So far in 2026, investors have poured more than $6 billion into companies focused on developing both fission and fusion nuclear energy technology and infrastructure, per 兔子先生传媒 . That鈥檚 far ahead of any comparable period, including last year, the prior record-setter. Round counts are also holding up at historically high levels, as charted below.

Biggest rounds

Much of this year鈥檚 funding went to a few heavily financed nuclear startups.

This included two billion-dollar recipients. Massachusetts-based , which is developing what it describes as the 鈥渨orld鈥檚 first commercially-relevant net energy fusion machine,鈥� secured $1 billion in a July equity financing. Meanwhile, , a developer of grid-independent nuclear reactors, picked up $1 billion across two Series B equity tranches.

For a bigger-picture view, below we charted 11 of the largest funding rounds for the nuclear sector this year.

IPOs were going strong too

Recent quarters have also been pretty strong for IPOs tied to nuclear power. In the past six months alone, at least three companies in the space went public at initial valuations above $1 billion. Most, however, are now far below their prior highs.

The largest debut came in April from Rockville, Maryland-based , a developer of small modular nuclear reactors and fuel engineering technology, which hit a $12 billion valuation in initial trading. Shares have subsequently shed about half their value.

The next-biggest offerings were summer debuts from Oak Ridge, Tennessee-based , a developer of advanced nuclear fuels, and Berkeley, California-based , a modular reactor startup. Shares of both are trading well below former peaks.

, the -backed nuclear fission company that to some extent kicked off the nuclear IPO boomlet with its 2024 market debut via SPAC, is also seeing weakening demand. Its shares are down about two-thirds from a high point about a year ago.

Optimism matters

It鈥檚 unclear to what extent recent share price setbacks reflect diminished optimism about the feasibility of nuclear startup ambitions or more a sense that valuations warranted a cutback. In the U.S., public backlash against massive data center buildouts also affects the energy upstarts looking to power them and has contributed to investor caution.

Moreover, next-generation nuclear power is still in its early innings. Over the past few decades, the reports, very little nuclear capacity has been built, citing high capital costs and lengthy licensing and approval processes as limiting factors. Scalable fusion, meanwhile, has yet to come online.

Still, a broad assortment of nuclear projects are moving forward. Multiple companies working on small modular reactors and microreactors have projects underway in Texas, Idaho, Utah and Tennessee, per the EIA. A longer list of projects is in the later-stage planning phase. And, hefty fundraising in recent months from both IPOs and venture rounds has given startups the runway to keep forging ahead.

Related 兔子先生传媒 queries:

Related reading:

• Next-Gen Nuclear Funding Looks Livelier Than Ever Following Inertia鈥檚 $450M Raise

Illustration:

This tracker includes layoffs conducted by U.S.-based companies or those with a strong U.S. presence and is updated at least bi-weekly. We鈥檝e included both startups and publicly traded, tech-heavy companies. We鈥檝e also included companies based elsewhere that have a sizable team in the United States, such as , even when it鈥檚 unclear how much of the U.S. workforce has been affected by layoffs.

Layoff and workforce figures are best estimates based on reporting. We source the layoffs from media reports, our own reporting, social media posts and , a crowdsourced database of tech layoffs.

We recently updated our layoffs tracker to reflect the most recent round of layoffs each company has conducted. This allows us to quickly and more accurately track layoff trends, which is why you might notice some changes in our most recent numbers.

If an employee headcount cannot be confirmed to our standards, we note it as 鈥渦nclear.鈥�

Meanwhile, on Monday, details from AI giant 鈥檚 IPO prospectus, giving potential investors a peek into its financials.

Oura had planned to offer 50 million shares at $40 to $44 apiece and was expected to begin trading Wednesday. At the top of that range, the offering would have raised $2.2 billion. The company says it is delaying the deal despite strong demand and has not set a new date. CEO said Oura has 鈥渢he luxury of choosing our moment.鈥�

Anthropic is still moving toward an IPO, although its timing remains unclear. A prospectus leaked by Reuters showed that revenue climbed twelvefold to nearly $4.6 billion in 2025 with an operating loss of $8.06 billion. Its staggering nearly $42 billion net loss included roughly $34 billion in accounting charges tied largely to earlier financing.

