Author: Xiaojing, Tencent Technology
Editor: Xu Qingyang
The year 2025 that just passed witnessed an unprecedented "tech ice and fire show" in the capital markets.
On one side, newly listed tech darlings saw their stock prices plummet like kites with cut strings. Once red-hot star companies lost tens of billions of dollars in market value within months, including some brutal cases with declines exceeding 50%. The market's "chill" quickly spread, making a large number of star companies planning to go public fearful and forcing them to repeatedly delay their IPO plans.
On the other side, the "heat" of capital is burning fiercely.
A new "trillion-dollar club" is gathering outside the gates of the capital markets. From the aerospace empire SpaceX led by Elon Musk, to OpenAI under Sam Altman, to giants like Anthropic waiting in the wings, they are preparing for super IPOs of unprecedented scale in tech history with valuations ranging from hundreds of billions to trillions.
Cold and hot, bursting and狂欢 (celebration), retreat and advance.
Is this trial by ice and fire the beginning of the market returning to rationality, or the prelude to capital moving towards extreme polarization? The bell of 2026 has already rung. Will the logic behind this "ice and fire duality" continue, and has the future flow of capital already changed?
01、2025 Tech IPO Review: The Cold of Breakage and Plunge
In 2025, although the number of tech company listings showed signs of recovery (about 23, significantly increased compared to 2024), the overall performance was dismal: over two-thirds of the companies saw their stock prices fall below the issue price, with a median decline of 9%, significantly underperforming the S&P 500 index, which rose nearly 18% during the same period.
However, after a brief frenzy, tech stocks fell back to cold reality.
- Among the many star startups, Circle (stablecoin issuer) became one of the very few survivors: benefiting from policy tailwinds, it surged on its first day of trading and, despite some pullback, remains firmly in positive territory, the only winner standing its ground.
- In contrast, the performance of other unicorns was less satisfactory. Figma generated buzz early in its listing but saw its stock price fall sharply from its highs due to intensified AI competition and slowing growth. Companies represented by Klarna (installment payments), StubHub (ticketing platform), and Navan (business travel software) collectively saw their market values evaporate by tens of billions of dollars after going public, exposing the secondary market's rejection of the "loss-for-growth" model.
- The worst performer was the cryptocurrency exchange Gemini. Hit by both financial losses and regulatory pressure, its stock price has been "halved" compared to its IPO price, plummeting 58%.
Figure: Stock performance of tech companies that conducted IPOs in 2025
On the other hand, capital is betting on "scarcity" with unprecedented patience. Although small and mid-cap tech stocks struggle due to insufficient liquidity and extended trust cycles, the entry of super giants like SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic is expected to reignite market enthusiasm single-handedly.
This extreme polarization indicates that the secondary market's taste has shifted: investors are no longer buying "growth stories," but are挤进 (crowding into) the few top-tier "must-have" tracks at any cost.
In comparison, small and medium-sized listed tech companies with an average market cap of about $8.3 billion face higher valuation thresholds, insufficient liquidity, and extended trust-building cycles, making it difficult to attract sustained attention from index funds and retail investors.
Behind this situation lies a serious "trust gap." On one hand, company founders and venture capital firms are unwilling to lower their valuations for listing; on the other hand, public investors, under the shadow of the AI bubble, have become extremely sensitive to companies' profit prospects and internal cash-outs. Coupled with banks blaming pricing difficulties on the turbulent environment, the multi-party game has reached a stalemate, ultimately leading to a situation where no one benefits.
This chill is quickly being transmitted to companies planning to go public in 2026. Companies like corporate travel software Perk (formerly TravelPerk) have postponed their IPO plans to 2027. If market sentiment does not improve significantly in 2026, there may be a large number of potential listed companies "waiting in line but afraid to ring the bell."
From a historical perspective, the recovery in 2025 is still far from prosperity levels. Data from Accel Analysis and Qatalyst show that the number of software and AI IPOs peaked in 2019-2021, with 13, 19, and 46 respectively. This was followed by a collapse period in 2022-2023, with zero and 1 respectively, entering a recovery phase in 2024-2025 (4 and 8).
Figure: Number of software and AI IPOs annually from 2010 to 2025
However, the number of software and AI IPOs in 2025 was only about half of the 2021 peak, lower than the "normal" benchmark of 9-10 per year from 2010-2018. This indicates that the tech IPO market still has a long way to go before truly returning to normal.
Figure: Returns of the 8 software and AI IPOs in 2025
Failure Case Analysis: The Collision of High Valuation and Market Reality
Navan's experience is typical.
This corporate travel management platform went public in October 2025, and its valuation trajectory was like a parabola: from a peak of $9.2 billion in its Series G financing in 2022, it was reduced to $6.2 billion at the IPO pricing ($25/share); it broke issue price again on the first day of trading, with the stock price falling to $20, leaving the market cap at only $4.7 billion.
