Loading...
Data-backed answers to the questions investors are asking about upcoming and recent IPOs.
1 deal coming to market: ADBT
2 deals coming to market: ADBT, LYNX
3 deals coming to market: BWGC, MOT, FOIL
Skipping the underwriter means something completely different depending on your size. One group matches the market; the other has almost never had a positive quarter.
4 deals coming to market: ATTO, BRVE, VOGX, MDAT
In the August 2026 run, several fundamentals correlate with 3–6M returns, but none survive false‑discovery correction and multivariate models have negative CV R².
In our 2026-07-23 factor run on IPOs priced in the last year, zero pre-IPO fundamentals survived multiple-testing at 3M or 6M, and prior “cash-flow growth” signal vanished.
MDAT is a tiny, high-multiple Web3 services IPO with shrinking revenue; the main risks are valuation fragility, client concentration/retention, and micro-float volatility—recent small Web3-adjacent deals have not been kind to buy-and-hold investors.
BWGC is a tiny, project-driven industrial EPC business coming public at a low-dollar valuation after a repricing; the real debate is whether today’s profit is durable against customer concentration and lumpy revenue recognition in a weak small-cap IPO tape.
Underwriter “reputation” can matter at the margin in clean, well-measured samples, but in today’s long-tail IPO tape the 30‑day outcome is dominated by issuer quality, deal structure, and liquidity—not the logo on the cover.
The SEC scrapped the 2003 research settlement in December 2025. We rebuilt Michaely & Womack's classic conflict study on 3,581 firm-attributed ratings across 259 US IPOs — and found that the same bank says 'buy' 15.7 points more often when it underwrote the deal.
The widely circulated $21–$25 range/$8B valuation framing conflicts with the database snapshot showing a $28.75 offer price, a $1.0B gross deal size, and an ~$11.6B post-IPO market cap—raising “terms are moving” risk right into pricing.
Reformation’s IPO pitch leans heavily on brand and sustainability, but the disclosed financial scale and implied multiples suggest investors are being asked to underwrite narrative more than fundamentals.
Ticketplus is marketing a small ~$29M IPO at a rich ~6.9x sales for a 28-employee LATAM live-events stack; the bigger risk isn’t growth—it’s customer concentration and post-IPO liquidity in a tape where recent consumer IPOs are overwhelmingly down.
MetaOptics is pitching a vertically integrated metalens + AI imaging stack, but the IPO is essentially a micro-cap financing of a very early, lumpy-revenue hardware business where execution and customer concentration dominate the risk-reward.
Scribe’s $13–$15 IPO is a bet on in vivo CRISPR durability in common cardiometabolic disease, but the setup is still classic early-clinical biotech: binary data risk, heavy dilution, and a weak 12‑month biotech IPO tape where the median deal is underwater.
BW Industrial’s ~$21M IPO is a micro-cap EPC contractor with project-accounting and customer concentration risk, coming to market as recent Industrials IPOs have, on median, traded down sharply post-open.
QumulusAI is trying to float an AI/GPU-infrastructure story with microcap economics and thin disclosure; recent tech IPO outcomes argue the base case is post-IPO drawdown unless liquidity, pricing discipline, and revenue quality prove unusually strong.
Ticketplus is coming public at a premium valuation for a tiny, fast-growing platform business, but the real risk is whether growth and margins are durable once you separate “full-stack” claims from promoter/venue concentration and LatAm operating volatility.
MetaOptics is pitching a vertically integrated “metalens” stack, but the IPO is very small (~$18–$23M) relative to a large implied cap in our dataset, leaving execution, liquidity, and valuation optics as the core risks—while there’s not enough disclosed peer-IPO performance data here to claim an “i
Not yet: the schedule may smooth the first 90 days, but SPCX’s stability so far is being driven more by demand/flow mechanics and valuation gravity than by lockup design.
Tarsier’s small ophthalmology-focused IPO is selling a late-clinical “platform” story into a biopharma tape where the median deal is still down in the first 1–3 months, making trial/regulatory execution and near-term financing the central risks.
Standard Nuclear is marketing a high-valuation, pre-scale nuclear fuel story into a sector where public investors have rewarded first-day scarcity but punished multi-quarter execution risk—especially when reactors aren’t yet commercial.
Csquare’s ~$1.25B–$1.55B IPO is a liquidity and balance-sheet event for a Brookfield-controlled data-center consolidator with mid-single/low-double growth, solid gross margin, and persistent losses—launching into a 12‑month IPO cohort where median post-IPO returns are deeply negative.
Ticketplus is coming public at a modest ~$29M raise, but it’s being priced like a high-growth software platform despite thin profits, customer concentration risk, and a 2025–2026 consumer IPO tape that has punished anything short of category-defining winners.
MetaOptics’ ~$23M IPO is a very small, early‑commercialization bet on metalens hardware + services + AI imaging software, with the core risk being whether tiny current revenue can turn into repeatable, scalable demand rather than one-off prototype/foundry work.
Tarsier is a small, late-clinical ophthalmology biotech targeting a ~$58M raise, but the bigger risk is the typical post-IPO biopharma grind—thin liquidity, binary clinical/regulatory events, and a weak 3‑month window for recent healthcare IPOs.
The filing reads like an AI-memory capex story, but the investable question is whether the market will pay up for a cyclical, capital-hungry DRAM/HBM business in a weak post-IPO tape for tech deals.
Coolbit’s $4–$5 IPO looks like a thinly capitalized, newly formed, hosting-dependent Bitcoin miner—and there are no recent, clean “Bitcoin mining IPO” comps in our dataset to anchor performance expectations.
MetaOptics is pitching vertical integration across metalenses + tools + AI imaging, but the IPO is tiny, the valuation optics look inconsistent across sources, and execution risk (yield, scaling, and real end-demand) dominates the setup.
Bending Spoons is marketing an acquisition-led “operational excellence” play, but the IPO is priced like a high-growth software story while the near-zero earnings base and integration risk make outcomes far more path-dependent than the headline growth suggests.
CopperTech’s IPO is a big, single-asset copper story marketed into an AI/electrification narrative, but investors are really underwriting Zambia execution, commodity-cycle timing, and sponsor/parent incentives—while the recent U.S. “copper IPO” comp set is effectively empty in our dataset.
ITG’s IPO pitches mission‑critical digital infrastructure services at a ~$2.67B valuation, but the real debate is whether a low‑margin, customer‑concentrated contractor deserves “infrastructure” multiples in a choppy IPO tape.
DPC/Doncasters is pitching “high-growth” aerospace/industrial gas turbine components, but the IPO is really a leveraged cycle-and-execution bet at ~5x sales and ~38x EV/EBITDA despite a $173M net loss.
Lime is trying to float a capital-intensive, city-permit-dependent scooter/bike rental operator at roughly a $1.6B market cap while still unprofitable—so the IPO will likely trade less on “growth” and more on durability of unit economics, regulation, and asset-depreciation discipline.
DSC is pitching an AI/digital operating system for China’s used-car dealers, but the deal is effectively a transaction-services business with China + platform monetization risks—and the US-listed comp set is thin, which matters for how you size this one.
DPC is pitching a “supercycle” in aerospace engines and industrial gas turbines, but the IPO is being marketed at high EV/EBITDA and ~5x sales despite ongoing losses, making the deal highly sensitive to any stumble in margins, production ramp, or end-market momentum.
Kardigan is trying to raise about $429M at a fixed $16 IPO price for a three-asset, in-licensed cardiology pipeline—an unusually large check for a clinical-stage story where the main risks are clinical readouts, licensing economics, and how long the cash actually lasts.
A combination of rebounding investor risk appetite, strong early 2026 market performance, and pent-up demand fueled the third-highest US IPO tally in three years.
6 deals coming to market: BWGC, MDAT, MOT, TP…
2 deals coming to market: MOT, TP
6 deals coming to market: CBAI, MOT, TP, TARX…
Coolbit’s $4–$5 IPO is a small capital raise for a capital-hungry business model, leaving dilution/financing and hosting-counterparty risk as the core issues; comparable “Bitcoin mining IPO” performance can’t be quantified from our database as of 2026-07-08.
IPO return data is non‑Gaussian, event-driven, and riddled with dependence—so accurate measurement requires compounding-aware return definitions, explicit sampling design (cross‑section vs panel), and robust statistics that reduce leverage from extreme winners/losers.
4 deals coming to market: CBAI, MOT, TARX, SKHY
5 deals coming to market: BSP, CUX, ITG, LIME…
1 deal coming to market: DPC
1 deal coming to market: FCBM
5 IPOs scheduled this week. INIO, QNT, SFPT…
No IPOs on the calendar this week.
An IPO used to have months before index funds came knocking. Under Nasdaq's new Fast Entry rule, that window has collapsed to 15 trading days.
