The following slides contain a host of funding projections, exit data, interesting rounds, and data concerning active investors. If you are an entrepreneur, investor, or tech worker, it’s worth reading.

You can, of course, read the same data with lots of included context and notes here (shout out to for putting it together). But if you just want the raw charts, we’ve got what you need.

Thanks for sticking with us through the full Q1 cycle. We’ll do it again in three months!

For all the fans of numbers who find the words we often stick in between yucky and superfluous, here is a chart collection.

What follows is the summation of both our investment (Money In) and exit (Money Out) global Q1 2018 venture capital report. Shout-out to for doing all the heavy lifting to get it done. Enjoy!

$3.6 billion was invested in companies with at least one female founder in Q1 2018. That result was up 60 percent from Q1 2017鈥檚 $2.2 billion tally but down from Q4 2017 by 30 percent. We fully expect this amount to go up as more fundings are added for the quarter retroactively.

Overall, the money invested into companies with at least one female founder represents just nine percent of venture dollars invested in Q1 2018. That is one percentage point below Q1 2017鈥檚 10 percent result. The second, third, and fourth quarters of 2017 all presented higher percentages as well: 14, 15, and 15 percent of venture dollars invested in those quarters, respectively.

When we narrow the criteria, however, the figures fall. In the Q1 2018, three percent of venture dollars were invested in solo female founders.

From a deal volume perspective, Q1 2018 saw 14 percent of venture deals include at least one female founder. That result mirrored the year-ago, Q1 2017 figure. However, in line with what we saw when looking at 2017鈥檚 dollar volume breakdown between teams with and without women, the interim quarters showed a higher deal count at 15 and 16 percent of all venture deals.

Deals Of Note

While the deal and dollar volume progress will disappoint many, inside the data are a host of interesting deals that we鈥檇 like to highlight. However, in the interest of space, we鈥檝e selected three to share.

Here are the notable venture deals made in Q1 2018 with female founders that caught our eye:

• : A New York-based direct to consumer beauty company, founded by Emily Weiss, raised a $52 million Series C round. Index Venture and Institutional Venture Partners led the Series C round.
• : A Silicon Valley-based fraud prevention company led by two female founders Yinglian Xie and Fang Yu raised a series C round of $40 million. Sequoia Capital China led the round with previous investors NEA and GSR Ventures participating.
• : A provider of scheduled on-demand rides for parents of children for highly vetted drivers, founded by Ritu Narayan. Zum raised a $19 million Series B round from Spark Capital with previous investors Sequoia Capital and AngelPad participating.

Next, we鈥檒l turn to who is cutting the checks. Or, more precisely, which firms are investing in companies with female founders.

Leading Venture Investors In Female Founders

Investors that represented the highest deal count in startups with at least one female founder include with seven investments and with at five each for Q1 2018.

But, of course, investors have different focuses, especially when it comes to startup maturity. So, to that end, we鈥檒l break down investment into companies with female founders of one particular stage.

Seed Investments In Female Founders

Seed-funded companies with at least one female founder raised $218 million in Q1 2018. This represented 18 percent of all seed dollar volume for the quarter, up from 15 percent in Q4 2017 and 17 percent in Q1 2017.

Overall, seed is a leading indicator for venture, and it has been growing year over year in absolute dollar terms and by percent since 2009 when we first started measuring these trends. That means that if the percentage of deals and dollars at the seed level that women are raising is going up, we may be able to expect more women-founded early and middle and late-stage companies to raise venture capital in time.

Here鈥檚 a look at the dollar volume of seed capital invested into companies with and without female founders:

Next here鈥檚 the same data in relative percentage terms.

Returning to the big picture, seed deal counts are down slightly quarter over quarter. As more than 59 percent of seed deal volume is reported after the end of a specific quarter, the count of seed deals will increase from what is listed below:

Again, we now want to know who was closing these deals with female founders.

Leading Seed Investors

Leading Seed investors in companies with at least one female founder include with 28, with 10, and and at five investments each.

Investing In Diverse Founders

, , , , , and more have been leading the charge to invest in diverse founders. With the increase in the number of female founders in the last five years, pressure has been growing on the broader venture capital community. With 74 percent of the top 100 firms with no female investing partners, bringing women and minorities both into their ranks and into their investment portfolios is a goal.

#AllRaise Sets New Goals For Investing In Diverse Founders

, which launched this past week, led by prominent female venture investors, seeks to impact these numbers. The organization has set the goal within the U.S. for the percent of female investing partners to double from 9 percent to 18 percent within ten years or by 2028.

Why ten years? For the venture industry that鈥檚 the typical life term of a single fund. Venture is a cottage industry with partners typically committing to stay for the lifetime of one or more funds. Therefore turnover at the partner level tends to be much slower than other industries. With funds raising ever-larger amounts, and more often, expanding teams provides an opportunity to bring on diverse candidates. According to All Raise the fastest growth for female partners is with not with existing firms, but with new funds.

In the next five years, would like to see venture investments in female-founded companies move up from 15 percent to 25 percent. The organization is leading efforts to impact these numbers directly with supporting women who are seeking funding, to having tech founders and CEOs commit to increasing diversity in their team, board, and investors.

附近上门 is partnering with All Raise to . market. For venture investments in female founders, we have a ways to go to get to 25 percent within the next five years. Reviewing the data over the last ten years, 2015 is the first year that companies with at least one female founder have broken through the threshold of 10 percent of venture dollars. 2017 represents the best full year to date at 14 percent of venture dollars.

The U.S. market mirrors this percent. We would need to see an average of two percentage growth points each year to reach this goal. With the number of female-founded companies growing slowly each year, these numbers are a stretch; however, it may still be attainable.

滨濒濒耻蝉迟谤补迟颈辞苍:听

Follow 附近上门 News on &

But while overall investment is on the rise, the U.S.鈥� share is dwindling. A few years ago, North American startups reliably received at least two-thirds of global early-stage investment. No more. For the past three quarters, North America’s share has dwindled to less than half, as the chart below illustrates:

The rise of China鈥檚 startup scene, combined with local investors鈥� penchant for jumbo-sized Series A rounds, goes a long way to explaining the shift. Venture ecosystems in Southeast Asia, Brazil, and elsewhere have also been in growth mode, and thus accounting for a more significant share of global early-stage investment.

Huge Series A Rounds Are Huge In China

Before we venture further, it should be noted that although we associate Series A with early-stage companies, this is not always the case. Some of the largest Series A rounds globally have gone to companies that were relatively mature but previously bootstrapped or spun out of large corporations.

Recent data shows both the U.S. and China have their share of spinouts and older companies gobbling up so-called early-stage rounds. and , subsidiaries of Chinese insurance giant Ping An, which raised $650 million and $1.2 billion, respectively, are examples of such activity.

Venture investors in China also put far more into Series A and B deals than U.S. counterparts. A 附近上门 News analysis found that the average Series A round for a China-based startup in 2017 was $32.8 million, just over triple the size of the average Series A for a U.S. company.

The momentum is holding up in 2018. So far this year, at least 12 Chinese companies have raised early-stage rounds of $100 million or more, altogether bringing in more than $4 billion (see ). Recipients of some of the largest rounds include:

• , an apartment rental service provider based in Beijing, raised $621 million in its Series A round.
• , a consumer finance platform, raised a $145 million Series A round.
• , an autonomous vehicle startup with significant operations in both Silicon Valley and China, raised a $112 million Series A.

US Is No Slouch In Big A And B Rounds Either

The U.S. has also had a (plus Pony.ai) bring in $100 million or more in early-stage rounds this year. However, the aggregate total these startups have raised鈥攁bout $1.8 billion鈥攊s less than half that of Chinese counterparts.

As mentioned previously, many of the largest early-stage round recipients are mature companies or spin-outs of mature companies. The list includes two companies founded in 2009 that closed Series B rounds of around $100 million this year: , a developer of electric planes, and , a vacation property management company.

Healthcare spin-outs are also attracting big dollars, including , a developer of placental stem cell-based therapies, and , a developer of therapies for autoimmune diseases.

But while big rounds are still getting done, the number of U.S. early-stage rounds of all sizes has declined a bit over the past four years. Over the last two quarters, 附近上门 projects fewer than 900 early-stage rounds are closing quarterly. Globally, however, the number of early-stage rounds has been trending up:

Part of the pattern is that the dynamics of early-stage funding have changed over the years. In the past, Series A and B rounds were for startups to develop working prototypes, hone market segments to target, and attract the earliest customers. Scaling on a national or international level was generally for later stages, after a company had proven demand and a working product.

These days, markets move faster, and it鈥檚 not uncommon to see startups move in just a few quarters from concept to scaling en masse. Just look at , the scooter sharing company that raised $115 million after mere months of operation with a business model intended to terrorize pedestrians and motorists provide a last-mile transit solution.

The entire bike, scooter, and moped sharing sector has blossomed over a couple of short years, with big early-stage rounds all around. And it鈥檚 an area where China was the early leader for scaling. But FinTech, BioTech, AgTech, and other fields are also providing fertile ground for substantial early-stage funding rounds.

Should We Worry?

So is the declining share of North American early-stage funding a source of worry for founders and investors in the region? Or is it a predictable evolution following economic growth in China and elsewhere?

We won鈥檛 attempt to answer that here, but others have tried. Sequoia Capital鈥檚 Michael Moritz drew wide criticism earlier this year f on what he perceived as superior work ethic among Chinese entrepreneurs compared to their U.S. counterparts.

Purely following the money, the takeaway is this: Investors globally have decided the early-stage opportunity is a lot bigger than they thought a couple of years ago. And while investors are putting a bit more into mature ecosystems like the U.S. and Silicon Valley, they are putting a lot more into China and other regions with underdeveloped venture markets relative to their size and technology prowess.

Illustration Credit:

To get a hold on the space in Q1 2018, we take a look at venture dollar invested into U.S.-based FinTech startups quarter by quarter since 2016.

Inside The Numbers

附近上门 News鈥檚 definition of FinTech encompasses a broad range of startups that leverage deep learning technology and big data in order to streamline tax processes, make paying friends easier, and provide better insurance options.¹

Follow 附近上门 News on &

Since 2016, more than $15.6 billion has been invested in seed, early, and late-stage U.S.-based FinTech startups. 2017 accounts for more than $7 billion of that total. Total dollar volume saw an increase of 25 percent year over year from 2016 to 2017.

According to 附近上门 data, known dollar volume has grown by approximately 92 percent from $1.3 billion in Q1 2016 to $2.5 billion in Q1 2018. Meanwhile, the number of deals decreased by 37.1 percent during the same period.

Looking at the data by known investment type, as is typical of most industries, the majority of known investments were directed toward early-stage startups, with Seed, Angel, Series A, and Series B deals making up nearly 66 percent of all 136 FinTech deals of disclosed investment type in Q1 2018.

In Q4 2017, late-stage deals accounted for nearly 63 percent of total known dollars raised, while early and seed-stage deals made up 31 and 6 percent respectively. By comparison, in Q1 2018, late-stage deals accounted for nearly 76 percent of venture capital directed toward deals of known dollar volume. Early and seed-stage deals accounted for 22 and 2 percent of the total.

With that in mind, let鈥檚 take a closer look at some of the seed, early and late-stage startups that raised last quarter.

Seed Stage: Meritize

One startup that picked up funding in Q1 2018 was seed-stage private student loan startup . It was founded in 2016 by CEO Chris Keaveney and CFO Phillip Stegner and launched in January 2017. A little over a year after its official launch, the startup raised a $6.8 million Seed round led by , , , and .

The startup aims to offer student loans by taking into consideration individual academic performance data. The company鈥檚 mission is based on an understanding that individuals who have a history of high performance are more inclined to pay off their loans on time.

鈥淪tudents pursuing education for highly specialized and skills-based jobs offer solid ROI, not only for their own employment prospects, but also from a lending perspective,鈥� said Keaveney in Meritize鈥檚 .

According to the company, prior to its funding round, Meritize had experienced month-over-month growth of 30 percent in the number of loan applicants. It plans on using the capital from its seed round to grow its team and increase support sales and marketing efforts.

Early Stage: Branch International

Mobile lending company (Branch) raised the largest known round for early-stage startups with a led by .

Other backers included and . , which led the company鈥檚 previous $9.2 million , also participated. The company has raised $80 million to date.

Branch was founded in 2015 by Matthew Flannery, co-founder and former CEO of microloan startup Kiva, and Daniel Jung. The startup aims to provide individuals in emerging markets with lines of credit through its branchless mobile banking product.

Branch started off in Kenya, a place that is home to what the Economist has called 鈥� It has since moved on to Tanzania and Nigeria. With its focus on emerging markets in Africa, the company has tapped into a potentially lucrative, yet neglected, mobile credit market.

Branch offers loans that start at just $2. , that amount in areas of Nigeria and Kenya has the equivalent spending capacity of about $40 in the U.S.

At the time of its funding, Branch processing tens of thousands of loans daily with 20 percent month-over-month growth. In 2018, it expected to disburse $250 million in loans. With its latest funding, Branch is aiming to expand in Africa and launch in India. The startup will also .

Late Stage: Oscar Health

Founded by Jared Kushner鈥檚 brother, Josh Kushner, along with Kevin Nazemi and Mario Schlosser, is a late-stage health insurance company that originally intended to provide . The New York-based company raised in a round led by . , an investment arm of Google鈥檚 parent company , also participated.

Before this capital investment, the company鈥檚 most recent funding event was a led by in February 2016. The latest round brought the company鈥檚 valuation up to a , and its known total funds raised to over $892 million across seven rounds from .

With obvious political changes affecting the company鈥檚 platform, it shifted focus by beginning to charge higher premiums for a smaller network, while adding mobile features and accessibility to its users. The company reportedly cut its healthcare network by 20,000 in New York in 2017, and from 778 hospitals to 31, . It succeeded in reducing its network and staying afloat by leveraging big data like insurance claims to provide users with a list of what the data concludes are the 鈥渞ight鈥� doctors.

According to its , the company enrolled nearly 250,000 members in 2018 and projects a gross premium revenue of more than $1 billion. It will use its fresh funds to continue expansion 鈥渁t a rate of 4-5 cities every year, in individual, small group, and other market segments.鈥�

Moving Forward

A decline in the number of deals over recent quarters, combined with an increase in total capital directed toward late-stage deals, could indicate growing sector maturity.

Even so, the landscape of the FinTech startup ecosystem will likely continue to shift. With more companies like Meritize attempting to help the Snapchat generation break into traditionally opaque systems like student loans and car insurance, we may see more funding for more FinTech startups in the future.

1. Companies considered in this analysis are those in categories including FinTech, insurance, InsureTech, payments, mobile payments, lending, banking, credit cards, credit, credit bureau, personal finance, financial services, and financial exchanges.

Illustration Credit:

After a mostly down year, Texas鈥檚 venture deal flow was back to pre-2017 levels, mainly driven by a strong Austin performance. Despite being smaller than both Houston and Dallas in population, the Texas capital raised 61 percent of the state鈥檚 venture dollars.

Venture capitalists pumped $368 million into Austin startups across 39 known deals in the first quarter according to 附近上门 data. That鈥檚 more than double the $143.7 million raised in last year鈥檚 first quarter across 52 transactions. A number of Austin startups closed on double-digit funding rounds during the 2018 first quarter, including AI startup , which raised $56 million, and multiscreen platform and solution provider , which brought in $46 million. Another AI startup, , raised $40 million in a Series B round.

Follow 附近上门 News on &

Dallas raised the second most number of venture funds in the first quarter of the year. The city accumulated $183.6 million across 13 transactions; however, that was down from the $208.9 million raised across 16 deals in the Q4 2017. In March, Dallas-based 鈥攁 company building a tech-enabled real estate brokerage firm鈥�closed on a $12 million funding round.

Houston鈥檚 performance was also lackluster with $37 million raised across seven deals compared to $40.4 million over 18 deals in Q4 2017.

Texas startups as a whole raised a total of $605.2 million in the first three months of 2018 across 63 known venture deals, according to 附近上门 data. That鈥檚 35 percent higher than the $391.7 million raised over 110 deals in Q1 2017 and 30 percent higher than the $463.9 million raised across 71 known venture deals in Q4 2017. The fact that more dollars were raised over a fewer number of deals indicates larger deal sizes.

But the numbers don鈥檛 tell the whole story of Texas鈥檚 venture capital scene. For that, we turned to those startups and investors on the ground.

Austin

When you talk to venture capitalists in the Austin area, the general sentiment is one of optimism as startups, and larger tech companies, expand in the area. This optimism is likely buoyed by the city鈥檚 ability to attract outsized amounts of capital when compared to other metro areas in Texas:

, co-founder and managing director of Austin-based, said his firm conducted four new deals over the first quarter out of its $90 million fund鈥攁ll in Austin companies. In looking at trends, Ball noted an increase in consumer companies compared to years past. Blockchain has been growing in popularity, too.

During the first quarter, Next Coast invested in two consumer startups: and

Ball has also noticed an increase in the number of startups founded by women. Of Next Coast鈥檚 last seven deals, four were founded, or co-founded, by women.

鈥淭his is something I haven鈥檛 seen as much of in the 12 years I鈥檝e lived in Austin,鈥� Ball told 附近上门 News. 鈥淭here are a lot more companies being started by women, which I think is awesome.鈥�

Ball also noted that more startups have raised angel and seed funding before getting to Next Coast.

鈥淚t seems that more companies that have received a substantial seed, or angel financing, and are further along by the time they get to institutional investors in general,鈥� he said. 鈥淲hen we compare notes with other early-stage investment firms, we all feel this is a positive trend.鈥�

Next Coast has also continued to see firms from outside of Austin investing in the city鈥檚 startups.

Two of Next Coast鈥檚 deals over the last six months, for example, were led by a Silicon Valley fund.

鈥淚 believe we鈥檒l continue to see funds from the Valley coming in,鈥� Ball said. 鈥淢y belief and my hope is that they want a local partner on deals here. That鈥檚 proven to be the case so far, and I think that will continue. It鈥檚 good for the ecosystem, investors and entrepreneurs.鈥�

Dallas

, the managing partner of Dallas-based, believes there are 鈥渇ar more funds鈥� available in the Dallas-Fort Worth area than there are quality deals to be done at the pre-seed and seed stage in the Dallas ecosystem.

鈥淎s a result, you see most of the active investors from Dallas doing most of their deals elsewhere,鈥� he explained to 附近上门 News.

To his point, Deep Space itself invested in zero Dallas startups in the first quarter. Most of its time and attention, Hays said, was spent in Austin and Los Angeles.

When it comes to dollars raised, Hays believes that there is almost always one mid-to-late stage deal that gets done each quarter that skews the area鈥檚 funding results.

鈥淏ut in reality, at the pre-series-A stages, there’s not nearly as much going on in Dallas per capita as in other cities, and there is a lot of capital being deployed from Dallas to other ecosystems at the early stages,鈥� he said.

In terms of sectors that are doing well in the city, Hays points to B2B software as being dominant at the early stage locally. Real estate technology and healthcare have also traditionally been active sectors in the Dallas ecosystem, he said.

Looking ahead, Hays believes that Austin-based opening a location in Dallas will continue to support the early stage pipeline in the area.

鈥淢any investors like Deep Space will rely on Capital Factory to screen a lot of the early stage opportunities while we focus on seed and pre-seed deals in other locales,鈥� he said.

Houston

Despite numerous efforts, the Houston venture capital scene continues to lag. The lack of venture capital funds (Mercury Fund being the most active) is just part of the problem, some believe.

I reached out to local accelerators for comment for this story and didn鈥檛 even get a call-back.

I covered technology in the city more than a decade ago, so I can personally attest to a lot of innovation going on, particularly out of the world-renowned and schools such as, which sponsors an annual business plan competition. But that innovation is not reflected in the area鈥檚 funding results.

, founder and general partner of Austin-based, offers her own thoughts as to the lack of funds in Houston,

鈥淭here used to be more, and then a lot of large oil and gas family offices created VC arms, and that sucked the oxygen out of the environment for independent VCs,鈥� Brand told 附近上门 News. 鈥淭here鈥檚 a lot of angel groups but not many VCs so you can get a company going in Houston but have to fly elsewhere to get follow-on funding.鈥�

In early February, the business acceleration program after 19 years.

The Houston Chamber of Commerce and other city officials appear to recognize the problem and are working to improve the area鈥檚 funding climate.

For example, in early March,鈥攁n early-stage investment firm dedicated to pursuing market returns through funding women-led businesses鈥� in Houston as part of a collaboration with the Greater Houston Women鈥檚 Chamber of Commerce. The New York-based group around the country who have invested $150 million in 105 companies since it was founded in 2005, according to Xconomy.

In 2017, was created through a combination of organizations to bolster Houston鈥檚 innovation ecosystem and drive the region to become a top 10 startup ecosystem by 2022.

鈥淭he city is trying to get more later stage investors to come in and fund Houston-based companies, and they are raising a fund to invest alongside that,鈥� Brand said.

Overall, Texas鈥攏amely Austin鈥攈ad a solid first quarter when compared to the final quarter of last year. But there continues to be room for improvement as local ecosystems continue to struggle with growth. What it will take to get Austin, or Texas, to have a sustainable and growing investment and startup scene is a question most of us continue to ponder.

Methodology

Careful readers may note a difference between some of the numbers reported in this Q1 report compared to prior quarters, namely that there may be a higher number of rounds reported. This arises for a number of reasons, some of which are well-documented, others of which are new.

This report (and prior reports on Texas VC activity) is based on 鈥渞eported鈥� data, which is information that 附近上门 already has in its database at the time of writing. There is a known reporting delay for private company data, so if a funding round isn鈥檛 announced immediately, it sometimes takes many quarters (or, sometimes, a couple of years) for any given funding round to be recorded in 附近上门 and other private company databases. In the first quarter, the definition of 鈥淰enture鈥� has also been expanded somewhat to include new round types, while some prior rounds have been recategorized. This is likely the driving force behind the increase in reported deal volume.

Overall, venture investors put $28.67 billion to work across seed through technology growth stage funding rounds in Q1 of 2018, according to 附近上门 projections. That鈥檚 up from $24.2 billion in Q4 听and $18.23 billion in Q1 of 2018.

Follow 附近上门 News on &

The rise was driven by increased investment at seed, early, and late stage, with round counts also up significantly from the prior quarter. That upward trajectory, particularly at seed stage, could alleviate concerns in recent months about a decline in rounds for the very earliest stage startups. While seed deal counts remain well below peaks hit a couple years ago, projections show they are no longer falling.

Below, we break down the numbers in greater detail, focusing on Q1 investment and round totals, stage-by-stage performance, largest rounds, and biggest exits.

Investment Totals

Let鈥檚 start with investment totals. Be forewarned: 鈥淯p鈥� and 鈥渞ising鈥� will be much-repeated words in the following paragraphs.

As mentioned, total investment across all venture stages was up both sequentially and year-over-year. The only stage that saw a small decline was technology growth, which is typically volatile from quarter-to-quarter due the small number of deals and large dollar sums involved.

In the chart below, we look at how the numbers compare over the last five quarters.

Round Counts Rebound

After a comparatively sluggish Q4, round counts are on the upswing. Just over 2,700 startups closed funding rounds in Q1, according to 附近上门 projections. That鈥檚 a nice rebound from Q4 of 2017, which saw a steep drop in the number of financings, particularly at seed and early stage. However, it鈥檚 still below average for the past five quarters.

In the chart below, we look at round counts for the past five quarters, color-coded by stage:

Late-Stage Surges

Looking at investment totals for Q1, late-stage dealmaking saw the biggest gains of any stage. Investors put $15.7 billion into late-stage rounds (Series C and beyond) over the first three months of the year, by far the highest total in five quarters.

Below, we take a look at how much capital has gone to late-stage over the past five quarters. As you can see, late-stage startups in Q1 of this year pulled in more than 30 percent more capital than any quarter in 2017.

A key factor behind the late-stage rise may be the mounting piles of cash in the hands of large venture firms. Following the launch of SoftBank鈥檚 market-disrupting $100 billion Vision Fund last year, U.S. venture firms have embarked on a supergiant fundraising spree. So far this year, at least six have disclosed new funds targeted at upwards of $1 billion.

A few really, really big rounds also pushed up the totals. Leading in this category is , a company aiming to shake up the building industry that raised $865 million in Series D financing. Other top mega-round recipients, all Series D, include delivery app with $535 million, drug developer with $500 million, augmented reality firm with $461 million, and zero-fee stock trading tool with $350 million.

Early-Stage Accelerates

early-stage funding (Series A and B) also rose in Q1, with startups raking in a projected total of $10.54 billion, by far the highest total in five quarters.

In the chart below, we look at how much money has gone into early-stage quarterly since 2017.

For Q1, the quarter-over-quarter rise was driven by both bigger rounds and more of them. 听Overall, 附近上门 projects that 898 Series A and B rounds closed in Q1 of this year. That鈥檚 up from Q4 but below the prior three quarters. Average round size, meanwhile, was just over $11 million, the highest of the past five quarters.

Big biotech rounds bolstered the quarterly totals. Out of the five largest Series A and B rounds closed in Q1, four were biotech companies. The largest rounds, for $250 million each, went to , a developer of placental stem cell-based therapies, and , a developer of therapies for autoimmune diseases. Other large bio funding recipients include personal genomics startup , which raised $200 million, and drug developer , which raised $125 million. The sole tech company in the top five, meanwhile, was , a provider of business process automation software.

An early-stage round doesn鈥檛 always mean immature technology, however. It鈥檚 worth noting that some of these big early-stage bio rounds went to startups with fairly mature technologies and product pipelines that were licensed or spun out of larger companies. This is the case for both Celularity and Viela.

Seed Stage Staunches Decline

Towards the latter part of 2017, a lot of articles came out (including some by us) about a marked dropoff in the number of seed-stage financings. The decline was a source of worry across the startup ecosystem, as investors rely on a healthy pipeline of seed-funded companies for later venture rounds.

While the Q1 numbers don鈥檛 put all fears to rest, they do offer a bit of comfort. 附近上门 projects that just over 1,500 companies in the U.S. and Canada raised seed or angel funding in the first three months of this year, up about 28 percent from Q4 of 2017.

In the chart below, we look at seed-stage investments and round counts for the past five quarters.

As you can see above the trendline is moving up. However, projected seed deal counts and investment totals for Q1 of 2018 are still the second-lowest quarterly total of the past five.

Exits Pack A Punch

The first quarter of 2018 also brought with it a number of large exits for venture-backed companies, including both acquisitions and public offerings.

For M&A, it was a long-awaited pickup, as the pace of large VC-backed acquisitions was slow for most of 2017.

The largest deals of the quarter were in biotech. One was Celgene鈥檚 purchase of cancer drug developer in a deal valued at $1 billion up front and up to $7 billion with milestone payments. The other was Roche鈥檚 purchase of 听, a cancer data company, for $1.9 billion (not including a 12 percent stake it already owned.)

Next on the big M&A exit list was connected doorbell maker , which Amazon snapped up for $1 billion, and cybersecurity provider , which sold to RELX Group for $817 million.

It was also a decent quarter for IPOs, led by 鈥檚 hotly anticipated debut in March, with the company recently valued around $12 billion. Cloud security provider also delivered a solid performance, snagging a recent valuation around $3 billion.

Biotech delivered the highest volume of venture-backed IPOs, with at least six offerings on US exchanges (see ). The largest offerings included drug developers and .

What Next?

It doesn鈥檛 take a crystal ball to predict that IPOs will be big in Q2. We鈥檝e already seen the first big internet IPO of the second quarter with 鈥檚 unconventional direct listing debut scoring the streaming company a market capitalization over $25 billion.

Meanwhile, more big IPOs are waiting in the wings. The list includes e-signature pioneer , along with software firms , , and .

As for startup funding, it also doesn鈥檛 take much soothsaying skill to predict that venture and growth investors, fresh from an epic fundraising binge, will be under pressure to find places to put all their capital. Of course, just who will be the recipients of all that largesse remains to be seen.

Follow 附近上门 News on &

As a follow-up to the Q1 2018 Global VC Investment Report, published yesterday on 附近上门 News, we present an analysis of startup liquidity in the first quarter of 2018. If the investment report was all about “money in,” this one is all about 鈥渕oney out.鈥�

There鈥檚 a lot to cover, but here are the key takeaways:

• Bullish Key Finding: Venture-backed M&A may be be reversing a long-standing downtrend, but it鈥檚 still a bit too early to tell for sure.
• Bearish Key Finding: There鈥檚 still a lot of employee and investor equity looking for a path to liquidity. Despite a relatively active market for IPOs, some of the biggest offerings anticipated for the rest of 2018 (like Lyft and Airbnb) have been pushed back.

But let鈥檚 not dilly-dally any further. There鈥檚 a lot to cover, so let鈥檚 see what happened under the hood of global startup liquidity in Q1.

Paths To Liquidity: An Overview

Unlike many other asset classes, private company equity is typically very hard to convert to cash because the market is very illiquid. In plain English, that means there are few participants in the market, and the pace of transactions is low. So investors who want to sell (or “exit”) their positions in a startup company often have to wait a fairly long time.

If you own stock in a public company and are disappointed with its financial results, or you don鈥檛 like the cut of a new executive鈥檚 jib, or for any reason at all, you can probably sell your shares that same day.

Not so with startup stock. A combination of standard contractual restrictions on transfer or sale and a generally illiquid market for shares creates a situation where basically two exit options exist:

• A private company can get acquired by another company. Especially if the transaction was all-cash, investors get a direct path to liquidity.
• A private company can list its shares or issue new shares to raise cash on a public stock market. This typically converts illiquid private shares into publicly-tradable shares, but the specifics of that conversion process depend on existing capital structure and other terms of the initial public offering.

In other words, turning startup equity into cash (or, if not cash, salable assets) is a bit of a challenge, but it鈥檚 one the market just has to deal with.

As we dig into exit data from Q1 2018, we鈥檒l start with mergers and acquisitions.

Venture-Backed Acquisitions

In terms of deal volume, mergers and acquisitions (M&A) are by far the most common way startups get liquidity for their various stakeholders. Like with technology growth funding rounds, the dollar value attached to these deals can vary wildly, as the chart below shows.

Due to variability in acquisition price, we鈥檒l focus more on deal volume here. (As an example of why dollar volume matters less here: just a few ten-figure deals from one quarter can skew dollar volume up, as we鈥檒l highlight below. There鈥檚 less volatility in deal volume over time.)

According to reported data in 附近上门, deal volume is basically flat relative to Q1 2017 and slightly up relative to the prior quarter.

What might be ho-hum results on most other metrics is, if you鈥檒l forgive the financial pun, a big deal here. Why? Because in all of 附近上门 News鈥檚 prior quarterly global venture capital reports鈥攕ince Q1 2017鈥擬&A deal volume has been negative year-on-year. Whether Q1 marks the start of a reversal in a multi-year trend of shrinking M&A opportunities, or if it鈥檚 just another point in a generally downward trendline, is something to revisit at the end of Q2.

In Q1, there were a number of very large exits for venture-backed companies. The table below shows some of the more interesting deals from the past three months.

Some of these deals got more attention than others. For example, much hay was made about billion-dollar of smart doorbell-maker in late February. And Brazilian ride-hailing app-maker only tightened the SoftBank-backed, Beijing-based transportation giant鈥檚 global network of on-demand transportation brands.

But the story here is one of consolidation in the software developer-focused market. Although went public in March 2017, the from gives the the API integration platform company an honorary spot on the list of notable venture-backed exits. (附近上门 News unpacked the Salesforce deal when it was announced in March 2018.)

With notable M&A activity in cybersecurity, natural language processing, containerization, cloud hosting, and other areas, Q1 2018 was particularly good for software and IT infrastructure M&A.

Initial Public Offerings

Putting shares up for sale on the open market in an initial public offering (IPO) is the second path to liquidity for investors, founders, and employees at venture-backed startups.

The latter half of 2017 was particularly good for IPOs by tech companies, opening a window to public markets that had been somewhat locked up for a while. The first quarter of 2018 was, for the most part, a continuation of prior momentum.

Here are some of the more notable tech IPOs from Q1.

One of the more interesting aspects to this list is the companies based outside the U.S. Despite being headquartered abroad, many companies opt to trade their shares on U.S. markets. Brazilian payments company , and Chinese companies like (a spin-off from ) and all opted to raise capital by listing on U.S. exchanges.

Some foreign companies鈥� public market debuts were successful. PagSeguro, for example, in January. Market reception for Bilibili, a streaming site and internet community platform for anime and gaming fandoms, was more tepid. Its opening trade on March 28th was below the $11.50 per-share IPO price and shares closed at $11.19. Still though, the company raised $483 million in its IPO, more than many U.S.-based “unicorns” do when they go public.

And then there are some cases where U.S. listings don鈥檛 go according to plan, such as in the case of iQiyi, a company positioned as an Asian competitor to Netflix. Despite raising nearly $2.3 billion from underwriters in the largest Chinese IPO on U.S. markets since , shares closed at $15.55 on the first day of open trading, down from an $18.00 per-share IPO price.

At least for Chinese companies that had previously looked to foreign stock markets, things may be changing. According to and elsewhere, China is launching a pilot program that would allow more Chinese companies to list their shares on Chinese markets through relaxed regulatory requirements.

This is not a Chinese equivalent of the , which made it easier for some American companies to raise capital. Rather, it鈥檚 an experiment in loosening restrictions on Chinese companies that operate as (VIEs), which previously haven鈥檛 been allowed to list their shares with financial markets on the Chinese mainland. (A more in-depth discussion of VIEs is a bit beyond the scope of this report. Bloomberg reporter Jennifer Surane Chinese companies like Alibaba were forced to go public in the U.S. and how that might change under the new initiative.)

That, in combination with an increasingly isolated and frosty approach to foreign economic relations from the U.S., may make U.S. stock markets less appealing to foreign companies鈥攑articularly those from China.

As far as the U.S. goes, it was a good quarter for SaaS and pharmaceutical companies. On the software side, there were strong showings from Dropbox, Zscaler, and Cardlytics. And for life sciences startups, ARMO BioSciences, Solid Biosciences, and Eyenovia raised considerable capital on public markets.

A Word About Secondary Markets

To pre-empt an objection: yes, there is a third path to liquidity. Private company shareholders may be able to sell their shares on the “secondary market.” But there鈥檚 still considerable friction involved:

• Merely semi-liquid secondary markets exist primarily for pre-IPO late-stage ventures
• Buy-side investors typically need to be accredited
• Shareholders on the sell-side of the transaction still have to navigate applicable securities law(s) and company-specific shareholder covenants.
• And there are relatively few participants in these markets.

Besides, these markets are fairly opaque, and mandatory reporting rules are more relaxed for public companies. This is all to say there isn鈥檛 a whole lot of open data available to derive trends from.

Conclusions

Things are looking up for private tech companies looking for a path to exit.

Barring the unexpected, public-market offerings are expected to remain strong throughout 2018, bolstered by robust results in the first quarter. According to research from consulting firm EY, shared in , companies raised $42.8 billion worldwide through IPOs in Q1 2018. That鈥檚 up 28 percent from the first quarter of 2017. Granted, that includes a lot more than just tech companies, but as we showed earlier tech was well-represented in the mix.

But the most heartening data point here is venture-backed M&A. It鈥檚 been a long-standing trope in 附近上门 News鈥檚 prior quarterly global reports to comment on dwindling exit options for startups. Again, it鈥檚 too early to say whether the tide is turning in the venture-backed M&A market 鈥� and dashed hopes of recovery have broken many a heart before 鈥� but flat YoY performance is the best news in at least a year for close watchers of the metric.

Despite some added stock market volatility and geopolitical tension among the world鈥檚 largest economies, Q2鈥檚 outlook is generally positive.

滨濒濒耻蝉迟谤补迟颈辞苍:听

As the , social networks鈥� , dreams of electric cars with , and that , it鈥檇 be easy to think that Q1 2018 was, at best, so-so. And for many big tech companies, particularly those trading on public markets, that鈥檇 be a fair assessment.

But the global venture capital market seemed to pay no heed to the choppy waters downstream. According to projected data from 附近上门, global venture capital deal and dollar volume in Q1 2018 eclipsed previous highs from Q3 2017, setting fresh quarterly records for post-Dot Com startup investment.

Like in previous quarters,听we at听附近上门 News venture into a cavern of data from the first quarter. Here, we’ll focus primarily on investment into startups. But, fear not, we’ll follow up shortly with our analysis of startup liquidity in Q1.

Before diving in, here are two key takeaways to keep in mind.

• Bullish Key Finding: In terms of total venture dollar and deal volume, Q1 2018 sets fresh post-Dot Com Bubble records for investment worldwide
• Bearish Key Finding:听Late-stage funding, in terms of both deal and dollar volume, appears to be growing faster than seed and early-stage deals, prompting questions about future deal pipeline issues.

Without further ado, let鈥檚 figure out what happened in the world of VC during the first quarter of the new year.

Global Funding Activity: A View From Cruising Altitude

Around the globe, venture capitalists kicked off 2018 where 2017 left off: by setting new records.

In this section, we鈥檙e taking a look at the global venture capital market from a relatively high vantage point. We鈥檙e going to evaluate some key metrics for the market overall 鈥� including the overall size and quantity of venture deals 鈥� before digging into the stage-by-stage numbers in the next major section.

Pace of Dealmaking

By taking a look into the recent past, we鈥檙e able to see how last quarter stacks up compared to the past year. And, apart from the Q4 hiccup from last year, the trend is generally upward.

The chart below plots projected data from 附近上门 for venture dollar volume in Q1 2018 in addition to the previous four quarters. (For more information about 附近上门鈥檚 projections and methodology, see the Methodology section at the end of this report.)

On both a sequential quarterly and year-over-year basis, global venture deal volume is up. With an overall quarter-on-quarter expansion of over twelve percent, the market made up for ground lost in Q4.

As we鈥檒l see in our stage-by-stage analysis shortly, most of those gains in deal volume were driven by growth at two different ends of the funding spectrum. Some of the most impressive gains, from a percentage perspective, came from late-stage deals which pushed total dollar volume higher. However, since angel and seed-stage deals make up such a large proportion of overall deal volume, a rising tide there raises numbers for the whole market.

Projected VC Dollar Volume

Overall venture capital dollar volume follows a similar pattern, except instead of angel and seed-stage deals pushing the new, record highs, it鈥檚 a jump in late-stage funding that pushed the overall metric to a local maximum. In other words, since late-stage deals account for the lion鈥檚 share of global dollar volume, growth (or contraction) there drives the numbers for the market overall.

The chart below shows 附近上门鈥檚 projections for venture dollar volume, subdivided by funding stage.

On both a quarterly and year-over-year basis, venture dollar volume is up at stages but “technology growth” since last quarter. Q1 2018 delivered one of the largest percentage-based jumps in dollar volume in recent memory. And with a projected total of nearly $77 billion worth of venture deals last quarter, dollar volume was over twice that of the same quarter last year.

And just for some added perspective of just how big $77 billion in quarterly investment is, at least in relative terms, 附近上门鈥檚 projections show that there was about $150 billion invested around the world in all of 2015.

Most Active Lead Investors

Now that we鈥檝e explored the contours of the global startup funding market for last quarter, let鈥檚 take a look at who鈥檚 leading the charge. In venture, leadership is an important skill for many reasons, not least of which is the ability to source deals and organize funding rounds.

In some, but not all rounds with investors attached, 附近上门 designates which investor led the round. And based on an analysis of reported data for 4,951 venture funding rounds from the last quarter, we identified around 1,940 distinct investors 鈥� both individual and institutional 鈥� that led at least one round in Q1. The chart below shows some of the most prolific round-leading investors in the market last quarter.

The ballooning size of YC鈥檚 seasonal batches aside, the makeup of this list is more or less in line with two broad groups you鈥檇 expect to see:

• Lots of established venture funds like Sequoia Capital and New Enterprise Associates (NEA).
• Some corporate venture investors like GV (formerly Google Ventures, which 附近上门 News profiled in mid-January), Tencent Holdings, Alibaba Group, and SoftBank.

But there are a few investors which stand out from the rest in this ranking, both with interesting angles into the venture space:

• is an early-stage venture capital firm based in S茫o Paulo and invests in Brazilian startups.
• And brings together real estate and technology, investing in companies that build for the built environment. Among other deals from Q1, Fifth Wall round with .

It should go without saying that there is a very long tail on this chart (again, nearly 2,000 investors total) and is subject to change as more deals from Q1 are added to 附近上门 over time. Regardless, what makes the top here鈥攁nd just below the threshold for making it to the chart鈥攁re mostly just the usual suspects.

Now let鈥檚 see what鈥檚 going on within each stage.

Stage-By-Stage Analysis of Q1 2018 VC Funding Trends

Earlier we promised a section where we鈥檒l go over some of the global VC market鈥檚 internals in greater depth. Well, congrats, we made it here together.

There鈥檚 a lot of data to cover in this section, so we鈥檒l try to move fairly quickly.

As we鈥檝e done in previous quarters, we鈥檒l start fairly “close to the metal” by analyzing angel and seed-stage deals, and move on to later stages from there.

Angel And Seed-Stage Deals

The first check of outside funding is among the most difficult a startup will raise. Q1 2018 appears to be another banner quarter for angel and seed-stage deals. In 附近上门, this is mostly comprised of angel and seed rounds, smaller convertible notes, and equity crowdfunding rounds.

The chart below shows projected deal and dollar volume for angel and seed-stage deals in Q1 2018 and a prior year鈥檚 worth of quarterly data.

Projected angel and seed-stage investments make up 58 percent of the total deal volume in Q1 2018 but just four percent of the total dollar volume of venture investment. On both a sequential quarterly and annual basis, both metrics are up, with dollar volume leading the way.

That鈥檚 due in no small part to a rise in funding round size over the past year leading up to Q1. Below you鈥檒l find a chart revealing an uptick in reported average and median round size of angel and seed-stage deals over time.

Here too, both metrics are either flat or positive both quarter-on-quarter and year-over-year. As we鈥檒l see throughout the remaining funding stages, this is something of a common thread.

And who were some of the most active investors in Q1? From reported rounds data for the quarter, we identified 1,856 unique individual and institutional investors connected to angel and seed-stage deals, worldwide. The top-ranked startup backers are displayed in the chart below.

It should come as no surprises that the most active investors in angel and seed-stage deals are, for the most part, accelerator programs and dedicated seed funds.

A few groups stand out:

• seasonal batch size grew to 141 companies (135 of which can be found in ), it鈥檚 easy to see how the program is head-and-shoulders above others in terms of deals struck.
• is a state-owned venture capital firm based in Hungary. It hasand offers a full raft of funding options, ranging from an accelerator program to growth equity, to Hungarian entrepreneurs.
• 附近上门 News mentioned in its coverage of the American South鈥檚 most active investors. TEDCO is a fund sponsored by the state of Maryland and is focused to funding new ventures that commercialize intellectual property developed in the state鈥檚 research universities.

Early-Stage Deals

It鈥檚 at the early stage of the funding cycle (primarily Series A, Series B, and certain large convertible notes and equity crowdfunding rounds) when we start talking about 谤别补濒听money. With 33 percent of global deal volume and 32 percent of the total dollar volume, ebbs and flows in early-stage deal-making can make a serious impact on the market overall.

And considering that many of the companies raising early-stage deals today could go on to raise late-stage deals in the future, a close look at this stage gives a peek at future deal flow.

To see how early-stage funding in Q1 stacks up against the last year, see the chart plotting projected deal and dollar volume below.

Relative to both Q4 2017 and Q1 2017, early-stage deal and dollar volume are up markedly. Nearly twice as much capital was invested in early-stage deals in Q1 2018, relative to the same period last year. And while the number of deals is also up year-on-year, dollar volume grew faster and thus continues to push the average size of early-stage rounds higher.

Below, you鈥檒l find a chart of average and median early-stage rounds 鈥� based on reported data in 附近上门 鈥� in Q1 2018 and the four prior quarters.

Early-stage rounds around the world were larger in Q1 2018 than the prior quarter and last year. Because the figure is on the rise, it鈥檚 likely we鈥檙e seeing a population-wide trend here; in other words, it鈥檚 not just a few very large rounds skewing the average upward.

Despite rising average check size, plenty of investors continue to pump lots of capital into early-stage deals. In the chart below, we plot the most active among them.

There鈥檚 nothing much interesting to report on in the above ranking, as the funds included are about what you鈥檇 expect to see. That said, there is one tidbit to keep in mind. Five of the eleven firms listed in this chart have a direct connection to China:

Once we account for the , an active investor in U.K. startups, we find that primarily U.S.-focused venture firms are in the minority of this particular ranking.

Late-Stage Deals

All the companies that didn鈥檛 fail, sell out, or just stop raising capital after Series B graduate to late-stage ventures. In Q1 2018, late-stage deals (mostly Series C, Series D, and beyond) accounted for just eight percent of total deal volume but a whopping sixty percent of the dollar volume, giving this stage of deals a lot of sway over aggregate dollar figures for the quarter.

In the chart below, we鈥檝e plotted 附近上门 projections for total late-stage deal action for Q1 and the prior year.

Late-stage deal and dollar volume are definitely on the rise, with fairly consistent quarterly growth over the last year or so, with the exception of a single quarterly decline in deal volume between Q3 2017 and Q4. Growth of late-stage dollar volume 鈥� both raw figures and on a percentage basis 鈥� and deal volume (just on a percentage basis) outpaced all earlier stages quarterly and year-on-year.

To get an idea of what might be driving dollar volume growth, let鈥檚 see how the size of late-stage rounds have changed, globally, over the past five quarters.

Despite some modest growth in median round size over time, the average is growing much faster. So while Q1 2018鈥檚 late-stage deals, as a population, may be slightly larger than the same time a year ago, it鈥檚 likely that a few very large rounds per quarter are skewing averages higher, faster.

Q1 has plenty of examples of really, really big late-stage rounds. Here are just a few:

• raised round led by Alibaba Group.
• Construction startup brought in .
• Mobile-first online brokerage closed .
• , a Spanish on-demand transportation company, raised a .

And here are the firms which invested in the most late-stage deals in the last quarter.

It鈥檚 not #BreakingNews that established, generally well-regarded venture firms with lots of capital under management tend to invest in a lot of late-stage deals, either as de novo positions or by exercising follow-on rights.

What is worth noting, though, is that many of the firms listed above are participants in the Q1 trend of announcing or launching really, really, big new funds. Here鈥檚 just a sample from the chart above:

• is raising with a minimum LP commitment of $250 million, according to CNBC sources. This was announced in mid-March.
• in late March, Lightspeed Venture Partners is for a new venture fund.

And it鈥檚 possible that other firms on this list will be raising new funds later this year. (, for example, has historically raised a new $900 million-$1 billion fund every two years since 2012. The firm鈥檚 last publicly-disclosed fund 鈥� its fifth, just a hair under $1 billion 鈥� was closed in June 2016.)

Technology Growth Deals

As a category of funding rounds, “technology growth” is a bit of a strange one. The idea here is to capture super-late-stage funding deals, typically struck with companies headed toward going public.

Longtime readers of 附近上门 News鈥檚 quarterly reports may remember that this category presented some vexing challenges over time, particularly concerning definitions.

For our , Q2, and Q3 reports for 2017, technology growth rounds were defined as “any 鈥榩rivate equity鈥� round in which a 鈥榲enture鈥� investor also participated.” This didn鈥檛 work for a few reasons, chief among them being that many of these rounds have only one investor, a private equity fund.

Starting in Q4 2017, and here for Q1 2018, technology growth deals are defined, in plain English, as “any 鈥榩rivate equity鈥� round raised by a company that has previously raised 鈥榲enture鈥� financing in a prior round, such as a seed round or Series C.” By focusing on the company鈥檚 funding history, rather than how its investors are labeled, the 狈别飞蝉听team believes it鈥檚 capturing a more accurate picture of growth equity investments by PE firms in technology companies.

Just like in prior quarters, deal and dollar volume for tech growth rounds are kind of all over the place, as the chart below shows.

For reasons we鈥檒l discuss shortly, we believe听it鈥檚 best to focus on deal volume inside of this category. For technology growth deals, there鈥檚 been positive growth since last quarter and the same time last year. This signals continued investor interest in very late-stage private companies, which is matched by companies interest in raising from private markets.

This being said, there hasn鈥檛 been much change in the size of tech growth rounds overall, apart from some outliers that push the average up. The chart below shows average and median round size of tech growth deals.

First off, the size of technology growth deals is quite variable. As examples:

• raised a , after raising more than $40 million in prior venture capital funding. (附近上门 News covered WP Engine and other WordPress-focused hosting providers earlier this quarter.)
• Also in January 2018, , a photo-sharing app based in Beijing, at a reported pre-money valuation of $17 billion (USD). Tencent Holdings was also the sole investor in the company鈥檚 prior venture round, , which valued the company at $2.7 billion pre-money in March, 2017.
• On the lower end, London-based at a reported 拢85 million pre-money valuation. 鈥檚 last funding round, a .

With much more variability in round size just within the past quarter, it鈥檚 difficult to make any definitive claims about the state of tech growth funding in the last quarter. It might be back to the drawing board here.

And with that, we鈥檝e covered the world of startup capital inflows in the first quarter of the year, at least in broad strokes.

Conclusions From Q1 2018

On a global scale, the venture capital market in Q1 is a microcosm of a number of salient trends.

• Big Rounds Reign 鈥� Rounds are getting larger at basically every stage. And, importantly, the largest rounds are growing larger, faster, across the board. 附近上门 News, independent analysts like , and from Foundry Group have covered this phenomenon in the past quarter. And barring something unexpected, there鈥檚 no external force in sight to slow this trend down.
• Concentration Of Growth At The Top 鈥� In terms of both raw numbers and on a percentage basis, some of the fastest growth has been at the latter stages of the startup funding cycle. At a global scale, this hasn鈥檛 come with material declines in seed or early-stage deals, like it has in North America. But nonetheless, there鈥檚 a very real possibility that high-dollar deals with comparatively less-risky late-stage companies will draw more attention from investors over upstream opportunities.
• US Funds Are Getting Larger 鈥� American venture capital firms have raises some very, very large funds in the past quarter. This may be a response to foreign competition from the likes of SoftBank and large corporate VCs in China, or it may just be an effort to anticipate capital requirements to maintain positions in their portfolio companies. If companies are staying private longer, pro rata investment opportunities follow on, and on, and on. Regardless, this results in more dry powder investors will have to marshal carefully, lest valuations go up in smoke due to unrealistic expectations.
• There鈥檚 A Truly Staggering Amount Of Money Sloshing About 鈥� As a follow-up point to the above, the first quarter of 2018 highlighted a trend from the prior year: the private market grows in importance as a venue for fundraising. A suggests that, at least in the US, companies raised more through private capital investment than by raising in public markets. Between rising round sizes, more capital flowing into bigger funds, extended timelines for going public, 2018 will likely be no different if Q1鈥檚 momentum keeps up.

Some may take solace in the fact that much of this is just an acceleration of historic trends. But at the same time, there are very few mechanisms to point to which can slow this train down, and investors don鈥檛 seem keen on pumping the brakes. After all, things are just now picking up from a sluggish Q4. So much for taking an extended breather.

Methodology

The data contained in this report comes directly from 附近上门, and in two varieties: projected data and reported data.

附近上门 uses projections for global and U.S. trend analysis. Projections are based on historical patterns in late reporting, which are most pronounced at the earliest stages of venture activity. Using projected data helps prevent undercounting or reporting skewed trends that only correct over time. All projected values are noted accordingly.

Certain metrics, like mean and median reported round sizes, were generated using only reported data. Unlike with projected data, 附近上门 calculates these kinds of metrics based only on the data it currently has. Just like with projected data, reported data will be properly indicated.

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

Glossary of Funding Terms

• Seed/Angel include financings that are classified as a seed or angel, including accelerator fundings and equity crowdfunding below $5 million.
• Early stage venture include financings that are classified as a Series A or B, venture rounds without a designated series that are below $15M, and equity crowdfunding above $5 million.
• Late stage venture include financings that are classified as a Series C+ and venture rounds greater than $15M.
• Technology Growth include private equity investments in companies that have previously raised venture capital rounds.

滨濒濒耻蝉迟谤补迟颈辞苍:听

The first quarter of 2018 brought startling losses to the crypto market. Bitcoin has, according to , toppled from its $19,343听December 16, 2017 high to $6,926 as of March 31, 2018鈥攁 low not seen since mid-November 2017. Other crypto assets have endured sharp losses as well.

Follow 附近上门 News on &

The decline is being felt by entrepreneurs looking to forego the VC scene in favor of initial coin offerings (ICOs). According to 附近上门 data, the first quarter of 2018 hasn鈥檛 exactly halted ICO activity. However, the previous boil has been brought to a (still hot) simmer.

A Big Deal Behind The Data

At the end of 2017, these virtual pages noted that, while ICOs have seen explosive growth, 鈥渢he bubble could pop tomorrow, marking 2018 as the year HODL breaks.鈥�

Using 附近上门 reported data, 附近上门 News charted the quarterly pace of ICO deals made and funds raised:¹

Right away, it is clear that Q1 2018 missed on one metric: number of deals. Quarter-over-quarter, ICO deal counts decreased by a touch over 20 percent, falling from 143 deals in Q4 2017 to 114 deals in Q1 2018. Of course, one dip isn鈥檛 exactly indicative of a trend鈥攅specially in a volatile market such as crypto. And compared to Q1 2017, deals are still up substantially. Furthermore, when we turn to the money, ICOs are still on an upward trend.

In Q1 2018, ICOs raised approximately $3.9 billion鈥�$860 million more than the preceding quarter. Yet the numbers begin to buckle under closer scrutiny.

While it鈥檚 not unknown for ICOs to attract huge sums of money, Telegram鈥檚 $1.7 billion raise is, even by crypto standards, quite a large lump sum of cash. This is especially true given the aforementioned decline the crypto market is experiencing as a whole. And it鈥檚 the reason the first quarter of the new year has something to boast about.

Without Telegram鈥檚 just-in-time ICO, funding in Q1 2018 would have only totaled to just a touch over $2.2 billion. That would have put Q1 2018 short of Q4 2017 by approximately $839 million. Still, even though Telegram鈥檚 ICO would have made even SoftBank鈥檚 Vision Fund blush, the deal happened and therefore counts. However, without Telegram鈥檚 record-setting, single-event ICO, Q1 2018 gives doubt to the narrative that growth will always be the crypto status quo. Widespread reluctance to be associated with the crypto community isn’t helping either.

Reigning In Crypto

Promoting anything related to crypto has become increasingly difficult. Nearly every major tech company has put an all out ban on crypto ads.

Facebook on January 30th, 2018, when it announced that it would end all crypto-related advertisements. Over a month later, . (More recently, Google also that mine crypto in the background.) And just a few weeks after Google, Twitter , after some hemming and hawing, crypto ads on its platform. Collectively, these three companies essentially own the digital advertising market, and a ban from all three is a significant hurdle for the crypto community to overcome.

Furthermore, the SEC has shown increased interest in the activities behind ICOs. 附近上门 News previously reported that SEC chairperson Jay Clayton considers 鈥渢he structures of ICOs鈥� directly implicate the securities registration requirements and other investor protection provisions of our federal securities laws.鈥�

And while the SEC has adopted a position of 鈥�do no harm鈥� on blockchain tech, that doesn鈥檛 mean the federal agency is afraid to charge those behind problematic ICOs. Most recently, the SEC Sohrab Sharm and Robert Farkas for their allegedly-fraudulent Centra Tech Inc ICO.

Now, this doesn鈥檛 mean ICOs won鈥檛 have their place in the market as a funding method. But regulatory concerns, being banned from the world鈥檚 most popular digital marketing channels, and softening numbers in Q1 2018 don鈥檛 speak well to the market鈥檚 ability to sustain such astronomical growth.

That said, crypto, as a whole, has proven to be very good at volatility. For all our doubts, the next quarter could still bring in a massive influx of deals and dollars, making Q1 2018 look like a blip on the radar.

At least that kind of volatility will always ensure we have something to write about.

1. 附近上门 added ICO tracking in 2017. The funding method鈥檚 nascency means that we are walking in new pastures. As such, we have a slightly lower levels of confidence that any single dataset is fully accurate when it comes to ICOs. Datasets (some of which we have used in reporting) can differ in terms of when a funding is recorded, and, say, in terms handling pre-sales to ICOs proper. Regardless, 附近上门 News checked 附近上门 data against other data sources (using only intervals when they appeared to be updated regularly) and found our results to be contentedly in-line directionally.