The document also outlined an eye-watering $518 billion in future cloud, computing and infrastructure obligations. Reuters has reported that a listing is likely to come after the November midterm elections.

Anthropic, the world’s most valuable venture-backed startup, has indicated it plans to beat rival to the public markets. The company could debut as soon as October and raise up to $100 billion via the offering, according to a recent in , while OpenAI, which Reuters says filed confidentially in June, is reportedly now looking toward early 2027.

(兔子先生传媒鈥檚 predictive intelligence tools, meanwhile, point to a slightly longer timeline for an Anthropic IPO, saying it鈥檚 more likely to happen in six to 12 months.)

Who鈥檚 next

So far, the 2026 IPO class already has a record-setting headliner in .

There are some other candidates. -backed AI cloud provider filed publicly this month , reporting $140.6 million in first-half revenue and a $1.02 billion net loss. , a -backed specialty insurance underwriter, on Sept. 24.

Neither has announced a trading date.

Data center operator is another possible fourth-quarter entrant. Reuters that it had hired banks for an IPO that could raise as much as $10 billion, although the timing remains subject to change.

Related 兔子先生传媒 query:

Related reading:

• IPOs Are Holding Up In 2026, But SaaS Debuts Aren鈥檛 Happening
• The IPO Window Is Closing. Here Are 8 Startups To Watch.

Illustration:

This is a weekly feature that runs down the week鈥檚 Top 10 announced funding rounds in the U.S. Check out last week鈥檚 biggest funding deal roundup here.

This week delivered a bountiful supply of big startup funding rounds, led by two $400 million financings for cybersecurity unicorns and . Rounding out the week were large financings for startups across hot sectors, including foundational AI, drug discovery, neurotech, and even rainmaking.

1. , $400M, cybersecurity: Island, a developer of tools for secure enterprise digital operations, raised $400 million in Series F financing. led the round, which set a $6.4 billion valuation for the Dallas-based company, more than double its 2024 valuation.

2. , $400M, cybersecurity: Cyera, a provider of enterprise data security tools that govern both humans and AI agents, picked up $400 million in Series G extension funding led by and backed by . The round brings total funding for New York-based Cyera to $2.7 billion, .

3. , $350M, foundational AI: San Francisco-based Snorkel AI, provider of tools for frontier labs and AI teams to develop specialized training data and environments, secured $350 million in Series E funding. and led the round, valuing the 7-year-old company at $3.2 billion, and it now has more than $375 million in annual recurring revenue.

4. , $311M, biotech: Enveda, an AI-enabled drug discovery startup, closed on $311 million in Series E financing led by and joined by a long list of new and existing investors. The round brings the Boulder, Colorado-based company’s total capital raised since inception to more than $845 million.

5. , $250M, neurotech: New York-based Precision Neuroscience, a startup focused on brain-computer interface technology, secured $250 million in Series D funding with and the as lead investors.

6. , $200M, wireless communications: Hubble Network, operator of a satellite network that extends connectivity to Bluetooth devices, pulled in $200 million in Series C funding. led the financing, which set a $1.6 billion valuation for the Seattle-based company.

7. , $155M, pharmacy benefits: New York-based Rightway, a provider of pharmacy benefits and care navigation services, raised $155 million in Series E funding led by . The startup will use the financing in part to expand its AI capabilities.

8. (tied) , $100M, cloud seeding: El Segundo, California-based Rainmaker, a startup focused on atmospheric research and producing new freshwater through cloud seeding, picked up $100 million in Series B funding. The round includes investments from , , , and .

8. (tied) , $100M, tax compliance: San Francisco-based Numeral, an AI-powered sales tax compliance platform, closed on a $100 million Series C round led by .

8. (tied) , $100M, AI data: San Francisco-based Micro1, a provider of AI training data to major AI labs, has reportedly raised a fresh funding round of more than $100 million at a valuation of $4 billion, according to a citing people familiar with the deal.

Methodology

We tracked the largest announced rounds in the 兔子先生传媒 database that were raised by U.S.-based companies for the period of Sept. 19-25, 2026. Although most announced rounds are in the database, there may be a small time lag, as some rounds are reported late in the week.

Illustration:

So far this year, companies in the space have raised around $2 billion in seed- through growth-stage funding. That’s already ahead of the 2025 full-year total, driven in large part by big rounds for companies at the intersection of AI and gaming.

Lead fundraisers

A few particularly large rounds contributed an outsized share to this year鈥檚 funding tally.

Sunnyvale, California-based , a developer of foundation models for AI-powered 3D generation, was the largest fundraiser, pulling in $400 million in a July Series B at a $1.5 billion valuation. While not a pure-play gaming company, Meshy highlights gaming as a core use case for its 3D AI agent.

, developer of a platform for training AI models, was another investor favorite, pulling in $300 million. Like Meshy, Israel-based Decart is not an AI pure-play; it鈥檚 also known for a video simulation technology pitched as compelling for game development.

We also saw plenty of pure gaming startups in the largest-round list, including motion-based family game developer , which closed on $150 million last week, and Turkish mobile gaming company , which picked up $70 million in May. Below, we highlight nine standout funding recipients this year.

Investors are also scaling up

Gaming-focused venture investors are also attracting fresh capital. One of the larger raises closed last month, with San Francisco-based picking up $250 million for its fourth flagship fund. The closing follows a string of successful investments, including a lead seed stake in viral puzzle game maker , which later exited at a $5 billion valuation.

Makers Fund has continued to invest actively, taking part in at least 10 known rounds this year, per 兔子先生传媒 data. This includes financings for high-profile startups such as , the sports betting platform that recently drew attention for a controversial ad campaign.

A few months earlier, announced a fresh raise of its own, securing $100 million for a fund focused on indie games. The firm鈥檚 Special Opportunities Fund intends to provide financing in exchange for a share of a game鈥檚 revenue, in what it hopes will be a more appealing investment structure for indie studios.

The beginning of an up cycle?

Overall, while gaming startup investment remains far below the peaks seen a few years ago, the substantial year-over-year gains we鈥檙e seeing look encouraging. The direction of funding charts certainly points to an upturn still early in the making.

Related 兔子先生传媒 query:

Related reading:

• Gaming Startup Funding Levels Down Further In 2025

Illustration:

So far this year, global startups have secured at least 114 Series A rounds聽1 of $100 million or more, per 兔子先生传媒 data. That鈥檚 the highest annual total in years and on track to top the all-time peak.

Moreover, many of those jumbo early-stage rounds far exceed the $100 million threshold. Collectively, this group of Series A recipients has raised around $33 billion this year, with at least 12 rounds valued at $500 million or more.

An AI thing

The funding bump was mostly an AI-driven phenomenon. Per 兔子先生传媒 data, more than 70% of Series A rounds of $100 million or more went to AI-focused startups.

That figure encompasses some of the year鈥檚 largest early-stage financings. For instance, it includes a $1.2 billion round for Silicon Valley-based , a platform for developers to train and serve custom models, and a $900 million financing for China-based , a developer of AI-enabled humanoid robots.

Below, we put together a sample of 10 of the largest Series A rounds, including mostly AI but a few other areas as well.

The high preponderance of AI deals reflects what we鈥檝e been seeing across stages. In the first half of this year, venture and growth funding to artificial intelligence startups totaled an estimated $394 billion, roughly 77% of all investment capital. Granted, most of that was for later-stage financings. But our Series A data shows early-stage doesn鈥檛 look too different for AI鈥檚 share.

US leads for jumbo Series A deals.

Roughly half of this year鈥檚 $100 million-plus Series A rounds and funding went to U.S.-based startups, per 兔子先生传媒 data. That translates to about 62 deals with a collective value of around $15 billion so far in 2026, which puts it on track for a record tally.

Still, megaround funding at Series A is more globally dispersed than overall venture investment this year. In the first half of 2026, more than three-quarters of global seed- through growth-stage financing went to American companies, largely due to megarounds for Silicon Valley-based and .

When investors like the same things

One can point to several potential causes behind the rise in Series A megarounds beyond AI growth alone. For one, leading startup investors have exceptionally large capital reserves to deploy. Additionally, exit multiples historically, and to an even greater extent recently, reward those who are anything but modest in their ambitions.

At Series A, another factor may be that investors seem to agree more than usual on the sectors, business models and founding teams they want to back. And given that a pricey share of a winner still beats a discounted share of a laggard, they鈥檙e piling in to perceived early-stage leaders.

Related 兔子先生传媒 queries:

Related reading:

• 兔子先生传媒 Data: Global Startup Investment Hit Record $510B in H1 2026 As AI Boom Accelerates Funding And Exits

Illustration:

That creates enormous productivity potential, but it also creates a new security problem: Companies now need to protect not only users, devices and applications, but software actors that can take actions on their behalf.

AI agents are becoming a new class of enterprise identity

An agent may access corporate files, query databases, send emails or execute code. Once it has that level of access, it needs permissions, monitoring and governance. Companies will need to know which agent accessed what information, which systems it connected to, and whether the actions it took were authorized.

As enterprises move from experimenting with a few agents to deploying hundreds of them, agent identity will become another important layer of cybersecurity. The challenge is that these identities are not passive. Agents can move between systems, invoke tools and make decisions, which makes controlling them more complex than managing traditional users or service accounts.

The value will sit in specific control points

This market will probably not develop as one broad category called 鈥淎I security.鈥� The real opportunity will be around specific control points.

One company may protect agent identity, another may control the data an agent can access, while others may focus on prompts, MCP servers, plug-ins, traffic or auditability.

We are already seeing activity around these areas. recently acquired Israeli startup which focuses on real-time data classification and policy enforcement. Israeli cybersecurity startup , meanwhile, raised a $27 million Series A led by and focuses on understanding and securing increasingly complex internet traffic, including traffic generated by autonomous systems.

These companies are solving different problems, but together they show how the market may begin to separate into distinct security layers.

These control points are creating a new M&A map

Identity providers may extend identity governance to autonomous agents. Data-security vendors may need to control what information agents can access. Cybersecurity platforms, cloud companies and enterprise software vendors may eventually need agent-security capabilities embedded directly into their products.

For entrepreneurs, this means that 鈥淎I security鈥� may already be too broad a positioning. The more important question is what exactly the company controls.

is a strategic adviser to tech companies, investors, CEOs and boards, specializing in strategy, growth and M&A. He is a guest contributor to 兔子先生传媒 News and a university lecturer on strategy, finance and entrepreneurship. Learn more at and connect with him on .

Related 兔子先生传媒 queries:

Illustration:

A decade ago, Espahbodi co-founded aerospace and defense startup accelerator and moved back to the U.S. to expand it. On the advice of friends at , he opened an office in El Segundo, California, near , just as more alumni of that company were leaving to launch hard-tech startups of their own and next-generation defense startups including were emerging.

Espahbodi eventually sold his stake in Starburst and launched , which invests in companies spanning industrial infrastructure, manufacturing, energy and water desalination. The firm has backed 14 companies since making its first investment in January 2023.

He also advises federal agencies on working with nontraditional, venture-backed companies. In an interview with 兔子先生传媒 News, he discusses how AI is changing hardware economics, why software investors are rushing into industrial technology, and what he believes many of them misunderstand about the sector.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

兔子先生传媒 News: What led you to leave Starburst and launch Generational Partners?

Espahbodi: About four years ago, I noticed that my friends from SpaceX were leaving the space vertical and moving horizontally across physical industries. I reached an inflection point: I didn鈥檛 want to remain locked into the space sector. I wanted to follow my friends.

I sold my equity in the accelerator, and part of the investment team left with me to start Generational Partners. For the past four years, we鈥檝e invested in what you might call the SpaceX-mafia and hard-tech sectors 鈥� anything involving industrial infrastructure, manufacturing, energy or water desalination.

We made our first investment in January 2023, in a North Dakota-based drone company. It was a trial by fire and an opportunity to prove the thesis. We鈥檝e invested in 14 companies since then.

You were already investing in physical, safety-critical industries before the generative AI boom. Has AI materially changed where you invest, or has it mainly reinforced your existing thesis?

Espahbodi: I tend to arrive earlier than others. I embraced the idea that hardware does not have to be capital-intensive. People often confuse hard tech with deep tech, but nomenclature aside, you don鈥檛 need to invest in science to win in these categories.

AI has dramatically changed that narrative and encouraged more people to get on board. I鈥檓 not looking to invest in science. I don鈥檛 necessarily see opportunities in quantum computing, nuclear fusion or other technologies being spun out of laboratories.

People who worked at companies such as SpaceX, and laid their companies鈥� foundations digitally. AI has significantly improved that augmentation and performance, enabling these companies to tackle legacy industries more aggressively and, more importantly, with new business models.

Another major component of the AI question is that frontier labs have become more expensive and capital-intensive than traditional hardware companies. The success of frontier AI labs, combined with the SpaceX IPO becoming an enormous wealth-creation event, creates a new environment. It raises questions about what is truly capital-intensive, what makes a product or its intellectual property defensible, and where companies are reengineering products around different business models.

Hardware has historically been capital-intensive, slower to commercialize and difficult to scale. Under what conditions does its technical defensibility compensate for those challenges?

Espahbodi: Fundamentally, it comes down to the business model. I look for creative software talent combined with commoditized hardware, significant customer demand and a new business model.

One of our portfolio companies was founded by the team that built the factory for user terminals. When you buy a retail Starlink antenna, these people built and scaled the assembly line that produced it at high volume.

While deploying those terminals globally to provide internet access, they observed that poverty often stemmed from a lack of access to clean water. They asked whether they could replicate the proliferated satellite-and-user-terminal architecture for edge water desalination.

Rather than investing in multibillion-dollar, nation-state infrastructure like that used by Gulf countries, they wanted to mass-produce every component in a vertically integrated stack. Their goal was to produce a cooler-sized device that could clean water at the point of need.

used a digital, software-based approach to build the bill of materials needed for mass manufacturing. AI is part of its business and operations, but the company鈥檚 real innovation was inverting the infrastructure model and scaling it.

I helped Vital Lyfe win its first customers within the and . Those organizations can use its devices in the field rather than shipping pallets of bottled water by air freight. That created a signal for overseas partnerships and nonprofit humanitarian-aid applications. It showed that there could be a different way to provide clean water.

Those are the kinds of unique business models that excite me.

What other companies founded by SpaceX alumni demonstrate how hardware businesses can overcome the traditional challenges of the sector? What can these founders build today that would have been difficult five years ago?

Espahbodi: Another example is the team SpaceX recruited to build the autonomous drone ships that catch boosters in the middle of the ocean. The team included former Coast Guard personnel and oil-and-gas technicians.

At SpaceX, they had the freedom to use software and AI tools to automate station-keeping 鈥� the ability of those drone ships to position and navigate themselves and reach the right location.

That team spun out and brought in many former colleagues to change commercial maritime shipping. They retrofit legacy boats operating in harbors and waterways and move supply-chain goods.

They brought a digital-first foundation to automating the controls on tugboats and barges. That had never existed before because the communications link to those ships didn鈥檛 exist. Starlink changed the concept of operations. The company can use its software expertise to change how physical devices operate aboard these boats and allow their sensors to send signals anywhere in the world.

