Prop Tech Funding Tracker (358 deals)

Our funding tracker covering the Prop Tech market

Below is the table listing all the deals. You may find our methodology at the end of this page.

And, if you want to gain a deeper understanding of the market and its current dynamics, get our report covering the Prop Tech Market.

Is Prop Tech really a $5 billion funding market right now?

Prop Tech is a roughly $5 billion funding market in our research window, but a normal company is raising nowhere near the amount that headline suggests.

We tracked 357 qualifying financings across 328 Prop Tech companies from January 1, 2024 through September 21, 2026, representing at least $4.987 billion of disclosed capital. The median round was $4 million. The average was $14.17 million.

The gap is the point. Remove rounds above $50 million and recorded capital falls to $2.558 billion. A very small number of large financings are responsible for almost half of the dollars.

The basic picture today is fairly clear: Prop Tech has a lot of funded companies, but the billions sit much higher up the market than the typical startup does.

Market measure	Result
Qualifying financings	357
Unique companies	328
Capital raised	≥$4.987B
Median round	$4.0M
Average round	$14.17M
Average / median	3.54×
Capital excluding rounds above $50M	≥$2.558B
Capital excluding rounds above $100M	≥$3.342B
Median cumulative capital/company	$4.18M

How many Prop Tech companies are actually getting funded?

Prop Tech funding is spread across a surprisingly large number of companies, but very few of them come back for another qualifying round during the period we studied.

We found 328 funded companies. Of those, 299 appear once and only 29 appear twice. None appears three times.

So 91.2% of the companies we tracked have a single qualifying financing in the window.

This does not mean those companies only ever raised once. Our window lasts less than three years, and some companies raised before it opened or will raise again later. What the numbers do show is that current Prop Tech deal flow comes from a broad pool of companies rather than the same small group fundraising every few months.

Dwelly is one of the rare exceptions. The UK company raised approximately $43.2 million of equity in February 2026 and another $95 million in July. Moves that fast are unusual in our dataset.

Single-appearance companies also account for roughly $4.43 billion of identifiable capital. The companies appearing twice contribute only about $554 million.

Is Prop Tech funding controlled by a handful of companies?

Prop Tech capital is heavily concentrated, although the market has several major winners rather than one company swallowing everything.

Only 18 rounds exceed $50 million. Those deals represent 5% of transactions and 48.7% of recorded capital. A handful of large rounds taking half the capital is the kind of signal we track every quarter in our report covering the proptech market.

The biggest financings show how quickly the numbers add up. Lighthouse raised $370 million, Hostaway $365 million, Vantaca more than $300 million, Entrata $200 million and Property Finder $170 million. Dwelly reached $138.2 million across two rounds, while Guesty, Mews and DoorLoop each raised at least $100 million.

The top five companies account for 28.2% of capital and the top ten for 39.4%.

At the other end, 55.7% of companies with usable cumulative funding figures never get beyond $5 million during our window. Only 5.9% cross $50 million.

That distribution is more useful than the $5 billion headline on its own. Most funded Prop Tech companies live in a completely different financial world from Lighthouse, Hostaway or Vantaca.

Company	Rounds	Capital in window
Lighthouse	1	$370M
Hostaway	1	$365M
Vantaca	1	≥$300M
Entrata	1	$200M
Property Finder	1	$170M
Dwelly	2	$138.2M
Guesty	1	$130M
Mews	1	$110M
DoorLoop	1	$100M
PetScreening	1	$80M

What does a normal Prop Tech funding round look like today?

A normal Prop Tech round is still a low-single-digit-million-dollar financing, and eight-figure rounds are much less common than funding headlines make them feel.

Among the 352 financings where we could establish a usable round size, 192 were below $5 million. Another 104 were between $5 million and $20 million.

Together, those two buckets represent 84% of known-size transactions.

The money is distributed very differently. Sub-$5 million rounds contribute just $393.7 million, or 7.9% of capital. The 18 rounds at $50 million or more contribute almost half.

So founders should be careful with averages. A $14 million average round sounds like an ordinary startup can reasonably expect an eight-figure check. Our data says otherwise.

A useful recent example is Boom. The leasing technology company raised a $15 million Series A in August 2026 after an earlier $12.7 million financing. That is already well above the market median, yet still tiny beside the biggest growth rounds.

Round size	Deals	Share of known-size deals	Capital
Below $5M	192	54.5%	$393.7M
$5M–<$20M	104	29.5%	$1.027B
$20M–<$50M	38	10.8%	$1.137B
$50M–<$100M	10	2.8%	$684M
$100M+	8	2.3%	$1.745B
All known-size rounds	352	100%	≥$4.987B

Are Prop Tech record funding months actually booms?

A huge Prop Tech funding month can easily be one giant deal wearing a market-wide disguise.

Across the 32 completed months from January 2024 through August 2026, we recorded an average of 11.1 deals a month and a median of 11. The busiest month reached 17 deals.

Capital jumps around far more violently. Median monthly funding was $111.7 million, while the largest month reached $488.5 million.

The reason was Lighthouse. Its $370 million financing represented 75.7% of that month's capital even though the month had exactly 11 deals, the normal median count.

Another busy month contained 17 deals, but Entrata's $200 million investment still represented 69.4% of the month's $288.4 million.

So a spike in monthly dollars is weak evidence that the whole Prop Tech market suddenly accelerated. Deal counts are much steadier than capital totals.

Which parts of Prop Tech are getting serious money?

Property Management Systems are where serious Prop Tech capital is clustering today, while Brokerage Software generates far more deals than its share of money would suggest.

We counted 44 Property Management Systems financings worth $1.729 billion. That gives the category 34.7% of all capital from just 12.3% of deals.

Real Estate Brokerage Software goes the other way. It is the largest category by activity with 80 financings but accounts for only 16.2% of capital.

Real Estate Data Tools attracted $924.4 million across 74 deals, Building Operations Systems $690.6 million across 62, Property Operations Software $508.5 million across 49 and Leasing Technology $324.4 million across 48.

The market clearly rewards some types of Prop Tech company with much larger checks than others. Counting startups alone misses that entirely.

Prop Tech category	Deals	Companies	Capital	Median round
Property Management Systems	44	42	$1.729B	$4.85M
Real Estate Data Tools	74	69	$924.4M	$3.7M
Real Estate Brokerage Software	80	71	$809.9M	$3.0M
Building Operations Systems	62	60	$690.6M	$4.45M
Property Operations Software	49	45	$508.5M	$5.0M
Leasing Technology	48	45	$324.4M	$4.0M
Overall market	357	328	≥$4.987B	$4.0M

Why is property management software raising such huge rounds?

Property management software attracts giant Prop Tech rounds because the biggest companies have grown into broad operating systems with a lot more to fund than one software feature.

Hostaway's $365 million growth investment is a good example. The company and General Atlantic said the money would support international expansion, product development and AI. Hostaway already operated an integrated platform covering the day-to-day work of vacation-rental managers across more than 90 countries.

Vantaca raised more than $300 million at a $1.25 billion valuation. Its platform combines community-management workflows, accounting, payments, business intelligence and AI automation and serves more than 500 management companies representing millions of households. Property management platforms raising this much are easier to place on the market maps and grids in our proptech market report.

Entrata received $200 million from Blackstone at a $4.3 billion valuation. By then, more than 12 million residents were using properties managed through Entrata's software, which spans accounting, purchasing, facilities and leasing.

Guesty's $130 million financing was meant to support global expansion, acquisitions and a broader enterprise product. DoorLoop said its $100 million Series B would accelerate product development and team expansion. Mews raised $110 million to keep expanding its hospitality operating platform.

These companies need capital for distribution, acquisitions, payments, new product layers, AI and international growth. Once a Prop Tech company reaches that stage, check sizes start looking very different from the market's early-stage rounds.

Is Lighthouse making Prop Tech data tools look richer than they really are?

Yes. Real Estate Data Tools has genuine funding depth, but Lighthouse alone creates a large part of the category's impressive headline.

The category raised $924.4 million across 74 financings. Lighthouse contributed $370 million, about 40% of that total.

KKR's investment also went into a company that was already operating at substantial scale. Lighthouse said it served more than 70,000 hospitality properties and processed more than 400 terabytes of travel and market data every day. The financing was earmarked for product development, AI capabilities, additional datasets, acquisitions and global expansion.

Without Lighthouse, Real Estate Data Tools still has plenty of funded companies. What disappears is much of the category's apparent capital intensity.

Its share of total capital is actually slightly below its share of deals once we look past the one very large transaction.

How old are Prop Tech companies before investors write really big checks?

Big Prop Tech checks generally arrive several years after the typical startup first starts raising money.

Across 349 financings where founding dates were usable, the median company was four years old at the time of financing.

Companies raising less than $5 million had a median age of three years. Companies receiving more than $50 million had a median age of eight.

The stage progression follows the same direction. Median age rises from two years at Seed to four at Series A, seven at Series B, eight at Series C and 11 at Series D+.

Building Operations companies take particularly long to mature, with a six-year median age at financing. Property Management Systems sit at five years, while Brokerage Software and Real Estate Data Tools are closer to three.

So when we see a nine-figure Prop Tech financing, we are usually looking at a company that has spent years building distribution, customers and operating infrastructure before that check arrives.

Where does the Prop Tech funding ladder get really hard?

The Prop Tech funding ladder gets especially thin after Series B.

We counted 174 Seed rounds, 65 Series As and 31 Series Bs among classified transactions. Then the population drops to ten Series Cs and five Series D+ financings.

The biggest contraction is therefore between Series B and Series C: more than three observed Bs for every C.

Those numbers are not graduation rates. We are looking at a market-wide financing window rather than following one closed cohort from Seed onward, and some mature deals are labelled Growth Equity or sit in the Unknown bucket.

But the age profile supports the same story. Companies get progressively older as they move up the ladder, while the number of available rounds shrinks sharply.

Growth Equity is where a lot of the mature capital ends up instead. Only 17 Growth Equity transactions account for $1.292 billion, more than a quarter of all recorded funding.

Stage	Deals	Capital	Median round	Median company age
Seed	174	$492.7M	$2M	2 years
Series A	65	$870.2M	$11M	4 years
Series B	31	$998.5M	$24.5M	7 years
Series C	10	$654.2M	$31M	8 years
Series D+	5	$371M	$75M	11 years
Growth Equity	17	$1.292B	$27M	9 years
Unknown	55	$308.4M	$2.7M	-

Are investors still backing brand-new Prop Tech companies?

Yes. New Prop Tech companies are still getting funded, but the market reserves most of its dollars for businesses that already have a financing history.

We classified 114 deals as first financings, equal to 31.9% of transactions. Their median size was $2.1 million. First checks to brand-new companies are part of where investors put money; what they back and avoid is covered in our report on proptech.

Follow-on financings numbered 241 and had a $6 million median.

The dollar split is much wider than the deal split. First financings account for roughly 8% of identifiable capital, while follow-ons receive about 92%.

A market where almost a third of deals go to first-time funded companies is still producing new entrants. At the same time, investors are clearly much more willing to put serious money behind companies that have already crossed the first financing hurdle.

The recent Boom round fits that pattern. Boom raised again in August 2026, with S3 Ventures leading a $15 million Series A for its leasing operating system. Its earlier qualifying financing had already put it on the funding map.

Is North America really taking most of the Prop Tech money?

Yes. North America receives far more Prop Tech capital than its deal count alone would justify.

North America represents 152 financings, or 42.6% of activity, and $3.042 billion, or 61% of capital. Its median round is $6.35 million.

Europe is much closer in deal volume than in dollars. We recorded 129 European financings, equal to 36.1% of activity, but only 26.2% of capital. Europe's median round is $2.38 million.

Asia-Pacific contributes 43 transactions and just $205.4 million. None crosses $50 million in our window. Latin America has 11 financings and also no deal above that threshold.

Some regional totals are themselves heavily concentrated. Property Finder's $170 million investment supplies more than half of Middle Eastern capital in our research, while Lighthouse alone contributes more than a quarter of Europe's total.

North America's advantage therefore comes partly from having more deals and partly from producing much larger ones.

Which Prop Tech investors actually keep coming back?

Very few Prop Tech lead investors keep appearing again and again, which makes the funding network much more fragmented than the headline names suggest.

We identified 294 separate disclosed lead or co-lead investor names across 262 financings where leadership could be established. Only 18 names appear more than once.

RET Ventures and Fuel Ventures are the most frequent, with five appearances each. RET Ventures is concentrated mainly around Property Operations companies, while all five Fuel Ventures deals are Seed financings.

KKR appears only twice, yet those rounds together represent roughly $500 million because they include Lighthouse and Guesty.

The investor writing the most checks is not necessarily the investor attached to the most capital.

Even after combining all recurring lead investors, they appear in only 16% of financings with a disclosed lead. There is no tiny club repeatedly underwriting most Prop Tech deals.

Do strategic investors really matter in Prop Tech?

Strategic investors matter a lot in some parts of Prop Tech and barely show up in others.

We found at least one identifiable strategic investor in 68 financings, equal to 19% of the market.

Those rounds are much larger. The median financing with a strategic investor is $9.35 million, versus $3.46 million without one.

Building Operations is the clearest example. Strategic investors participate in 35.5% of its financings. The share is 22.4% in Property Operations Software, 20.5% in Property Management Systems and 20.3% in Real Estate Data Tools.

Brokerage Software and Leasing Technology sit at only 8.8% and 8.3%.

JLL Spark helps explain why. JLL has described its venture model as combining investment with access to its real-estate clients and distribution network. That can be particularly valuable when a product has to get installed inside real buildings or become part of a landlord's operating workflow.

Carrier's acquisition of 75F in July 2026 is another useful current example. Carrier said it plans to combine 75F's cloud-native building automation and AI with its own equipment, controls and analytics products. For Building Operations companies, access to installed infrastructure can be as strategically important as the check.

What is Prop Tech funding still missing right now?

Prop Tech currently has plenty of companies and early-stage rounds; the thin part is the population that keeps climbing into large institutional financings.

The upper venture ladder remains small, with only ten Series C and five Series D+ deals in the period we studied.

Some categories show the gap even more clearly. Leasing Technology produced 48 financings but only one Series C and no Series D+ round. Few late rounds in leasing technology show what is missing for growth; what has to happen next is covered in our proptech market report.

Large rounds are also geographically patchy. Asia-Pacific and Latin America combine for 54 deals without producing one financing above $50 million.

And while the market has hundreds of lead investors, very few show up repeatedly.

Taken together, those absences show where Prop Tech still struggles. The market can generate startups and fund experiments quite easily. Turning a large number of those companies into repeat, later-stage fundraisers is much rarer.

Is Prop Tech funding actually getting healthier in 2026?

Prop Tech funding looks healthier today than it did during the industry's post-boom reset, although investors are still concentrating large checks in a narrow group of companies.

MetaProp's Year-End 2025 Global PropTech Confidence Index, published in May 2026, put investor confidence at 6.5 out of 10, up from 6.2 six months earlier. Startup confidence jumped from 6.1 to 8.1, its highest level since 2021.

MetaProp also found that 63% of investors expected to maintain their investment pace over the following 12 months, compared with 43% in the previous survey. Among founders, 59% expected fundraising conditions to become easier.

More recent financings suggest companies are still finding money across different layers of the market. Dwelly raised $95 million of equity in July 2026. Boom followed with $15 million in August.

The recovery still looks selective. Large amounts of money are available, but investors are showing a strong preference for companies with scale, clear operating use cases or a credible path to becoming an important platform.

That is a healthier market than a frozen one. It is also a much more demanding market than the free-spending Prop Tech environment of earlier cycles.

What should a Prop Tech founder realistically expect from this funding market?

A Prop Tech founder today should expect the fundraising game to change dramatically as the company moves from proving the product to proving that it can become a large operating platform.

At the beginning, small rounds dominate. More than half of known-size financings are below $5 million, and Seed rounds have a $2 million median.

Series A moves the typical check to $11 million. Series B pushes it to $24.5 million.

Beyond that point, the funnel gets much tighter. The companies that do break through can suddenly raise enormous amounts, but they tend to be older businesses with established customers, broader products and a clear reason to deploy large amounts of capital.

Property-management platforms show the clearest version of that path. They start as software companies and, if they scale far enough, can become operating systems covering accounting, payments, maintenance, leasing, data, AI and other workflows.

The multi-hundred-million-dollar rounds belong to that small upper layer. For most Prop Tech companies currently raising money, a low- to mid-single-digit-million-dollar financing remains a much more realistic benchmark.

What should we actually take away from Prop Tech funding today?

Prop Tech is a large funding market, but it is much easier to raise a small round than a large one. The billions come from a thin layer of scaled companies sitting above a much wider startup population.

The market itself is broad. We found 328 funded companies, and most appear only once during the research window. There is plenty of experimentation, while repeat fundraising remains comparatively uncommon.

Property Management Systems have become the main home for serious capital. Hostaway, Vantaca, Entrata, Guesty, Mews and DoorLoop show what happens when vertical software grows into a much broader operating platform. Vertical software growing into an operating platform is a business-model shift; we study which models make money in our market report about proptech.

The funding ladder gets difficult beyond Series B. Prop Tech has many Seeds, a smaller but still meaningful Series A and B population, and very little visible Series C or D+ depth.

Maturity matters. Companies receiving the largest checks tend to be substantially older than those raising small rounds, which suggests investors increasingly want evidence of scale before committing serious capital.

Strategic investors also have a real role where Prop Tech touches physical infrastructure or institutional workflows. Building Operations is the clearest case, and Carrier's 75F acquisition shows why established industry players care about controlling the technology layer inside buildings.

Current sentiment is improving, and fresh 2026 financings confirm that investors are still active. The market today looks selective rather than starved: funding is available, but the distance between an ordinary Prop Tech startup and the handful of companies attracting nine-figure checks remains enormous.