Venture Capital Funds Currently Raising in 2026: Who Is in Market and What LPs Are Being Offered

Venture capital funds currently raising in 2026 range from $15 billion multi-strategy platforms to $30 million debut funds, and the gap between them has never been wider. This market report from the Kurums Venture Capital Finance Sub-Topic Hub lists the funds that have closed or announced targets this year with sources and dates, explains why LP money is concentrating in a few dozen firms, walks through first-close and final-close mechanics, shows how LPs discover funds in market, and describes what a prospective investor can expect to receive in the PPM and LPA package.

How much venture capital has been raised in 2026 so far?

Through mid-October 2026, quarterly tallies from Murph Capital (about $39 billion in Q2 and $46 billion in Q3, plus a first quarter dominated by a16z and Thrive) point to well over $100 billion of disclosed global venture fund closes for the year, versus $66.1 billion raised by US firms in all of 2025, with the increase driven by a dozen mega-funds rather than by more funds closing.

The baseline matters. According to the PitchBook-NVCA Q4 2025 Venture Monitor, US venture firms closed 537 funds on $66.1 billion in 2025, the lowest dollar total since 2018 and about 30% of the 2021 count. PitchBook attributed the drought to negative net cash flows to LPs of almost $200 billion since 2022: with distributions scarce, pensions and endowments could not recycle money into new commitments. The report expected the market to stay stagnant for new funds until cash flows turned positive.

Then 2026 opened with a wave. Value Add VC’s live tracker, last updated 20 August 2026, listed 49 named closes worth about $68.3 billion in dollar funds plus roughly €1.6 billion in euro funds, led by Andreessen Horowitz, Thrive, Sequoia, Founders Fund, Accel, Lead Edge, Battery, Kleiner Perkins and Spark. Murph Capital’s Q3 2026 review, published 15 October 2026, added 152 closes worth about $46 billion in the third quarter alone, up from $39.3 billion in Q2, including Bessemer’s $5.75 billion, Accel’s $3.5 billion across four vehicles, a further $2.85 billion for a16z, G Squared’s $2.3 billion Fund VII and Index Ventures’ $2 billion across three funds.

The reopening IPO window explains some of the shift. CoreWeave, Circle, Figma and Chime listed in 2025, and LPs anticipating OpenAI, SpaceX and Databricks liquidity have been willing to re-up with managers who hold those positions. The pattern is consistent with the structural split described in our review of where venture capital went in 2024–2026: AI-heavy growth strategies raise easily, everything else is hard.

Which US mega-funds closed or are in market in 2026?

The largest 2026 closes are a16z’s five funds totalling more than $15 billion (9 January), Thrive Capital’s $10 billion Fund X (17 February), Sequoia’s roughly $7 billion expansion fund (16 April), Founders Fund’s $6.02 billion Growth Fund IV (6 March) and Accel’s $4 billion Leaders Fund (15 April).

Andreessen Horowitz’s raise, reported by Axios on 9 January 2026, comprised a $6.75 billion fifth growth fund, $1.7 billion each for Apps Fund 2 and Infrastructure Fund 2, a $1.18 billion American Dynamism Fund 2, a $700 million Bio+Healthcare Fund 5 and about $3 billion of other venture strategies; a separate $2.2 billion Crypto Fund V followed in May. PitchBook noted the January close alone equalled more than 18% of all US VC commitments since the start of 2025. Thrive X, announced 17 February 2026, allocates $1 billion to early stage and the balance to growth, nearly doubles Thrive’s previous fund, and was described to Bloomberg as oversubscribed. Sequoia’s expansion fund, the first major raise under co-stewards Alfred Lin and Pat Grady, is roughly double the $3.4 billion vehicle it raised in 2022 and targets late-stage AI companies in the US and Europe, per TechCrunch on 16 April 2026.

Lightspeed’s $9 billion across six funds, including a $3.3 billion opportunity fund, closed on 15 December 2025 and is effectively 2026 deployment capital. Founders Fund’s Growth Fund IV at just over $6 billion, Battery Ventures’ $3.25 billion Fund XV, Lead Edge’s $3.5 billion Fund VII, Kleiner Perkins’ $2.5 billion growth fund and $995 million Fund XXII, Spark’s $2.33 billion Growth VI and $1 billion Fund IX, Benchmark’s $1.25 billion growth fund, Greylock’s $1.5 billion Fund XVIII, Bain Capital Ventures’ $1.6 billion Fund XI and 8VC’s $1.5 billion Fund VII round out the list. Several firms, including General Catalyst (which raised about $8 billion in October 2024) and Insight Partners, are widely expected to return to market in late 2026 or 2027, but no target had been confirmed by the firms themselves at the time of writing. For profiles of these managers see our ranking of the top venture capital firms in the United States.

Fund sizes as reported by the cited sources between December 2025 and 15 October 2026; several are first closes or approximations and may change at final close.

Which European and Asian funds are raising in 2026?

Europe’s 2026 headline is the €5 billion Scaleup Europe Fund managed by EQT under a European Commission mandate, alongside Highland Europe’s €1.1 billion Fund VI, Index Ventures’ $2 billion trio and a cluster of specialist closes; in Asia, Peak XV’s $1.3 billion India and APAC funds lead.

The Scaleup Europe Fund was launched in August 2026 after EQT won an open competition to manage it. Dealroom reported on 4 August 2026 that founding investors alongside the Commission include Novo Holdings, EIFO, CriteriaCaixa, Santander’s Mouro Capital, Fondazione Compagnia di San Paolo with Intesa Sanpaolo, Fondazione Cariplo, APG on behalf of ABP, Wallenberg Investments and Allianz, with fundraising continuing toward the €5 billion target. Murph Capital counted its first close above €1 billion. It is a growth vehicle for deep-tech scale-ups, designed to address the financing gap described in our analysis of Germany’s scale-up gap.

Beyond that, Q3 2026 saw QuantumLight’s $500 million Fund II (London), DTCP’s €455 million defence fund (Hamburg) and Molten Ventures’ first close on its new growth fund. Value Add VC’s tracker lists euro closes earlier in the year from Earlybird, Daphni, Quantonation, Kurma, 2150, Elaia and Constructor totalling about €1.6 billion. Europe overall accounted for 34 funds and about $6 billion in Q3, roughly 18% of the US dollar total, with the UK contributing 13 funds and $3 billion. In Asia, Peak XV’s February close is the standout; Antler continues to raise regional vehicles, and several Japanese and Korean managers have announced new funds. The regional context is covered in our guide to venture firms in India and Southeast Asia.

Why are LPs concentrating their commitments in the top 30 firms?

LPs are consolidating relationships because distributions have been scarce, re-ups with managers holding pre-IPO winners look safest, and institutional committees find it easier to defend a brand-name commitment than an emerging manager.

Murph Capital’s Q3 2026 report describes the dynamic as “concentration inside a contraction”: 26 mega-funds were 17% of closes but 76% of capital, while the median emerging-manager close fell from $55 million in Q2 to $31 million. Funds between $100 million and $500 million made up only 10% of closes through Q3, the lowest share on record. TechCrunch’s December 2025 coverage of Lightspeed’s raise quoted the same mechanism: endowments, pensions and sovereign funds concentrating in firms with proven track records after weak 2021-vintage results.

The liquidity arithmetic reinforces it. Until a pension receives distributions, its venture allocation is “over-weight” simply because public markets fell in 2022 and private marks did not; new commitments then have to wait. When money does flow, it goes to the managers most likely to deliver near-term DPI, which in 2026 means those holding OpenAI, Anthropic, SpaceX, Databricks and Stripe positions. The venture capital barbell effect we described for startups applies to funds too.

LP transparency remains poor. Only 83 of the 152 funds in Murph Capital’s Q3 sample disclosed any LP, 351 unique LPs were named, and just 16 of them backed more than one fund; only 8 of the 26 mega-funds named a single investor. For a prospective LP this means that public data describes the long tail better than the head, and that the best intelligence on who is in a top-tier fund comes from other LPs and from the GPs’ own investor-relations teams.

How do first closes, final closes and hard caps work?

A fund starts investing after its first close, when enough commitments are signed to activate the partnership; later closes admit new LPs on the same terms (usually with an equalisation charge), until the final close, which must occur within the LPA’s deadline (typically 12–18 months) and cannot exceed the hard cap.

The first close is strategically important. GPs want it as early as possible to start deploying and to create momentum, so they offer early LPs incentives: fee discounts of 10–25 basis points, co-investment rights, LPAC seats or more favourable side letters. Anchor LPs who commit a large share of the first close may negotiate a slice of the management company’s economics. For a new LP, the first close is where minimums and terms are most negotiable.

Subsequent closes bring in LPs who missed the first. They typically pay an equalisation amount: their share of capital already called, plus interest at a stated rate (often 6–8%), so that all LPs are economically in the same position regardless of when they joined. The LPA sets a target size and a hard cap; GPs may not accept commitments above the cap without LP consent, and oversubscribed funds cut back allocations pro rata. Thrive X and a16z’s growth fund were reported as oversubscribed, meaning the firms turned money away. The final close date is also when the investment period clock usually starts, which matters for fee step-downs discussed in our explainer on VC fund terms.

How do LPs learn which funds are in market?

LPs track funds in market through SEC Form D filings, data providers such as PitchBook and Preqin, placement agents, fund administrators and lawyers, LP peer networks, and increasingly through GPs’ own public announcements and newsletters.

Form D is the cheapest signal. Any US fund relying on Regulation D must file within 15 days of its first sale, and the filing lists the offering size, amount sold and minimum investment. Trackers such as Value Add VC and Fund Momentum build their daily lists largely from Form D and press releases. PitchBook and Preqin add target sizes, prior fund performance and LP lists, at subscription prices that make sense for institutions and larger family offices. In Europe, ESMA’s AIFMD register and national regulators publish authorised AIFMs but not fund targets, so trade press (Sifted, Tech.eu, Private Equity Wire) and data rooms matter more.

Placement agents (Campbell Lutyens, Eaton Partners, Rede Partners, Asante and many boutiques) represent GPs and reach out to LPs in their networks, typically for funds of $150 million and up; they are paid by the GP, and the LPA should disclose whether placement fees are offset against management fees. Fund administrators, auditors and law firms see funds forming months before Form D and often facilitate introductions. LP associations, from ILPA to regional family-office networks, circulate deal flow informally. Finally, many GPs now announce raises publicly under Rule 506(c), post on LinkedIn and X, and run newsletters; for an LP this is both a discovery channel and a signal that the fund is not fully spoken for.

What does the PPM and LPA package contain?

A prospective LP receives a private placement memorandum describing the strategy, team, track record, terms, risks and conflicts; a limited partnership agreement that is the binding contract; a subscription agreement with investor questionnaires; and usually a due diligence questionnaire, prior-fund performance data and a side-letter template.

The PPM is a disclosure document. It summarises the fund’s terms (size, minimum, fee, carry, investment period, term, GP commitment), presents gross and net performance of prior funds with footnotes on methodology, and contains lengthy risk factors and conflict disclosures: allocation between funds, co-investments, cross-fund investments, affiliated service providers and personal investing by partners. Read the footnotes to the track record; the difference between gross deal-level IRR and net fund-level IRR can be ten points or more.

The LPA is where terms live and can be negotiated, mostly through side letters that grant particular LPs MFN rights, reporting, excuse rights or fee concessions. Expect a draft LPA, a term-sheet summary, and a markup period. The subscription agreement contains the accredited, qualified purchaser or professional-client representations explained in our comparison of investor eligibility rules, plus anti-money-laundering, tax (W-9/W-8, FATCA, CRS) and ERISA or benefit-plan questions. Larger LPs also receive ILPA’s due diligence questionnaire filled in, and from 2026 vintages the updated ILPA reporting and performance templates become the standard for ongoing fee and expense disclosure.

How does a new LP actually get an allocation?

New LPs get allocations by arriving before the first close with a credible cheque, by being introduced through existing LPs or portfolio founders, by offering something the GP values (long-term re-up intent, co-investment capacity, regional access) and by accepting that oversubscribed funds will cut them back.

The process resembles a startup fundraise in reverse. Build a target list of 20–30 managers that fit your strategy and ticket size. Reach GPs through warm paths: their existing LPs, their portfolio founders, their fund counsel or administrator. Ask to be put on the list for the next fund even if the current one is closed; most GPs keep a “waitlist” and begin pre-marketing 6–9 months before launch. When a data room opens, respond quickly: oversubscribed funds often close their first close within weeks.

Position yourself as a good LP. GPs value investors who fund capital calls on time, do not require bespoke reporting, re-up across cycles and bring co-investment or strategic help. Family offices that can move fast and are not bound by committee calendars are attractive anchors for emerging managers. For the very top brands, honesty is required: a new $1 million LP will rarely get into a $7 billion Sequoia fund, and the practical route is a fund of funds or a feeder, as we discuss in our guide to funds of funds and feeder platforms.

What is the outlook for emerging managers for the rest of 2026?

Emerging managers face the hardest fundraising climate in a decade, with first-time fund closes on pace for a record low, but the same scarcity is creating opportunities for LPs willing to anchor small, specialist funds on favourable terms.

PitchBook data cited by Murph Capital show only 81 first-time funds closed in 2026 through the third quarter. Median emerging closes shrank to $31 million, fund-formation lawyers report extended timelines of 18–24 months, and many managers are falling back on rolling funds, SPV series or deal-by-deal structures to keep investing while they raise. Development finance institutions and state-backed funds of funds (the European Investment Fund, British Business Bank, Turkey’s Development Fund, Saudi Jada) have become the most important first-close anchors outside the US.

For LPs the trade is clear. Emerging managers accept lower minimums, grant MFN and LPAC seats more readily, offer fee concessions to first-close investors, and historically have produced a disproportionate share of top-decile funds, alongside a long tail of failures. A barbell of two or three established managers plus a handful of specialist emerging funds, committed steadily across vintages, is the structure many family offices have settled on. Whether 2027 brings a broader recovery depends on distributions: if the 2026 IPO pipeline converts into cash, the LP money that returns will flow first to the brands and only later down the ladder.

Browse the full Investing in VC Funds pillar for eligibility rules, fund-term explainers and the realistic access routes for smaller investors.

Frequently Asked Questions