That makes it possible to retrofit and overhaul how legacy shipping vessels navigate harbors and waterways in the U.S. It鈥檚 another example of SpaceX alumni applying the playbook and technologies they learned at SpaceX to a much broader commercial industry.

You鈥檝e said AI is eroding traditional software moats. What evidence are you seeing that investors are responding by moving into hardware and industrial technology?

Espahbodi: I meet many software investors who feel they鈥檙e missing out on hardware but don鈥檛 necessarily understand it. I鈥檝e met beauty investors who now say they鈥檙e defense-tech investors.

Los Angeles is a hotbed of firms that historically invested in software, media or consumer packaged goods. But people forget that Southern California, particularly El Segundo, is the aerospace capital of the world and has the largest concentration of mechanical-engineering talent.

Across the region 鈥� from China Lake to San Diego 鈥� technicians, builders and vocational talent are intersecting with the democratization of software and access to AI tools. Many local VCs have never taken advantage of the hardware talent located around them, so they鈥檙e being thrown for a loop.

Ironically, Bay Area VCs have been among those leaning most heavily into this. But it鈥檚 happening everywhere. I鈥檓 in Washington, D.C., now, and one of the first investors in , the hypersonic missile company, was in Virginia 鈥� before and others became involved.

Los Angeles VCs in particular know there is a talent war underway and that many people are leaving established companies to launch new businesses in these categories. But they struggle to underwrite those deals. They don鈥檛 know how to distinguish a strong opportunity from fear of missing out or something merely cosmetic.

So investors鈥� lack of experience in the space isn鈥檛 deterring them from writing checks or competing for deals?

Espahbodi: You have to ask why. The answer is their limited partners.

Sophisticated allocators, such as endowments, foundations and pension funds, along with more FOMO-driven family offices and high-net-worth investors, are watching this wave of SpaceX, and Anduril alumni create new companies and raise extraordinary rounds.

Many of those companies are no longer raising solely to pursue intellectual property. They鈥檙e building war chests to acquire other companies. The lines between private equity and venture capital are blurring. VC-backed companies are doing private equity-style buyouts, while venture deals are bringing in private equity checks.

That leaves LPs pushing for more. The success of the frontier AI labs has also perpetuated a fear of a 鈥淪aaS apocalypse,鈥� which I don鈥檛 think is real 鈥� although I sometimes question 鈥檚 1聽stock price for fun.

It creates what venture does best: tourists and FOMO. LPs ask why their managers aren鈥檛 investing in the same companies and how they can participate, raise more money and show that they aren鈥檛 missing out. That鈥檚 how I鈥檝e seen investors unfamiliar with these sectors enter the market.

Some of the largest Silicon Valley firms … missed this dynamism wave. Now they鈥檙e leaning in hard, sometimes at ridiculous valuations for companies that have yet to produce anything.

If more venture funding continues to flow into defense, aerospace and industrial technology, what prevents hardware from developing the same problems software experienced, including too many competing companies?

Espahbodi: Bring it on 鈥� hard and fast, and as much as possible.

Venture as a category exists because it was always about hardware. I would argue that the SaaS era, from the dot-com boom until now, was a blip compared with what venture was originally intended to underwrite.

I would move away from the hardware-vs.-software distinction and ask who is reframing the business model. Is there a way to reengineer a combination of software and hardware to unlock customer value? That鈥檚 the more important question.

How important is geography for these startups? Does locating near a major government customer help a company win contracts, and how do startups navigate procurement if they aren鈥檛 based near Washington, D.C.?

Espahbodi: It鈥檚 a common misconception that Washington is where the money is. The Los Angeles Air Force Base houses , which is another way of saying it holds 鈥檚 wallet. El Segundo makes the purchasing decisions for the fastest-growing portion of the military budget.

Washington is a place of considerable activity that needs to be influenced. Venture has never had this degree of influence on an administration and its executive orders. We鈥檙e also seeing portfolio companies backed by influential investors win government contracts worth as much as $1 billion at a time. That鈥檚 extraordinary.

Geographically, companies need to be where the talent is as much as where the customers are. Government customers should signal what matters, but companies shouldn鈥檛 organize themselves entirely around the government.

My catchphrase is that I want everyone to be commercially focused but mission-aware. I don鈥檛 want them to be mission-focused on the government. I want government to signal what it cares about while companies remain commercially focused.

The talent war for this convergence of hardware and digital technology is centered in Southern California. If you aren鈥檛 building and recruiting there, you鈥檙e falling behind. I like that the Bay Area is trying to attract more hardware talent and capitalize on the automotive and humanoid-robotics markets.

But I think the talent base for the factory of the future starts in Southern California and can then be used as a model for expansion into other places, as companies such as Anduril have done in Ohio and Louisiana.

We invested in a company founded by people from SpaceX and . They immediately moved to Austin to build a smart factory for raw-material processing. They wanted to automate the process at its source.

The largest concentration of cotton farming is around Lubbock in the Texas Panhandle. The company is building automated factories from the ground up to mill cotton into yarn and then complete the digital, vertically integrated stack by producing textiles at prices that beat outsourcing to China, Vietnam and other countries.

It sounds crazy, but the founder is determined to do it. If you can prove the model in textiles, you can apply it to copper. If you can do it with copper, you can do it in pharmaceuticals. From there, it could go in any direction.

Do startups located near Space Systems Command have an advantage?

Espahbodi: Not for that reason alone. The advantage is that they鈥檙e part of the ecosystem and geography. They鈥檙e spending time in the same bars and restaurants, and their children attend the same schools. They鈥檙e witnessing the same velocity.

Space Force itself is facing greater demand than ever to protect assets in space. Whatever happens with funding for individual programs, it remains the fastest-growing portion of the Pentagon budget.

I don鈥檛 think startups should locate there solely to be close to the customer. They should be there for the talent they need to build.

Related 兔子先生传媒 queries:

Related reading:

• Sector Snapshot: Space Tech Startup Funding Orbits New Highs
• Sector Snapshot: Defense Startup Funding Hits An All-Time Record As VCs Begin To Eye Exits

Illustration:

This is a weekly feature that runs down the week鈥檚 Top 10 announced funding rounds in the U.S. Check out last week鈥檚 biggest funding deal roundup here.

After a week of multiple billion-dollar-plus rounds, startup investors have reduced the number of zeroes on their funding checks. This past week, the largest U.S. startup funding rounds were in the hundreds of millions, topped by a $550 million financing for AI infrastructure company and a $308 million investment in space vehicle developer .

The remaining list of big rounds featured mostly AI-focused companies in sectors including investment management, networking, coding and marketing as well as some energy and biotech. Data center developer , also made official its previously reported $3 billion-plus raise, co-led by , and .

1. , $550M, AI infrastructure: Temporal Technologies, developer of an open source platform for building and operating long-running AI agents and other enterprise systems, secured $550 million in Series E funding at a $12.55 billion valuation. , , , and led the financing for the Bellevue, Washington-based company.

2. , $308M, space tech: Redondo Beach, California-based Impulse Space, a developer of space vehicles for moving payloads across and between orbits, secured $308 million in Series D extension funding. The financing brings the combined round total to $808 million.

3. , $250M, investment management: Ridgeline, an AI-enabled investment management platform, picked up $250 million in a Series E funding round. The financing, led by founder and chairman , set a $1.45 billion valuation for the Incline Village, Nevada-based company.

4. , $205M, networking: Wayne, Pennsylvania-based Cornelis Networks, a developer of networking technology for AI and high-performance computing workloads, closed on $205 million in new funding backed by .

5. , $200M, AI software development: San Francisco-based Factory, a provider of AI tools for enterprise software development, announced a $200 million funding round at a $5 billion valuation, backed by a long list of venture firms and individual investors.

