What are the fundraising trends in the FinTech market?
In our updated market reports, you will find everything you need
SUMMARY
This report analyzes publicly disclosed equity rounds raised by pure-play FinTech companies between January 2026 and early July 2026. We only kept rounds of $300K or more, excluded undisclosed-size rounds and non-equity financings, and ended with 39 disclosed deals across 39 unique companies.
The FinTech market has raised $4.195B in disclosed equity capital so far in 2026. That is a large number for a partial-year dataset, but the shape of the market is highly selective rather than broadly easy.
Capital is concentrated at the top. The largest deal accounts for 23.84% of all disclosed capital, the top three account for 38.98%, and the top ten account for 70.21%, which means the visible funding environment is being set by a small group of scale winners.
The typical FinTech round is much smaller than the headline total suggests. The median round is $60M while the average round is $107.56M, so larger rounds are pulling the average well above what a middle-of-the-pack company actually raises.
Capital Markets Software is the leading category by dollars, with $1.284B, or 30.61% of all capital. That lead is partly driven by Kalshi's $1B round, but the category also includes Rogo, Cryptio, bunch, F2, and Nebex, which makes the signal broader than one company.
Digital Payments is the most active category by deal count. It produced 9 of the 39 disclosed rounds, but only 15.62% of capital, which suggests strong activity breadth but less dollar intensity than Capital Markets Software, Digital Banking, or WealthTech.
Digital Banking remains one of the most important FinTech categories. It captured 22.14% of disclosed capital across 6 deals, helped by Mal, Varo Bank, Ualá, KAST, Slash, and Mercury.
North America dominates the FinTech market by both deal count and capital. It produced 25 of 39 deals and $3.256B, equal to 77.62% of disclosed funding, which confirms that the largest private FinTech checks are still heavily concentrated in North America.
The 2026 FinTech market is not only late-stage. Seed and Series A rounds together represent 16 of 39 deals, but they account for only 16.13% of capital, while Series B and later plus Growth Equity capture 83.29% of dollars.
The strongest interpretation is selective reopening. Investors are funding new FinTech companies again, but the biggest checks are going to companies with infrastructure control, regulated workflow ownership, stablecoin utility, capital-markets relevance, or clear category leadership.
Is more or less capital going into the FinTech market?
More capital is going into the FinTech market so far in 2026 than the deal count alone would imply, but the increase is selective. Between January 2026 and early July 2026, the dataset shows $4.195B raised across 39 disclosed equity deals.
That is already a large funding pool for a partial-year window. The practical takeaway is not that every FinTech company can raise easily, but that investors are again willing to write large checks when the company controls a valuable financial workflow.
The comparison to full-year 2025 is useful because 2025 produced $7.996B across 51 deals. The 2026 dataset has already reached a little over half of that capital level while covering only the first part of the year, which suggests the market is still open for high-conviction companies.
The honest interpretation is that the FinTech market has reopened at the top and middle, not across every corner. Personal Finance Tools have no qualifying disclosed deals, Online Lending has only $25.9M, and B2B FinTech Infrastructure has many deals but a lower dollar share than in 2025.
So the answer is more nuanced than simply “more capital.” More money is flowing into the FinTech market where there is proof of scale, regulatory relevance, or embedded infrastructure value. Less money is flowing into generic consumer finance or credit exposure without a stronger software or infrastructure angle.
Is FinTech funding driven by more deals or larger rounds?
FinTech funding in 2026 is being driven by both more visible activity and a handful of very large rounds, but larger rounds explain most of the dollars. The market has 39 deals, yet the top 10 alone account for 70.21% of disclosed capital.
The median round is $60M, while the average round is $107.56M. That gap matters because it shows that the typical FinTech round is meaningful but not nearly as large as the headline funding total suggests.
Megarounds are the clearest market signal. Rounds above $50M represent 20 of the 39 deals, or 51.28% of the dataset, and rounds above $100M represent 11 deals, or 28.21%. In other words, the visible FinTech market is still heavily shaped by companies that are already large enough to raise institutional-scale capital.
At the same time, the market is not only a mega-round story. There are 10 deals in the $5M to $20M range and 9 deals in the $20M to $50M range, which means new and mid-stage companies are present. They just do not control the majority of dollars.
The practical rule is to read FinTech funding through two lenses at once: deal count tells you where experimentation is happening, while top-10 capital share tells you where investors are concentrating conviction.
Is FinTech capital moving toward later-stage or earlier-stage companies?
FinTech capital is moving mostly toward later-stage companies by dollars, even though early-stage companies are visible by deal count. Seed plus Series A rounds represent 16 of the 39 deals, but they capture only 16.13% of disclosed capital.
The late-stage side dominates the money. Series B, Series C, Series D+, and Growth Equity together account for $3.494B, or 83.29% of total capital. That means most dollars are still going to companies with more proof than a first product launch.
Series D+ is the strongest stage by capital, with $2.019B, or 48.13% of disclosed funding. That category includes the biggest market-shaping companies, so it explains why the funding environment feels mature even while many new companies are still entering.
By count, Series A is the largest stage with 9 deals, followed by Series B with 8 and Seed with 7. This means the FinTech market has a real new-company and expansion-stage layer, but that layer is much smaller in capital terms than the late-stage pool.
The result is a barbell market. There is renewed formation at the bottom, strong conviction at the top, and a funding environment that still asks companies to show traction before they can access the largest checks.
Is the FinTech market maturing or still experimental?
The FinTech market is maturing, but it still contains pockets of experimentation. The strongest evidence of maturity is that follow-on rounds represent 82.05% of deals and 91.40% of capital.
That follow-on dominance means most disclosed dollars are backing companies that have already passed at least one prior financing test. Investors are not primarily funding ideas; they are funding companies that already have products, customers, regulatory positioning, or transaction volume.
The experimental layer is visible in the 7 first financings. Those first financings include areas such as AI-native Islamic banking, AI agents for lending, compliance automation, payments infrastructure, capital-markets infrastructure, and wealth technology. This is not generic FinTech formation; it is formation around specific new themes.
The strongest maturity signal is category-level specialization. The market is no longer just neobanks and payment apps. The disclosed rounds span stablecoin payments, issuer processing, private-credit AI, financial-crime operations, investment banking workflows, advisor infrastructure, and prediction-market infrastructure.
So the FinTech market is mature in capital allocation but experimental in product direction. Investors are using large checks for proven platforms and smaller checks to test where the next workflow shift might happen.
Are new startups still entering the FinTech market?
Yes, new startups are still entering the FinTech market, but they are not receiving most of the capital. First financings account for 7 of 39 deals, or 17.95% of the disclosed dataset, and 8.60% of disclosed capital.
That is a meaningful change from the comparable 2025 period, when the raw data shows no observed first financings. The practical takeaway is that the FinTech market has reopened enough for new company formation to appear again in public funding data.
The new entrants are concentrated around themes that feel current rather than generic. Mal raised a large seed round for an AI-native Islamic digital bank, Sphinx raised for AI-powered compliance agents, Veritus raised for voice-first lending agents, and F2 raised for AI in private credit.
But Mal's $230M seed round makes the early-stage dollar picture look stronger than the ordinary seed environment probably is. Without that one unusual financing, first financings would still matter by count, but their capital share would look much smaller.
The honest interpretation is that new FinTech startup formation is back, but only when the company attaches itself to a clear structural shift: AI workflows, stablecoin rails, regulated infrastructure, Islamic banking, capital markets, or compliance automation.
Are more investors entering the FinTech market?
The FinTech market has a broad investor base in 2026, but repeat conviction is concentrated in a short list of firms. The dataset contains 108 unique disclosed investors and 49 unique tier-1 investors.
That breadth matters because it shows that FinTech is not being funded by one narrow specialist community. The investor mix includes venture firms, growth funds, strategic financial institutions, corporate venture arms, family offices, and regional capital.
But repeat activity is much narrower. Andreessen Horowitz appears in 4 deals, Sequoia Capital in 3, and Sapphire Ventures, Bessemer Venture Partners, Lightspeed, Khosla Ventures, and Coatue each appear in 2. That means the difference between investor breadth and recurring conviction is important.
The practical reading is that many investors are willing to participate in FinTech rounds, but only a few are repeatedly underwriting the category. The repeat names are especially visible in capital-markets software, AI workflows, digital banking, and infrastructure-style FinTech.
For evaluating future rounds, the investor signal should be weighted by recurrence, not just logo quality. A famous investor joining one round validates that company; a famous investor backing multiple FinTech themes validates the direction of the market more strongly.
Are top investors getting more or less active in FinTech?
Top investors are getting more visible in the FinTech market, but their activity is selective rather than broad. Andreessen Horowitz, Sequoia Capital, Sapphire Ventures, Bessemer Venture Partners, Lightspeed, Khosla Ventures, and Coatue are the only investors with more than one disclosed deal in the dataset.
Andreessen Horowitz is the strongest repeat signal, with 4 disclosed deals. Sequoia follows with 3. That matters because both are generalist tier-1 investors, which suggests top funds are re-engaging with FinTech through specific high-conviction themes.
The repeated participation is not spread evenly across consumer finance. It clusters around capital-markets software, banking infrastructure, AI-native workflows, regulated financial operations, and infrastructure-like payments. That is where top investors appear to see the best risk-adjusted upside.
Still, the market is not dominated by one specialist fund. Even the most active investors show up only a handful of times, and the broader investor base is long-tailed. This means FinTech has regained attention, but not in the form of an indiscriminate funding rush.
The practical takeaway is simple: top-investor activity is a strong signal when it repeats across related workflows. A single brand-name investor in one deal is useful; several brand-name investors converging on the same category is much more informative.
Which FinTech subcategories are gaining momentum?
Capital Markets Software is the clearest FinTech subcategory gaining momentum in 2026. It captured $1.284B, or 30.61% of all disclosed capital, from only 6 deals.
Kalshi is the biggest reason for that dollar lead, with a $1B round. But the category also includes Rogo, Cryptio, bunch, F2, and Nebex, so the signal is not only prediction markets. It spans AI for finance, digital-asset accounting, private-markets operations, private credit, and market infrastructure.
RegTech is also gaining strategic importance. It has only 3 deals, but those deals raised $282.1M, with a $75M median. Bretton AI, Sphinx, and Quantifind show that compliance, financial crime, and risk intelligence are being funded as core infrastructure rather than back-office software.
WealthTech Platforms remain highly capital-intensive. The category raised $729M across 5 deals, with Vestwell, Jump, Midas, Farther, and Arca showing demand for advisor, retirement, investment, and wealth infrastructure.
Digital Payments is gaining on breadth. It leads deal count with 9 rounds, and the best-funded examples increasingly involve stablecoins, cross-border settlement, issuer processing, merchant payments, and instant payment risk infrastructure.
Which FinTech subcategories are losing momentum?
Personal Finance Tools are the clearest subcategory losing momentum in the 2026 FinTech dataset. They produced zero qualifying disclosed deals and zero disclosed capital.
That absence matters because the broader FinTech market is not quiet. When a market can produce 39 qualifying deals and $4.195B, but standalone personal finance produces none, the practical interpretation is that investors are not prioritizing generic budgeting, financial wellness, or consumer money-management apps right now.
Online Lending is also weak in capital terms. It produced only 2 deals and $25.9M, equal to 0.62% of total capital. Veritus and Ratio show that lending still attracts funding when attached to AI or workflow automation, but pure credit exposure is not the center of the market.
B2B FinTech Infrastructure looks weaker by dollars than it did in 2025, even though it still has 8 deals. Its capital share is 6.91%, far below the 35.0% full-year 2025 share in the raw data. That suggests the category is fragmenting into smaller specialized workflow layers rather than disappearing.
The broader lesson is that investors are not abandoning FinTech infrastructure. They are moving away from broad infrastructure labels and toward more specific proof points, such as capital markets, RegTech, stablecoin payments, and AI-native financial operations.
Which regions are gaining momentum in FinTech funding?
North America is the region gaining the most momentum in FinTech funding by capital intensity. It produced 25 of 39 disclosed deals and $3.256B, equal to 77.62% of total disclosed capital.
That share is not just a function of deal count. North America has 64.10% of deals but 77.62% of dollars, so the region is producing both more rounds and larger rounds. Its median deal size is $75M, and its average deal size is $130.24M.
The Middle East is also gaining strategic relevance despite a small deal count. It produced only 2 deals, but $255M in capital, helped by Mal's large seed round and Stitch's Series A. The region's median deal size is $127.5M, the highest among regions with qualifying deals.
Latin America remains selective but credible. It produced 3 deals and $242M, led by Ualá, with additional activity from Alfred and Trace Finance. The region is not broad in this dataset, but the companies that do raise tend to have scale, cross-border utility, or infrastructure relevance.
The practical takeaway is that FinTech remains global by company formation, but the biggest capital momentum is concentrated in North America, with the Middle East and Latin America showing targeted strength.
Which regions are losing momentum in FinTech funding?
Africa is the clearest region losing visible momentum in the 2026 FinTech funding dataset. It produced no qualifying disclosed deal and no disclosed capital through early July 2026.
That does not mean African FinTech has structurally disappeared. It means that, under this public-source, disclosed-equity, pure-play filter, the early-2026 signal is absent. In a funding tracker, absence is not proof of no activity, but it is still a meaningful public-market signal.
Europe remains active but is losing share of the largest rounds. It produced 5 deals, or 12.82% of deal count, but only 7.41% of capital. The region's median deal size is $45M, below North America's $75M and far below the Middle East's $127.5M.
Asia-Pacific also looks more active by count than by capital. It produced 4 deals but only 3.13% of disclosed dollars, with a median round of $21.8M. That suggests the region is present, but not yet driving the largest checks in the 2026 dataset.
The honest interpretation is that regional weakness is mostly about check size, not company absence. Europe and Asia-Pacific still produce qualifying companies, but North America is where the largest disclosed FinTech rounds are concentrating.
Is FinTech becoming more global or regionally concentrated?
The FinTech market is global in deal formation but regionally concentrated in capital. Qualifying deals appear in North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, and the Middle East, but North America captures 77.62% of all disclosed dollars.
That gap between map breadth and capital concentration is the key point. North America has 64.10% of deals, already a majority, but its dollar share is even higher. This means the largest checks are disproportionately flowing into North American companies.
The rest of the market is uneven. Europe has 5 deals and $310.7M, Asia-Pacific has 4 deals and $131.1M, Latin America has 3 deals and $242M, and the Middle East has 2 deals and $255M. Africa has no qualifying public deal in the 2026 window.
The practical interpretation is that FinTech opportunity is global, but FinTech capital formation is not evenly global. Investors will fund strong companies across regions, yet the default center of gravity for large private rounds remains North America.
For founders and market readers, this means regional deal count should not be confused with regional capital depth. A region can look active on company count while still lacking access to the largest growth-stage checks.
Is FinTech capital moving toward proven winners or new opportunities?
FinTech capital is moving mostly toward proven winners, even though new opportunities are visible again. Follow-on rounds represent 32 of 39 disclosed deals and 91.40% of disclosed capital.
That means investors are still using large checks to back companies that have already raised before. Mercury, Vestwell, Rain, Varo Bank, Ualá, Farther, Quantifind, Kalshi, and Rogo all fit the pattern of companies raising after prior market validation.
New opportunities matter more by count than by dollars. First financings represent 17.95% of deals but only 8.60% of capital. This tells us that investors are testing new themes, but they are doing so with more caution than they show toward proven platforms.
The exception is Mal, whose $230M seed round makes first-financing capital look unusually large. That round is not a normal seed-market benchmark; it is an outlier tied to a specific banking and regional thesis.
The best way to read the 2026 FinTech market is that it is exploratory at the edge and conviction-led at the core. New ideas can get funded, but the largest checks are reserved for companies that already show strategic importance.
Is the FinTech market becoming winner-takes-most?
The FinTech market is not winner-takes-all, but it is clearly winner-takes-most at the capital level. The largest deal alone accounts for 23.84% of total disclosed funding, and the top 10 account for 70.21%.
That concentration is meaningful because the dataset contains 39 companies. Many firms are raising, but the bulk of capital is not distributed evenly across them. The bottom half of deals captures only 10.01% of capital.
Kalshi is the clearest example because its $1B round alone reshapes the category ranking. Without it, Capital Markets Software would still be relevant, but it would not dominate the market in the same way.
Still, the market is not dependent on only one company. The top three deals account for 38.98%, which is high but not totalizing. The top five account for 49.23%, which means several companies beyond the largest round matter.
The practical rule is to avoid reading the FinTech market through total dollars alone. Always check the top-one, top-three, and top-ten shares before deciding whether a funding increase reflects broad strength or a few exceptional winners.
Is the next wave of FinTech winners becoming visible?
The next wave of FinTech winners is becoming visible, especially in AI-native workflows, stablecoin-enabled finance, capital-markets software, RegTech, and WealthTech infrastructure. These themes appear repeatedly across the 2026 deal list rather than in one isolated round.
In AI-native workflows, the dataset includes Rogo, Jump, Basis, Bretton AI, Quantifind, Sphinx, Veritus, Uptiq, and F2. The pattern is clear: investors are backing AI when it is attached to a financial workflow with high labor cost, regulatory complexity, or data intensity.
In stablecoin-enabled finance, Rain, VelaFi, KAST, Fun, Mesh, Alfred, and Trace Finance show that stablecoins are increasingly being financed as payment, banking, and settlement infrastructure rather than as speculative crypto exposure.
Capital-markets software is another visible winner pool. Kalshi, Rogo, Cryptio, bunch, F2, and Nebex show that investors are willing to fund market infrastructure, institutional finance workflows, and new financial venues.
The strongest filter for identifying future winners is workflow ownership. Companies that sit directly inside payments, compliance, banking, wealth operations, settlement, capital markets, or business finance workflows look more fundable than companies that only offer a surface-level consumer finance experience.
Is the FinTech funding landscape fragmenting or consolidating?
The FinTech funding landscape is fragmenting by theme but consolidating by capital. The 39 qualifying deals span 7 active categories, and no single category owns a majority of deal count.
Digital Payments has 9 deals, B2B FinTech Infrastructure has 8, Capital Markets Software and Digital Banking have 6 each, WealthTech has 5, RegTech has 3, and Online Lending has 2. That is a diversified activity base.
Capital tells a different story. Capital Markets Software captures 30.61% of dollars from 15.38% of deals, Series D+ captures 48.13% of dollars from 15.38% of deals, and North America captures 77.62% of capital from 64.10% of deals.
So the market is fragmenting into specialized FinTech themes while consolidating around a smaller number of companies, stages, and regions that can absorb very large checks. That is the central contradiction of the 2026 market.
For diligence, this means category breadth is not enough. The stronger signal is whether a company sits in one of the capital-concentrating pockets: capital markets, digital banking, WealthTech, RegTech, stablecoin payments, or AI-enabled finance workflows.
Where is investor attention shifting in FinTech?
Investor attention in the FinTech market is shifting toward capital-markets software, AI-native financial workflows, stablecoin-enabled payments, RegTech, and scaled WealthTech infrastructure. These themes explain much more of the 2026 dataset than generic consumer finance does.
The category rotation is the strongest evidence. Capital Markets Software reached 30.61% of capital, Digital Banking reached 22.14%, WealthTech reached 17.38%, and Digital Payments remained the most active category by deal count.
AI is not being funded as a vague feature. It is being funded when it automates financial-crime operations, advisor workflows, accounting, private credit, lending agents, investment banking tasks, or financial-services infrastructure.
Stablecoins are also being reframed. Rain, VelaFi, KAST, Fun, Mesh, Alfred, and Trace Finance show that investors are treating stablecoins as payment and banking infrastructure, especially where cross-border flows, settlement, and enterprise payments are involved.
The practical interpretation is that investor attention has moved from finance apps to finance operating systems. The best-funded companies do not just acquire users; they control the rails, workflows, compliance layers, or decision systems that financial activity depends on.
INSIGHTS
The insights below come from reviewing every disclosed equity round in the pure-play FinTech market between January 2026 and early July 2026.
- The 2026 FinTech market is best described as selective reopening. Capital is available, but the bottom half of deals captured only 10.01% of funding, so the recovery is not being shared evenly across the market.
- Capital concentration is the most important reading lens. The top 10 deals captured 70.21% of disclosed capital, which means the market can look very strong even when most companies are raising much smaller rounds.
- Kalshi changes the category map, but it does not fully explain the capital-markets shift. Capital Markets Software also includes Rogo, Cryptio, bunch, F2, and Nebex, so the category has multiple proof points across market infrastructure, AI finance, digital assets, and private markets.
- Digital Payments is broad but less capital-intensive than its deal count suggests. It leads deal count with 9 rounds, yet captures only 15.62% of dollars, which suggests breadth without the same late-stage concentration seen in Capital Markets Software or Digital Banking.
- B2B FinTech Infrastructure looks less dominant in dollars but not less important. Its 8 deals show continued activity, while its 6.91% capital share suggests investors are funding narrower infrastructure layers rather than broad platform stories.
- Personal Finance Tools are conspicuously absent. In a dataset with 39 qualifying deals and $4.195B of capital, zero personal-finance rounds imply weak investor appetite for standalone consumer budgeting, money-management, or financial-wellness apps.
- Online Lending is selective, not dead. Its two deals and $25.9M of capital show that investors will still fund lending-related companies, but only when the pitch is attached to AI, workflow automation, or a differentiated infrastructure angle.
- RegTech has low deal count but high strategic weight. Three deals produced $282.1M, which suggests financial crime, risk intelligence, and compliance automation are being treated as critical financial infrastructure.
- AI is investable in FinTech when it is tied to a regulated or expensive workflow. Rogo, Jump, Basis, Bretton AI, Quantifind, Sphinx, Veritus, Uptiq, and F2 show that investors favor AI inside compliance, advisory, accounting, lending, banking, and capital-markets operations.
- Stablecoin-related FinTech should not be read as generic crypto exposure. Rain, VelaFi, KAST, Fun, Mesh, Alfred, and Trace Finance show that stablecoins are being financed as payments, banking, and settlement infrastructure.
- The market is maturing because most dollars still go to follow-ons. Follow-on rounds represent 82.05% of deals and 91.40% of capital, so the largest checks remain tied to already-validated companies.
- New startup formation is back, but it is theme-specific. First financings rose to 17.95% of deals, yet those rounds cluster around AI agents, Islamic banking, capital-markets infrastructure, RegTech, payments, and WealthTech rather than generic FinTech apps.
- Mal's $230M seed round makes early-stage capital look stronger than the ordinary seed environment probably is. Without that outlier, the first-financing signal would remain real by count but far weaker by capital.
- Series D+ is where the biggest conviction sits. It represents only 15.38% of deals but 48.13% of capital, which confirms that investors still reserve the largest checks for companies with later-stage validation.
- North America is pulling away in funding intensity. It has 64.10% of deals but 77.62% of capital, which means it is winning both more rounds and larger rounds.
- Europe remains credible but smaller-check. Its 12.82% deal share and 7.41% capital share suggest that European FinTech still produces fundable companies, but not many of the largest disclosed private financings.
- Africa's absence is a warning signal in the public dataset. It does not prove that no African FinTech activity exists, but it does show that no qualifying disclosed equity round appeared under the strict filter through early July 2026.
- The Middle East is strategically important despite low deal count. Its two deals produced $255M, which shows that Islamic banking, payments infrastructure, and regional financial modernization can attract large checks.
- Repeat investor activity matters more than investor breadth. The dataset contains 108 unique disclosed investors, but only seven investors appear more than once, so recurring conviction is much scarcer than logo count suggests.
- The best-funded FinTech companies increasingly own workflows, not just customer relationships. Payments, accounts, custody, compliance, wealth operations, settlement, capital-market access, and business finance workflows are where capital is concentrating.
OUR METHODOLOGY TO BUILD THIS TRACKER
We built this FinTech funding tracker by reviewing publicly disclosed equity rounds raised by pure-play FinTech companies between January 2026 and early July 2026. A company counts as pure-play when more than 80% of its activity is dedicated to software or infrastructure that digitizes payments, banking, lending, investing, financial operations, compliance, or capital-markets workflows.
We applied four main filters to build the dataset. First, we only included equity rounds, so grants, debt facilities, structured financings, IPOs, SPAC transactions, acquisitions, business combinations, and secondary-only transactions were excluded. Second, we only counted rounds of $300K or more. Third, we only kept pure-play FinTech companies, which means we excluded InsurTech, broad crypto projects, payroll or HR platforms, and adjacent software companies unless the product was clearly built for the requested FinTech scope. And fourth, every deal had to be confirmed by a direct company announcement, press release, tier-1 media report, specialized FinTech source, or relevant regional publication.
We also excluded undisclosed-amount rounds because including them would distort dollar-based metrics such as average round size, category share, regional share, and concentration. Mixed debt-and-equity rounds were excluded when the equity component could not be separated from the public source. Examples of exclusions in the underlying review include WeLab and Salmon Group because the public reporting did not provide a clean equity-only amount.
The final dataset contains 39 disclosed equity deals across 39 unique companies. Every average, median, share, investor count, megaround count, first-financing share, regional split, and category split is calculated on that disclosed public sample, so private database-only rounds and unannounced financings are necessarily outside the tracker.
Related blog posts
- The most heavily funded startups in the FinTech market
- The highest-valued startups in the FinTech market
- What does funding activity look like in the FinTech market?
