Past Crypto Fundraising: The Complete Archive of Closed Private and Public Funding Rounds

Benchmarking is the archive's most common use, and it works best when the filter is narrow enough to be honest. A workable sequence:

1. Filter by sector first, since valuation multiples differ sharply between infrastructure, DeFi, gaming, and consumer.
2. Narrow to a single stage. Mixing a seed round into a Series B comparison set produces a range wide enough to justify anything.
3. Constrain the date window to four quarters or fewer, because crypto valuations reprice faster than traditional venture.
4. Exclude the outliers deliberately, then look at the median rather than the mean.
5. Check each remaining round's source link before relying on the figure.

The output is a defensible range rather than a headline number. Every figure carries its source, so anything you put in front of an investment committee traces back to a filing or an announcement.

Closed records are organized along the ladder the market actually uses, and each rounds of funding label filters independently:

• Pre-seed and seed, typically first institutional capital ahead of a working product.
• Series A, B, and C, priced against traction and revenue rather than narrative.
• Strategic rounds from exchanges, market makers, and ecosystem funds, where distribution matters as much as capital.
• Private sales, discounted token allocations closed before listing.
• Public sales, IDOs, and launchpad rounds, the smallest tickets and the widest participation.

Many projects ran several of these in parallel, so the archive records them as separate entries on a shared timeline rather than collapsing them into a single figure. That distinction matters when a headline raise turns out to be three rounds added together.

Fund marketing tends to foreground a handful of winners. The archive lets you pull the complete list instead, which is a different picture in most cases. Pull every closed round a fund participated in, then read:

• How many of those projects still have active development today.
• How token prices behaved through the unlock schedule the fund agreed to.
• Whether the fund led or merely joined, since lead participation carries far more signal.
• Whether they concentrated in one sector or cycle, which tells you how much of the record is skill and how much is timing.

This is the cheapest diligence available on the sell side of a pitch. A lead investor's name is often used as a quality signal, and the archive is where you find out whether that signal has held up.

Outcomes vary far more than fundraising coverage implies, and the archive is deliberately unflattering about it. Roughly 50% of crypto projects launched since 2014 are now considered defunct according to CoinGecko research, and funded projects track that base rate closely. Every closed entry carries a current status tag:

• Listed and active: token trading, development ongoing.
• Listed and dormant: token trading, development stalled.
• Pre-listing: round closed, TGE still pending.
• Defunct: project wound down or abandoned.

Reading the failures is worth more than reading the winners. The patterns that precede a dormant tag, anonymous teams with no prior shipping record, insider-weighted vesting, and unverifiable round leads, are visible in the data well before they became obvious in the market.

The fundraising database is split into three views, each built for a different job:

• Upcoming: announced rounds not yet open. Built for preparation.
• Active: rounds accepting commitments right now. Built for execution.
• Past (this page): closed rounds with final terms and outcomes. Built for benchmarking.

Records persist across all three rather than being re-keyed at each transition, which is why a round's announced terms and its closing terms can be compared directly here.