6. , $180M, AI marketing: Profound, a startup offering marketing software to help users appear more prominently in AI results, raised $180 million in Series D funding at a $1.8 billion valuation. and led the financing for the New York-based company.

7. (tied) , $150M, foundational AI: Arcee AI, a developer of open-weight AI models, closed on $150 million in Series B funding at a valuation of more than $1 billion. , and led the round for the San Francisco-based company.

7. (tied) , $150M, gaming: Nex, a developer of family-oriented digital games that rely on body motion rather than controllers, secured $150 million in new equity and debt financing, including a Series E led by and . The San Francisco company did not break out how much of the round consisted of equity.

9. , $135M, geothermal energy: Mazama Energy, a Seattle-based geothermal energy developer specializing in superhot rock geothermal power, picked up $135 million in a Series B round led by and .

10. , $123M, biotech: Sling Therapeutics, developer of a small-molecule therapy for thyroid eye disease, closed on $123 million in Series C funding. led the financing for the Ann Arbor, Michigan-based company.

Methodology

We tracked the largest announced rounds in the 兔子先生传媒 database that were raised by U.S.-based companies for the period of Sept. 12-18, 2026. Although most announced rounds are in the database, there may be a small time lag, as some rounds are reported late in the week.

Illustration:

U.S. venture-backed technology聽1 companies have secured nearly $90 billion in domestic public offerings this year, per 兔子先生传媒 data. That鈥檚 already the second-highest annual tally on record, and we鈥檝e still got a few months to go.

However, virtually all the money went to two companies. alone accounted for 83% of the $90 billion raised this year, while AI infrastructure company scooped up another 6%. A potential offering from , meanwhile, could be even bigger.

The remaining field is comparatively modest. Just 21 other venture-backed technology companies went public this year in sizable or offerings 2, per 兔子先生传媒 data. Collectively, their offerings, which include traditional IPOs and SPAC deals, pulled in less than $10 billion.

This small cohort is intriguing for what it excludes as well as what it includes. Enterprise software, long a staple industry among venture-backed IPOs, was essentially a no-show this year. Energy, defense and space tech, by contrast, were well-represented. We also saw smaller offerings from other sectors, including medical devices and consumer-facing startups.

Here are some of the key findings in more detail:

Energy powers the most IPOs: About a quarter of this year鈥檚 tech startup offerings hail from the energy sector. The largest of these was from geothermal energy provider . Several nuclear power-focused startups also made their debuts, including and , developers of small modular nuclear reactors, as well as , focused on advanced nuclear fuel.

A dash of quantum, defense, aerospace, devices and consumer: Beyond energy, quantum computing company delivered one of the year鈥檚 larger debuts, as did equipment rental platform . Defense tech and aerospace were also strong performers, with offerings from satellite intelligence provider and spacecraft developer . And on the consumer front, e-bike and scooter platform finally made its market entrance, albeit at a valuation below its one-time .

An IPO SaaS-pocalipse: But what about SaaS? Mostly MIA. The paucity of enterprise software offerings this year isn鈥檛 entirely surprising given the impact of AI on the sector. VCs are pouring capital into a newer generation of AI-first platforms in legal tech, accounting and other enterprise software sectors. Existing SaaS unicorns are also moving fast to incorporate more AI in their offerings.

One end result is there are an awful lot of SaaS unicorns and former unicorns that have concluded this year is not the time to pursue an IPO.

Winner-takes-almost-all

Another end result is that investment returns are looking more concentrated than ever.

Of course, winning big or not at all is far from a new thing in the startup world. Tech venture returns have always been propped up largely by a few enormous wins, with the remainder of portfolio companies producing either losses or smaller profitable exits. But lately, the winner-take-almost-all-the-IPO-proceeds tilt is more pronounced than ever.

The pipeline of tech companies that have filed for future IPOs doesn鈥檛 offer much consolation that this pattern will change. Giant potential market debuts from Anthropic and still dominate IPO chatter. Enterprise SaaS offerings do not.

Related 兔子先生传媒 query:

Illustration: