Total valuations at IPO price for those billion-dollar listings reached at least $125 billion — more than doubling year over year.

This year, experts we spoke with expect that momentum to continue. In this market, “a profitable company — particularly one that either is an AI play or has a good story of how AI will be a tailwind for their business — are good candidates for a 2026 IPO,” , a corporate partner at who was involved with the , and IPOs, told my colleague Gené Teare in late December.

Among the companies most closely watched for potential offerings this year are fintech unicorns such as and , and buzzy AI companies including , and .

Still, in the first month of this year, some of that enthusiasm has tempered. As contributing reporter Joanna Glasner notes, even when open, the IPO window is always just a quick market turn from slamming shut once again.

So while a new offering from a buzzy company like or OpenAI would help prop the window open, more humdrum IPOs from run-of-the-mill enterprise SaaS startups probably won’t be enough to fuel a new IPO boom.

2. A flurry of M&A activity

Startup acquisitions are also expected to become more common this year, especially if the IPO market does gain steam.

“A healthy IPO market tends to increase M&A activity rather than reduce it,” , technology, media and telecoms deal advisory and strategy leader for , told contributing reporter Mary Ann Azevedo. “Many companies pursue dual-track strategies, simultaneously preparing for an IPO while exploring M&A, which gives them greater flexibility and leverage in negotiations. The threat of a public offering can be used as a bargaining chip to drive up a startup’s sale price.”

Last year, there were around 2,300 M&A deals for venture-backed startups, per Crunchbase data. Industry insiders we spoke with said they expect dealmaking to continue at a steady pace in 2026, in part as larger companies make strategic buys for startup talent, and as startups last funded in the boom five years ago look for exit opportunities.

“On the one hand, big corporates are snapping up seed/Series A startups for talent and tech — we can call that the AI acqui-hire trend. Many teams with fewer than 100 employees have landed $100 million-plus exits,” , technology sector leader, told us. “On the other hand, a cohort of 3- to 6-year-old unicorns that stalled on IPO plans is finally selling.”

3. Strong funding, especially for these sectors

Four investors who spoke with Mary Ann all concurred that they expect another uptick in venture funding this year, with predictions ranging from a 10% to 25% year-over-year increase.

Those investors expect funding in 2026 will continue to concentrate into AI-related companies and adjacent sectors such as robotics and defense tech, at the expense of areas like climate tech, crypto and vertical AI that doesn’t have a strong differentiation or moat.

“Last year demonstrated that it’s difficult to survive as an AI wrapper company,” , managing director at told Mary Ann last month. “Even the vertical AI providers have to be deeply embedded into industry workflows to differentiate themselves from a foundation model doing more of the repetitive work in the market.”

Many of the investors also said they expect capital to concentrate on two ends of the startup spectrum: big growth rounds for established players to maintain a market lead, and larger seed and early-stage deals to promising startups that look poised to disrupt.

“I expect net new dollars to concentrate more in seed and growth deals, primarily because the seed rounds are getting quite large thanks to fundraises by the likes of neolabs, neoclouds, and others. Furthermore, the capital needs of existing high-growth companies will continue to grow due to dependencies on frontier lab and hardware spend,” partner told us.

Already, we’re seeing those predictions about the rise in early-stage megarounds pan out.

4. Capital concentration and heightened AI bubble fears

Last year’s venture funding disproportionately went to a select group of companies. OpenAI, , , and each raised more than $5 billion in 2025. Altogether, those five companies raised $84 billion, or 20% of all venture funding last year — an unprecedented amount for the largest fundings in any given year, an analysis of our data shows.

Last year was also defined by new startup records: the largest private funding round of all time ($40 billion to OpenAI), the largest private valuation ever recorded (SpaceX’s $800 billion valuation), and the largest venture-backed acquisition on record (’s $32 billion purchase by ).

All that’s to say: Investors placed bigger, bolder and riskier bets on a smaller cohort of companies. That capital concentration — along with between companies such as OpenAI, and — have heightened concerns about an AI bubble that could have far-reaching fallout for both private and public tech companies, and the global economy overall.

5. More tech layoffs due to AI

AI has also prompted mass layoffs. Last year, we saw job cuts at companies including , and blamed at least in part on artificial intelligence.

“I’ve reduced it from 9,000 heads to about 5,000, because I need less heads,” Salesforce CEO said last fall, the San Francisco-based company’s decision to slash its customer-service headcount.

All told, around 55,000 U.S. layoffs in 2025 cited AI as a factor, staffing firm .

Unfortunately, we expect to see more tech employers make similar moves this year as companies focus on cutting costs and replacing some portion of their human workers with cheaper AI substitutes.

6. Fintech’s rebound

One of the startup sectors that experienced a particularly healthy bounce last year was fintech, with funding to the sector jumping 27% year over year to $51.8 billion. Investors in the space are bullish on 2026 as well.

Fintech VCs told Mary Ann they expect funding growth in 2026 to continue to concentrate into pre-IPO companies, for M&A to tick up, and to see robust investment into startups that add value to their fintech offerings with AI.

Vice President said he expects stablecoins, agentic payments and AI-native tools to be particularly strong areas for fintech investment this year.

The underlying growth and performance of companies in the age of AI is “astounding and unlike anything we’ve seen before,” even relative to 2020 and 2021, partner and head of U.S. investments at , told us.

“Absent a broader recession, we expect some pullback and return to rationality in the funding market,” he said, “but we believe funding in fintech and at the AI application layer should remain quite strong.”

Related reading:

• Crunchbase Predicts: Why The Race For Talent And Tech Could Accelerate Startup M&A In 2026
• Crunchbase Predicts: Why Top VCs Expect More Venture Dollars, Bigger Rounds And Fewer Winners In 2026
• Crunchbase Predicts: IPOs Picked Up In 2025 And The Outlook For 2026 Is Even More Optimistic
• Crunchbase Predicts: 15 Companies That Could Go Public In 2026 As The IPO Market Gains Momentum
• Fintech Forecast: Momentum Builds With Big Deals, IPO-Ready Companies And More AI
• Global Venture Funding In 2025 Surged As Startup Deals And Valuations Set All-Time Records

Illustration:

After a prolonged slowdown, the IPO market is showing clearer signs of life. As our 2026 IPO outlook forecast details, improving public-market conditions, stabilizing interest rates and renewed investor appetite for growth are setting the stage for a wider reopening of the listing window.

Against that backdrop, a growing cohort of late-stage private companies now looks increasingly prepared to make the leap. Using ����ܲԳ����������’s — which evaluate factors including funding history, growth signals, investor mix and market timing — we’ve curated a list of 15 companies across AI, enterprise software, fintech, space, defense, healthcare and consumer tech that could realistically go public in 2026, should market momentum continue to build.

AI and enterprise tech

: When the window is open, you make your move. That’s something IPO market timers take to heart. But while well-funded private companies are aware of this cyclicality, actually prepping and orchestrating a public debut takes the kind of prep that doesn’t always align with the perfect window. That said, AI infrastructure unicorn Crusoe Energy Systems is certainly scaling in a direction that points to a public exit, a likelihood that Crunchbase predictions affirm with a “probable” rating on a listing for the Denver-based company. Crusoe closed on a in October at a valuation of more than $10 billion. With generative AI platforms currently expanding and investing at an unprecedented rate, the timing is certainly right for the kind of growth metrics IPO investors appreciate.

— Joanna Glasner

: Databricks has been on our list since the end of 2021, when it missed the IPO window. ����ܲԳ����������’s predictive tools label it a “very likely” IPO candidate and that makes sense. The 12-year-old, San Francisco-based company is well placed to go public. As of Q3, it announced it is growing more than 55% year over year, with an over $4.8 billion revenue run rate as of its . Of that revenue, $1 billion was from its AI products. Net retention was above 140% and the company has been free cash flow positive for more than 12 months. Its valuation in recent months has soared. It was valued at $100 billion in September and in December at $134 billion in a round led by and public market investors and .

: Competition among model developers is heating up. AI lab has engaged to begin to explore an IPO, according to the . While 2026 might be too early for Anthropic to go public, another, less-known model developer could make a public-market debut this year. Cohere, co-headquartered in Toronto and San Francisco, focuses on supporting sovereign and secure AI for enterprise and governments. Its customers hail from across North America, APAC and EMEA, and include , and . , its founder and CEO, spoke at a event in London expressing an interest in a public listing in the near future for the 6-year-old company, which was recently valued at $7 billion with . Crunchbase predicts it is a “probable” IPO candidate.

: Design platform Canva is another strong contender to go public in 2026. The 13-year-old Sydney, Australia-based company was valued at $42 billion in its most recent funding — a share sale for employees led by public market investor . As of its August 2025 funding, Canva’s . The company, which Crunchbase bills a “probable” IPO candidate, claimed 240 million monthly users designing with its tools at that time. And adding further validation of Canva’s public-market readiness, competitor went public in July 2024 at a valuation of $16.1 billion. (Although, Figma’s stock is slightly up as of mid-December but remains well below its first-day massive .) As of Q3, Figma, by comparison, has reached .

— Gené Teare

: Before the AI boom, quantum computing was the hot, capital-intensive tech that got VCs and technologists excited. While AI has eclipsed investor interest in quantum, the latter continues to draw big checks from investors, who see enormous potential for the technology to facilitate breakthroughs in areas ranging from drug discovery to cybersecurity and defense. At least one quantum startup is actively mulling an IPO. That’s Quantinuum, which Crunchbase labels a “probable” IPO candidate. That prediction squares with other reporting, including a March 2025 that cited a source with direct knowledge of the matter saying parent company is aiming for a 2026 or 2027 listing. The Broomfield, Colorado-based startup, formed in 2021 via the merger of Honeywell Quantum Solutions and Cambridge Quantum, has raised $925 million from venture investors to date, including a $600 million -backed Series B in August at a $10 billion pre-money valuation.

— Marlize van Romburgh��

Space and defense tech

: Space tech has been a strong area for venture investment of late, and with the prospect of a IPO in 2026, it’s an increasingly buzzy sector for public markets as well. Among recently funded startups in the sector, Torrance, California-based K2 Space is a standout on several fronts. For one, it’s a fundraising machine, securing more than $400 million across three rounds since 2024. That culminated in a $250 Series C led by last month at a $3 billion valuation. The company, founded in 2022, develops large, high-power satellite platforms and has secured $500 million in signed contracts across commercial and U.S. government customers. Crunchbase predicts it’s “probable” that the startup will IPO.

— Joanna Glasner

: This one is kind of a gimme. Late last year, -led SpaceX was reported to be eyeing an IPO that would be the largest VC-backed listing of all time —��by about 10x — at a target valuation of $1.5 trillion. The company is already one of the most valuable private businesses in the world. Its reported IPO ambitions make a lot of sense, given the capital-intensive nature of space exploration, aforementioned investor appetite for space tech, and its revenue: an $15 billion in 2025, much of it from its fast-growing StarLink satellite internet business. Founded in 2002, SpaceX has raised nearly $12 billion in its lifetime, according to Crunchbase, which pegs a “very likely” IPO probability on the Hawthorne, California-based company. Investors include , , , and , among others.

: Venture investment into defense tech hit an all-time high last year, and no company received more money than Anduril. Of the more than $7.7 billion that flowed to defense-related startups in 2025, roughly a third went to Anduril in its $2.5 billion Series G at a $30.5 billion valuation. The startup, founded in 2017 by founder , is well-connected in the administration and has been the beneficiary of the U.S. military’s efforts to modernize its defense and war technologies, including a contract with the to supply VR/AR headsets to the . The company has raised $6.3 billion to date from investors including , the , and . The Costa Mesa, California-based company is deemed a “very likely” IPO candidate.

— Marlize van Romburgh��

Health and consumer tech

: Innovaccer, provider of AI-enabled data and intelligence platform for healthcare providers, hits a lot of the checklist items we see in pre-IPO startups. It’s been around for a while (founded in 2014), raised considerable capital, secured a big early this year, and has high-profile strategic backers including . With 1,200 employees across five global offices, San Francisco-based Innovaccer is also a fairly large operation at this point, and certainly looks scaled enough for a public market debut, all factors that contribute to its “probable” IPO prediction from Crunchbase.

— Joanna Glasner

: Hardware-maker Nothing is taking a more unconventional path to a potential IPO. The London-based startup is working to be “IPO-ready” in three years, CEO and co-founder last month. In the meantime the company is giving fans of its smartphones and other gadgets a chance to invest at a via platforms like and . “The timing will depend on market conditions and what makes sense for the business at that point in time,” Pei told the publication. Crunchbase puts a “probable” prediction on an IPO for Nothing, which has reportedly posted fast growth, particularly in markets like India, the U.K. and Japan. The company has said it hit more than $1 billion in lifetime sales last year and has sold more than 7 million devices. Along with its crowdfunding campaigns, Nothing has raised more than $446 million from venture investors including and , .

— Marlize van Romburgh��

Cybersecurity

: Cybersecurity has long been one of the most robust and predictable areas for venture investment. One of the faster-growing startups in the sphere is Huntress, which offers cybersecurity products for small and medium-sized businesses that don’t have the resources for a fully staffed 24/7 security team. Crunchbase pins a “probable” IPO prediction on the company, and CEO has also indicated a Huntress listing is a strong possibility in coming years. on the floor of the in late October, he said that the Columbia, Maryland-based company has posted 60% year-over-year growth and is on track to hit $185 million to $190 million in revenue this year. Demand for its offerings has only increased as generative AI has aided scammers and hackers to craft more sophisticated phishing and other cyber attacks, he said. The company has raised nearly $310 million from investors to date, , including a June 2024 Series D led by , and .

: Crunchbase says it’s “probable” that crypto wallet startup Ledger will IPO. That’s down from a “very likely” prediction last year, but other signs continue to point to the likelihood of an offering for the Paris-based startup, which provides a hardware wallet to secure crypto private keys. That means Ledger, founded in 2014, is well-positioned at the intersection of two currently hot industries: cybersecurity and blockchain. It has raised some $577 million from venture investors including and , per . CEO in mid-2025 that Ledger is actively thinking about a U.S. stock market debut, likely within the next three years. He reiterated that an IPO is actively under consideration in an interview with last year, adding that the company’s revenue had hit triple-digit millions in 2025 amid soaring demand for secure crypto storage devices spurred by rising hacks. Ledger secures about $100 billion worth of bitcoin for its customers, he said. Gauthier has previously said an estimated 20% of the world’s crypto assets are protected by his company’s wallets.

— Marlize van Romburgh��

Fintech

: With a “very likely” IPO prediction from Crunchbase, 2026 could be the year that Plaid, a fintech company that connects bank accounts to financial applications, finally decides to go public. In April, the company sold about $575 million worth of common stock at a $6.1 billion post-money valuation. At the time, Plaid told that it would not go public in 2025, but confirmed that an IPO was a milestone the company continued “to track towards.” The startup has not revealed specifics around revenue, noting only that 2025 was a record-setting year in which revenue grew over 25%. Plaid has raised about $1.3 billion from investors such as , , , and .

: Revolut, a digital bank based in London, is a “very likely” candidate for an initial public offering, per Crunchbase predictions. In November, it completed a secondary share sale, boosting its valuation to $75 billion. That was a 67% jump compared to the $45 billion that Revolut was valued at in August 2024 when it announced to provide liquidity to employees. Investors include , , , , ’s venture capital arm , and . Revolut has seen impressive growth since its 2015 inception. In 2025, it achieved $1 billion in annualized revenue and surpassed a 65 million customer base across 100 countries. The company likely won’t IPO until it secures its full U.K. banking license, for which it is still .

: Monzo, another U.K.-based banking platform, is also said to be eyeing an IPO in 2026 and Crunchbase pegs a “very likely” prediction for an offering too. Timing of the IPO is so sensitive for the company now that its CEO was pushed out of the head role due to his reported attempts at a listing earlier than some directors apparently wanted. He also reportedly indicated he might leave soon after. In June, Monzo revenue of more than $1.35 billion and “a sharp rise” in annual profit. It also increased its customer base by 25% to 12.2 million in its last fiscal year. The company was valued at $5.9 billion in October 2024 after selling shares to a group of existing investors. Backers include , , , and .

— Mary Ann Azevedo

An IPO prediction is never a promise. But as market conditions shift and investor appetite broadens, these companies are flashing more of the signals that tend to precede a public offering.

Methodology

����ܲԳ����������’s utilize Crunchbase data — including funding and valuation, and milestones such as financial growth, key leadership hires, market share expansion and headcount growth — to forecast the likelihood of a private company launching an IPO, providing a probability score and its supporting evidence. Read more about ����ܲԳ����������’s Predictions & Insights and its methodology for IPO predictions .

Related reading:

• Crunchbase Predicts: IPOs Picked Up In 2025 And The Outlook For 2026 Is Even More Optimistic��
• Crunchbase Predicts: Why Top VCs Expect More Venture Dollars, Bigger Rounds And Fewer Winners In 2026
• Crunchbase Predicts: Why The Race For Talent And Tech Could Accelerate Startup M&A In 2026
• 6 Charts That Show The Big AI Funding Trends Of 2025
• The IPO Market Is Opening Up. These 14 Companies Could Be Next.

Illustration:

Last year was a stellar one for venture funding, in large part thanks to AI. Preliminary Crunchbase data shows global venture investment in 2025 was on pace to be the third-highest on record, after the peak years of 2021 and 2022.

A total of $205 billion was raised through mid-2025, up 32% from H1 2024, and marking the strongest half-year for venture capital since the first half of 2022. In the third quarter, global funding jumped 38% year over year, with funding up at all stages, albeit concentrated at the top into the largest AI companies. (Final year-end 2025 numbers were not yet available at the time of this writing.)

Both of the two largest venture fundings on record were also raised last year, and both were AI-related. They were , with $14.3 billion in Q2, and with $40 billion in Q1.

With that momentum behind the industry, what’s ahead for 2026? Will it be more of the same, or will investors finally pull back on AI?

To get a sense of the startup funding outlook for the year ahead, Crunchbase News reached out to four investors via email: , managing director at ; partner at ; , managing director and partner at Menlo Ventures; and , partner at . The following interviews have been edited for brevity and clarity.

Crunchbase News: In 2026, do you expect total dollars deployed to be up, flat or down vs. 2025, and by roughly what percentage?

Mathew: We expect global venture capital deployment to increase from the low $400 billion to the high $400 billion mark, which implies a 10% increase in dollars deployed.

Tully: The data indicates about $340 billion was invested in 2024, and we are on track for north of $400 billion in 2025, which was a 17.6% increase, so I’d ballpark this goes up even further, perhaps closer to 25%. You’re seeing large funds raise progressively larger funds, giving them more capital and dry powder to deploy. Additionally, the round sizes themselves are getting larger at all stages. Putting those two ideas together would lead to this prediction.

Murphy: Up, mainly due to the fast growth and maturation of AI native companies that will raise large expansion rounds. Early-stage will be robust, likely the same as this year, but we could see some slowdown as the bloom comes off the rose in competitive overfunded categories.

Ranum: Up vs. 2025, by roughly 10% to 15%, driven by reopening growth rounds and fewer, but larger checks from scaled funds.

In 2026, do you expect more rounds to be priced up, priced flat or priced down? What does “normal” look like?

Mathew: This will likely be a tale of two cities. AI funding will be about half the total funding and will continue to accelerate with likely large raises, especially in growth and later stage.

Murphy: For the AI native companies, rounds will continue up, but there will be a bifurcation as the winners emerge and the number 3 to 8 players in categories really struggle to raise and likely seek M&A. Winning SaaS companies from the ZIRP era will finally start to exceed previous valuations and raise flat to slightly up rounds. Those that didn’t rebound substantially will seek liquidity, with PE increasingly becoming the option.

Ranum: “Normal,” meaning hyper-growth AI companies clearing at premium valuations, while the median remains flat with tighter terms and less available capital.

Where do you expect net new dollars to concentrate in 2026: seed, Series A or growth? Why?

Mathew: We believe that seed and Series A will aggregate the highest number of deals, but the net new dollars will continue to concentrate on growth, especially in the megarounds of AI infra and foundational models.

Tully: I expect net new dollars to concentrate more in seed and growth deals, primarily because the seed rounds are getting quite large thanks to fundraises by the likes of neolabs, neoclouds, and others. Furthermore, the capital needs of existing high-growth companies will continue to grow due to dependencies on frontier lab and hardware spend.

Murphy: Bigger rounds in growth. The early AI winners will continue to separate, and the enormous capital in the private growth market continues to pour in. Seed likely sees an uptick, but dollar-wise, it’s trumped by growth.

Ranum: Series A, as seed remains crowded and growth selectively reopens for companies with real revenue and AI leverage. It’s a bit of a barbell where concentrated bets continue to take place on the growth end.

Which three sectors will gain share of venture dollars in 2026, and what’s the concrete catalyst for each? Which will lose share?

Mathew: Simply put, AI, AI and AI are the three sectors that are positioned to gain. In all seriousness, foundation models, agentic infrastructure and vertical AI are all expected to expand in 2026. That said, it will likely be very difficult for a SaaS company without native AI/agentic capabilities to find VC dollars at any stage.

Tully:�� I expect an increase in:

• AI infrastructure: As the old saying goes, when there’s a gold rush, invest in picks and shovels …
• Defense tech: The current administration’s focus on defense procurement will create increased near-term contract wins, particularly for startups.
• Robotics: The convergence of decreasing hardware costs for sensors, batteries, etc. … combined with increased AI capabilities will make 2026 an inflection point where physical AI becomes not only more viable, but rather likely.

I expect a decrease in:

• Climate tech: They will still get funding, but I predict this sector will lose share because climate tech requires long-term patient capital along with long development cycles.
• Crypto: decreasing crypto prices in the back half of 2025 will continue to sour investors and force them into a wait-and-see mentality in 2026 and vertical SaaS.
• Vertical SaaS without AI differentiation or a technical moat: This will be hard to justify for investors demanding strong fundamentals and dramatically higher multiples relative to the past for their companies.

Ranum: AI infrastructure (cost/performance breakthroughs), defense (geopolitical), healthcare AI (provider margin pressure) will gain share, while consumer and horizontal SaaS will lose.

In 2026, does capital shift from “AI wrappers” to infrastructure, data and verticalized workflows — or do apps still attract venture dollars?

Mathew: We believe that shift has already happened. Last year demonstrated that it’s difficult to survive as an AI wrapper company. Even the vertical AI providers have to be deeply embedded into industry workflows to differentiate themselves from a foundation model doing more of the repetitive work in the market.

Murphy: The market is more balanced in 2026 as the number of companies deploying AI apps scales up significantly, and operational challenges of scale require more tooling and more great infra products to help replatform. Apps remain strong, but more 50-50 in 2026.

Ranum: There are enough dollars chasing exposure to continue to support apps on generic AI wrappers and to infrastructure, data and deeply verticalized workflows. We will also see a few app-layer winners breaking out in accounting, ITSM and ERP.

What’s your 2026 base case for liquidity: More IPOs, more M&A, secondaries or still mostly private?

Mathew: We would expect more IPOs and more M&A as drivers for liquidity in 2026.

Tully: According to , for companies that went public in 2025, the median time to IPO for those valued at $500 million or more has reached over 11 years, the longest in a decade. The bar for IPOs has risen in recent years, with the bar now set at close to $500 million-plus in revenue, at least 30% growth if not more, as well as positive rule of 40. There are only a handful of companies positioned to go public based on these factors. Based on that, I do believe we will see continued growth in M&A and secondaries in 2026 as shareholders seek outlets for liquidity.

Murphy: IPOs slightly up, continued upward trend in M&A as legacy companies seek AI assets and as private-market players consolidate to gain scale. Secondary continues to rise as VCs get more intentional about liquidity, and even become more active in buying and selling to each other.

Ranum: I’m excited to see more M&A and secondaries, as well as an uptick in IPOs at the high-end/scaled companies.

How do you expect 2026 venture fundraising to impact deployment? Are too many firms “underfunded” to keep pace?

Mathew: Again, a tale of two cities. Scale and domain expertise will matter. It will be increasingly harder to be a generalist tech investor, especially in venture markets.

Murphy: Given the size of AI rounds, multistage firms have an advantage. Smaller funds are forced to go earlier or write small participation checks. It could be a great time to be an early-stage firm if you can pick well and get in before the big uptick rounds, which are increasingly happening at the A stage.

Ranum: I don’t expect there to be less capital available to funds. I think total fundraising in 2026 will be comparable to, or stronger than, 2025. The totals for 2024 were notably low relative to prior years, and LPs are actively seeking exposure to the AI wave.

Give me your 2026 predictions in one sentence.

Mathew: We are accelerating to a world where models and agents can complete a full day’s worth of work with minimal or no human intervention, and we may already be there in some domains.

Murphy: AI hits a further inflection in the enterprise as security issues and technology choices are largely addressed, and enterprises substantially increase their application development velocity with tools like Claude Code.

Ranum: 2026 is a fundamentals-first year where capital rewards revenue growth, efficiency and real AI advantage, and punishes anything that is AI veneer on old ideas.

Related Crunchbase query:

Related reading:

• Crunchbase Predicts: Why The Race For Talent And Tech Could Accelerate Startup M&A In 2026
• Crunchbase Predicts: IPOs Picked Up In 2025 And The Outlook For 2026 Is Even More Optimistic��
• 6 Charts That Show The Big AI Funding Trends Of 2025
• What We Learned In 2025 From 6 Active AI Investors Backing Startups Across The Stack

Illustration: