Venture capital news headlines these days are dominated by stories of size: capital concentration into the highest-growth companies, surging valuations, seed rounds totaling tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars, and megafunds raising tens of billions in new capital.
Smaller funds and more modest seed rounds are seemingly out of favor.
Seed trends bifurcate
Crunchbase’s U.S. seed funding numbers confirm that perception.
Deal counts and amounts are down roughly 20% year over year for the pre-seed and regular seed funding range bands that include deals of $200,000 to under $5 million. (As always, that proportion will improve a bit over time as smaller seed rounds are added to Crunchbase.)
The mid-tier band, from $5 million to under $10 million, was on par year over year.
Among U.S. seed funding deals, it’s only the upper bands of larger and outlier seed rounds — those $10 million and above — that grew in 2025, Crunchbase data shows.
It’s a bifurcated market, according to Katie Stanton, founder of seed fund Moxxie Ventures. “You’re either an AI elite team that is growing really fast and you’re going to raise a ton of capital at Series A from one of the big firms — or you’re everybody else,” she said.
In reaction to the market changing, her fund has shifted its strategy, saving a greater proportion — 60% to 70% for primary capital — compared to 50% in prior funds. “We would rather have more shots on goal,” she said.
The second shift has been to find founders even earlier, often not even waiting for product-market fit.
Seed deal counts
The majority of seed-stage deal counts still occur for rounds $5 million and under. But that percentage has trended down over time, from 93% in 2018 to 75% of deals in 2025.
Meanwhile, larger and outlier seed rounds of $10 million and above have climbed from 2% to 9% over that time. That means roughly 1 in 10 seed deals over $200,000 in 2025 were in deals $10 million and over, numbering around 360.
Seed amounts
U.S. seed funding totaled $19.4 billion in 2025, per Crunchbase data.
Large deals drove that increase — 51% in seed deals $10 million and over, compared to a third in 2024. The largest seed round in 2025 was $2 billion for Mira Murati’s Thinking Machines Lab.
Between 2018 and 2025, seed rounds of $200,000 to $5 million fell, from 70% of all seed funding amounts to 26%.
At the same time, seed rounds of $5 million and above have gained ground since 2021, and remained elevated in contrast to 2020 and earlier.
In 2025, the biggest jump in amounts were the outlier seed rounds — those deals $50 million and above — which increased more than 300%. Even those larger seed rounds of $10 million to $50 million gained 20%.
Seed reshaped
Crunchbase data shows seed funding has by no means stalled.
Instead, AI is reshaping seed investment, with multistage venture and mid-tier funds backing hot companies earlier and at higher values due to founder pedigree or company traction.
As a result, larger seed rounds increased in 2025 with more than 20 outlier deals of $50 million-plus and over 300 in the $10 million to $50 million range.
Seed fund managers are shifting strategies based on a changing funding market.
“It has never been so easy to build a product, and it’s never been so hard to build a business,” said Stanton.
A small seed round can lead to the next breakthrough company. “There’s still a need for the smaller companies to emerge, and the smaller VCs to emerge to serve those different constituencies,” she said.
Related Crunchbase queries:
Related reading:
- Turing Winner LeCun’s New ‘World Model’ AI Lab Raises $1B In Europe’s Largest Seed Round Ever
- Thinking Machines Lab’s $2B Seed Round Is Biggest By A Long Shot
Illustration: Dom Guzman
Stay up to date with recent funding rounds, acquisitions, and more with the Crunchbase Daily.
67.1K Followers
Facts Only
U.S. seed funding totaled $19.4 billion in 2025, per Crunchbase data.
Seed rounds of $10 million and above accounted for 51% of seed deals in 2025, up from 33% in 2024.
The largest seed round in 2025 was $2 billion for Mira Murati’s Thinking Machines Lab.
Seed rounds of $50 million and above increased over 300% in 2025.
Seed rounds between $10 million and $50 million grew by 20% in 2025.
Seed rounds of $200,000 to $5 million fell from 70% of all seed funding amounts in 2018 to 26% in 2025.
Deal counts for pre-seed and regular seed rounds ($200,000 to under $5 million) declined roughly 20% year over year.
The mid-tier band ($5 million to under $10 million) remained stable year over year.
In 2025, 9% of seed deals over $200,000 were $10 million or larger, totaling around 360 deals.
Katie Stanton, founder of Moxxie Ventures, shifted strategy to allocate 60-70% of capital to primary investments, up from 50% in prior funds.
Stanton’s fund now targets founders earlier, often before product-market fit.
The percentage of seed deals $5 million and under dropped from 93% in 2018 to 75% in 2025.
Executive Summary
Venture capital trends in 2025 show a bifurcated seed funding market, with larger deals dominating while smaller rounds decline. Crunchbase data reveals that seed funding totaled $19.4 billion, driven by a surge in outlier rounds—particularly those $10 million and above, which accounted for 51% of seed deals, up from a third in 2024. The largest seed round was $2 billion for Mira Murati’s Thinking Machines Lab, while deals $50 million and above increased over 300%. Meanwhile, smaller seed rounds ($200,000 to $5 million) fell from 70% of funding amounts in 2018 to just 26% in 2025. Investors like Katie Stanton of Moxxie Ventures are adapting by reserving more capital for primary investments and targeting founders earlier, even pre-product-market fit. The shift reflects AI’s influence, with multistage funds backing high-growth companies at higher valuations. Despite the dominance of large deals, smaller VCs and startups still play a critical role in fostering innovation, though the market increasingly favors elite teams with rapid scaling potential.
The landscape suggests a growing divide: AI-driven startups with elite pedigrees attract outsized capital, while others struggle to secure funding. This polarization raises questions about accessibility and the long-term health of the startup ecosystem, as smaller funds and modest rounds become less viable. The data underscores a structural shift where speed and scale are prioritized, potentially sidelining diverse or unconventional founders who may not fit the "elite" mold. Yet, the persistence of smaller deals indicates that niche opportunities and patient capital still exist, even if they are overshadowed by headline-grabbing mega-rounds.
Full Take
The strongest version of this narrative highlights a clear structural shift in venture capital: AI and elite founder pedigrees are driving capital concentration, with larger seed rounds becoming the norm while smaller deals decline. The data is compelling—outlier rounds ($10M+) now dominate, and the $2B seed round for Thinking Machines Lab is a stark example of this trend. The analysis acknowledges the adaptability of smaller funds like Moxxie Ventures, which are adjusting strategies to survive in this environment. The piece avoids overt emotional manipulation but leans into a "winner-takes-all" framing, implicitly suggesting that only AI-driven, elite-backed startups can thrive. This could subtly pressure founders to conform to a narrow definition of success.
Patterns detected: ARC-0024 Ambiguity (implied "elite" vs. "everybody else" binary without clear criteria), ARC-0043 Motte-and-Bailey (generalizing "AI elite" as the only path to success while acknowledging smaller VCs still have a role).
Root cause: The paradigm here is the venture capital industry’s increasing focus on scalability and rapid returns, amplified by AI hype. The unstated assumption is that innovation is best served by concentrating capital in a few high-growth companies, rather than distributing it widely. This echoes historical patterns of industry consolidation, where early-stage risk-taking gives way to oligopolistic control.
Implications: Human agency is constrained for founders who don’t fit the "elite" mold, while dignity is at risk for smaller VCs forced to adapt or exit. The beneficiaries are large multistage funds and AI-focused startups, while the costs fall on diverse founders and patient capital strategies. Second-order consequences could include reduced innovation diversity and a startup ecosystem that prioritizes speed over sustainability.
Bridge questions: What metrics define an "elite" team beyond AI pedigree? How might this capital concentration affect long-term innovation in non-AI sectors? Would a correction in AI hype reverse these trends, or is this a permanent shift?
Counterstrike scan: A coordinated influence campaign would amplify the "AI or bust" narrative to funnel capital toward specific firms or technologies, using data to create inevitability. The actual content aligns with this pattern but lacks overt manipulation—it presents data neutrally while letting the implications speak for themselves. No red flags beyond the structural bias inherent in VC trends.