Ironically, Navan is not an empty shell. It has $613 million in annual recurring revenue (growth of 32%) and over 10,000 corporate customers. Its business scale is solid and it has real造血能力 (money-making ability). However, market pricing logic has drastically changed: the same company could easily obtain a price-to-sales (P/S) ratio of 15-25x in 2021, but in the 2025 environment, even a 10x valuation was still considered "too expensive" by the market.
The core reason behind this cold reception is the failure of the "Rule of 40." Navan had 30% revenue growth, but this was offset by a net profit margin of about -30%, resulting in a score of basically 0. According to this golden rule measuring the health of software companies, only when the sum of growth rate and profit margin is ≥ 40% is it considered a balance between "expansion" and "efficiency."
Figure: Post-IPO stock performance of Figma and Navan
Figma's experience is a microcosm of the剧烈波动 (violent fluctuations) in tech stocks. Although it surged 2.5 times after its July IPO, its stock price fell 60% from its peak after releasing earnings guidance that indicated a slowdown. Its volatility stems from two main points: First, structural imbalance—only 8% float at IPO created artificial scarcity, while the release of large restricted stock units in September triggered a stampede. Second, valuation overload—its P/S ratio of 31x was more than four times that of Adobe's, and the premium space seemed不堪一击 (vulnerable) in the face of slowing growth.
The market chill is spreading comprehensively. From ticketing platform StubHub (down 42%) to commercial aerospace Firefly (down 36%), from transportation software Via (down 28%) to fintech Klarna (down 22%), companies with "high valuation, low profit" are collectively experiencing a残酷修正 (brutal correction) by the market.
Investment Bank Dilemma: Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley's Halo Fades, Who Pays for the High Valuation Bubble?
The poor performance of 2025 IPOs also puts the investment banks Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, which led the majority of tech listings, in an awkward position.
The median decline for IPO projects led by Goldman Sachs (e.g., Via, Firefly) was about 28%, underperforming the overall market. Morgan Stanley was responsible for deals like Figma and CoreWeave, with the median stock price of its underwritten IPOs down about 4%, better than the overall median, but each company has fallen significantly from its peak.
Figure: Performance of IPO projects led by Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley
Analysts point out that part of the reason for the poor performance lies in factors beyond the banks' control. Public investors believe many companies trying to go public now are not outstanding, while some of the strongest companies remain private.
Samantha Liu, Chief Investment Officer for small and mid-cap growth stocks at AllianceBernstein, noted that she tried to tell bankers working on IPOs for companies like Navan to keep pricing reasonable, especially if they didn't expect significant retail interest. "People's expectations were completely out of control," she said.
02 Giant Rise: The Heat of Record-Breaking IPO Preparations by SpaceX, OpenAI, etc.
Just as many tech darlings were experiencing a "winter"洗礼 (baptism) in the public markets, a completely different heat wave was rising from the other pole of the market. In stark contrast to those companies that broke issue price upon listing are a few super tech giants that have established absolute advantages and are seen as "must-haves."
SpaceX: Aiming for the Largest IPO in History
According to people familiar with the matter, SpaceX is actively advancing its IPO plans, targeting financing of over $30 billion and aiming for a valuation of $1.5 trillion. This size approaches the listing record set by Saudi Aramco in 2019.
In terms of scale, if SpaceX sells 5% of its shares at a $1.5 trillion valuation, the $40 billion issuance size would break Saudi Aramco's record of $29 billion, becoming the largest IPO in global history.
Unlike Saudi Aramco's extremely low流通比例 (float ratio), if SpaceX can successfully complete the issuance on this scale, it will completely reshape the landscape of global hard tech investment. Management currently倾向于 (leans towards) listing in mid-to-late 2026, but may postpone to 2027 depending on market fluctuations.
SpaceX's confidence in accelerating its IPO stems from explosive business growth: Starlink has become a core revenue pillar, and the "phone direct connection" business has greatly broadened market boundaries;同时 (at the same time), progress in Starship's moon and Mars exploration also provides huge imagination space.
Financial data shows the company's revenue is expected to reach $15 billion in 2025 and is expected to jump to $22 billion to $24 billion in 2026. In addition to core aerospace business, funds raised from the IPO will also be invested in new areas led by Musk, such as space-based data centers and related chip development.
Musk recently confirmed via social platform X that SpaceX has achieved multi-year positive cash flow and provides liquidity to employees and investors through regular share buybacks. He emphasized that the valuation jump is an inevitable result of technological breakthroughs in the Starship and Starlink projects. Currently, SpaceX's shareholder lineup is extremely豪华 (luxurious), including top institutions like Founders Fund, Fidelity Investments, and Google.
OpenAI: Trillion-Dollar IPO Reshapes AI Capital Landscape
It is reported that OpenAI is also preparing a heavyweight IPO, raising at least $60 billion with a valuation of $1 trillion. People familiar with the matter said OpenAI is considering submitting an IPO application to securities regulators as early as the second half of 2026.
At the same time, OpenAI is also in financing negotiations for up to $100 billion, which could value it at $830 billion.
The company aims to complete this round of financing by the end of the first quarter of next year and may invite sovereign wealth funds to participate in the investment.
The background of this financing is that OpenAI, in order to maintain its leading position in the AI technology race, has committed to investing trillions of dollars and has reached multiple cooperation agreements globally.
The core logic of the financing points directly to computing power supremacy. OpenAI needs to invest over $38 billion in the next few years to build data centers and server clusters. Potential investors form four camps: tech giants (Amazon, Nvidia, Microsoft, and Apple, etc., seeking business绑定 (binding)), sovereign wealth funds (Middle Eastern and Singaporean funds requiring technology localization and industrial回流 (repatriation)), Wall Street investment institutions (JPMorgan Chase, etc.,抢占 (seizing) pre-IPO seats), and innovative financing models (government energy cooperation, special debt instruments, etc.).
It is particularly noteworthy that geopolitical factors are deeply embedded in the financing negotiations: multiple rounds of investment from the UAE's MGX fund, potential conditions from Saudi Arabia requiring data center localization, and indirect participation by the US government through infrastructure cooperation have made this financing超越 (transcend) the commercial scope, becoming a microcosm of great power tech博弈 (game theory).
If the financing is successful, OpenAI will create a historical record where a single company's financing规模 (scale) surpasses the annual tech budgets of most countries.
Besides SpaceX and OpenAI, AI startups like Anthropic have also joined the "hot" camp with valuations exceeding $300 billion. The rise of these super giants contrasts sharply with the cold reception of most tech IPOs in 2025.
Overall, 2026 may usher in a wave of high-valuation unicorn listings. Potential candidate companies include:
- Super Giants: SpaceX, OpenAI, Anthropic. The listing of these companies will redefine the scale of the IPO market.
- AI & Infrastructure: AI companies seeking capital for expansion, such as chip maker Cerebras, and data center providers Lambda, Crusoe, and Nscale.
- Fintech & Software: Motive, backed by Index Ventures, which sells safety technology to truck drivers; Japanese fintech company PayPay, backed by SoftBank; other mid-sized tech companies.
- Postponed or Watchful Companies: Companies like Perk, which has postponed its IPO plan to 2027, and a large number of candidate companies "waiting in line but afraid to knock on the door."
Jeff Crowe, Senior Managing Partner at Norwest Venture Partners, said: "There is a batch of potential IPOs waiting to go public, but if the market's acceptance of IPOs does not improve in 2026, no one will be in a hurry to act."
It is worth noting that B2B industry leaders with annual recurring revenue exceeding $1 billion, like Stripe and Ramp, are currently choosing to conduct large-scale private financing or share tender offers rather than go public.
Payment giant Stripe recently completed a share tender offer, valuing the company at $91.5 billion. The State Street Private Equity Index now represents commitments of over $5.7 trillion, more than five times the $110 billion committed capital when it launched in 2007. Ample private capital reduces the pressure on companies to承受 (endure) quarterly earnings call scrutiny and the increased regulation that comes with listing.
Tim Levene, CEO of Augmentum Fintech, Europe's largest fintech fund, believes: "The likely exit route for many of our portfolio companies will be M&A, not choosing an IPO."
Jeff Crowe, Senior Managing Partner at Norwest Venture Partners, also said that his venture capital firm is seeing a "better M&A atmosphere," with three companies in its portfolio recently acquired by large tech companies in recent weeks.
03 Tech Stock IPOs, The Rules of the Game Have Changed
Looking ahead to 2026, the global IPO market is in a critical period of transition from a "valuation winter" to "cautious optimism." Improvements in macroeconomic indicators, more predictable monetary policy, and the commercialization红利 (dividend) of AI technology are jointly catalyzing the repair of market sentiment.
A diversified global listing pipeline is forming. If market volatility can be effectively controlled, the上市势能 (listing momentum) accumulated in 2025 is expected to爆发 (erupt)集中 (concentratedly) in 2026.
However, the path to warming is not smooth, and the market faces severe access challenges:
● Severe IPO Backlog: Hundreds of "veteran" unicorns originally scheduled to go public in 2022-2023 are still in line. They are more mature in size and have more urgent funding needs.
● Significantly Raised Entry Thresholds: Market performance in 2024-2025 has proven that buyers no longer accept "edge cases." Typical candidate companies need to have about $500 million in annual recurring revenue (ARR), 50% growth rate, and strong unit economics.
● Complex Macro博弈 (Game Theory): The pace of listings in 2026 will deeply depend on monetary policy stability, easing of geopolitical tensions, and the robustness of the labor market.
Figure: Possible factors affecting tech company IPOs in 2026
The剧烈波动 (violent fluctuations) since 2025 are essentially a painful修复 (repair) of the market from irrational prosperity to value return. Except for a very few top giants, the public market has almost closed its doors to mediocre companies. Investors are no longer paying for "expected growth," but are scrutinizing profitability and sustainability with unprecedented harshness.
For entrepreneurs, the rules of the game may have permanently changed. Profit paths, strategic clarity, and unit economics have become the passport to survival.
Guest compiler Jin Lu also contributed to this article.
