Adaptam Therapeutics has raised €3 million in Adaptam Therapeutics funding to advance novel antibody-based cancer immunotherapies that disarm the tumor’s immune-suppressing defenses.
Tahoe-x1 single cell, a 3-billion-parameter foundation model, applies large language model scaling laws to biology, promising a leap in cancer drug discovery.
Valthos AI biodefense has secured $30 million to develop AI systems that rapidly detect biological threats and update medical countermeasures in real-time, addressing the growing risks of programmable biology.
Want to keep track of the largest startup funding deals in 2025 with our curated list of $100 million-plus venture deals to U.S.-based companies? Check out The Crunchbase Megadeals Board.
This is a weekly feature that runs down the week’s top 10 announced funding rounds in the U.S. Check out last week’s biggest funding rounds here.
This was another active week for large startup financings. AI data center developer Crusoe Energy Systems led with $1.38 billion in fresh financing, and several other megarounds were AI-focused startups. Other standouts hailed from a diverse array of sectors, including battery recycling, biotech and even fire suppression.
1. Crusoe Energy Systems, $1.38B, AI data centers: Crusoe Energy Systems, a developer of AI data centers and infrastructure, raised $1.38 billion in a financing led by Valor Equity Partners and Mubadala Capital. The deal sets a $10 billion+ valuation for the Denver-based company.
2. Avride, $375M, autonomous vehicles: Avride, a developer of technology to power autonomous vehicles and delivery robots, announced that it secured commitments of up to $375 million backed by Uber and Nebius Group. The 8-year-old, Austin, Texas-based company said it plans to launch its first robotaxi service on Uber’s platform in Dallas this year.
3. Redwood Materials, $350M, battery recycling: Battery recycling company Redwood Materials closed a $350 million Series E round led by Eclipse Ventures with participation from new investors including Nvidia’s NVentures. Founded in 2017, the Carson City, Nevada-based company has raised over $2 billion in known equity funding to date.
4. Uniphore, $260M, agentic AI: Uniphore, developer of an AI platform for businesses to deploy agentic AI, closed on $260 million in a Series F round that included backing from Nvidia, AMD, Snowflake Ventures and Databricks Ventures. The round sets a $2.5 billion valuation for the Palo Alto, California-based company.
5. Sesame, $250M, voice AI and smart glasses: San Francisco-based Sesame, a developer of conversational AI technology and smart glasses, picked up $250 million in a Series B round led by Sequoia Capital. The startup is headed by former Oculus CEO and co-founder Brendan Iribe.
6. OpenEvidence, $200M, AI for medicine: OpenEvidence, developer of an AI tool for medical professionals that has been nicknamed the “ChatGPT for doctors” reportedly raised $200 million in a GV-led round at a $6 billion valuation. Three months earlier, OpenEvidence pulled in $210 million at a $3.5 billion valuation.
7. Electra Therapeutics, $183M, biotech: Electra Therapeutics, a developer of therapies against novel targets for diseases in immunology and cancer, secured $183 million in a Series C round. Nextech Invest and EQT Life Sciences led the financing for the South San Francisco, California-based company.
8. LangChain, $125M, AI agents: LangChain, developer of a platform for engineering AI agents, picked up $125 million in fresh funding at a $1.25 billion valuation. IVP led the financing for the 3-year-old, San Francisco-based company.
9. ShopMy, $70M, brand marketing: New York-based ShopMy, a platform that connects brands and influencers, landed $70 million in a funding round led by Avenir. The financing sets a $1.5 billion valuation for the 5-year-old company.
10. Seneca, $60M, fire suppression: Seneca, a startup developing a fire suppression system that includes autonomous drones that help spot and put out fires, launched publicly with $60 million in initial funding. Caffeinated Capital and Convective Capital led the financing for the San Francisco-based company.
Methodology
We tracked the largest announced rounds in the Crunchbase database that were raised by U.S.-based companies for the period of Oct. 18-24. Although most announced rounds are represented in the database, there could be a small time lag as some rounds are reported late in the week.
As startup valuations reset and venture capital firms hunt for unconventional deals, one investor is looking to the bankruptcy courts. Bambu Ventures, an early-stage VC firm, last month agreed to acquire telemedicine company Lemonaid Health — once a $400 million bet by 23andMe — for just $10 million.
The transaction is more than a bargain buy. It’s also an intriguing deal that illustrates how an early-stage VC firm can operate by a private-equity playbook to revive a distressed asset.
DNA testing company 23andMe acquired Lemonaid for $400 million in 2021. Lemonaid operated as a division of 23andMe until the parent company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy earlier this year.
Last month, New York-based Bambu made a deal with Chrome Holding Co. — the rebranded former parent company 23andMe Holding — in which the venture firm agreed to buy Lemonaid for a staggering 40x less than the DNA company had originally paid for the telehealth brand.
Kyle Pretsch, COO of Lemonaid SPV Inc.
So why did Bambu Ventures make a play for Lemonaid? Just how did it win the bid? And what are its plans for the asset? Crunchbase News recently spoke with Kyle Pretsch, COO of Lemonaid SPV Inc. and general partner at Bambu Ventures, to discuss all this and more. The interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.
This is not your typical startup purchase. What prompted you to buy Lemonaid? Are you going to operate as an independent startup?
Lemonaid wasn’t just a company. It was a vision. It was an incredibly exciting team. It’s an incredible, exciting market, and it’s a mission that we can all feel good about, which is increasing accessibility to healthcare. Obviously, there’s a phenomenal market for that, but at the end of the day, we are working to provide improved transparency, the ability to improve your lifestyle at an affordable cost, and do it in a nice, systemic fashion, to reach more people.
23andMe has been an incredible custodian of this company and so we didn’t just see it as a company. We saw something much, much more. We plan to operate it independently. We like the fact that this is a space we’re familiar with. This is a space we have other holdings in.
We expect there will be opportunities along the way to use those contributions to help grow Lemonaid.
I understand that you’re paying about $10 million for Lemonaid when 23andMe paid $400 million to acquire it just a few years ago. Do you view this as an incredible opportunity?
Yes. We don’t believe the value of the asset has eroded since 2021.
Regeneron is buying the rest of 23andMe. How did you end up with Lemonaid?
Regeneron actually didn’t bid for Lemonade. It excluded it from their purchase. And technically Regeneron didn’t win 23andMe, either.
At one point, it had been identified as the winning bidder, but an organization called TTAM Research Institute, which was a research institute founded in part by Anne Wojcicki, the original founder of 23andMe, ended up prevailing in the repurchasing of the assets out of bankruptcy.
It, too, excluded Lemonaid from its bid. So both organizations put forth what’s called a stalking horse bid, which is if no one else bids, they would absorb the asset for a certain amount. And we ended up bidding in excess of that.
This feels very similar to a private-equity play. Do you think this sort of transaction is becoming more common? Are you going to do it more often?
This is a really unique situation, and for so many reasons I don’t think venture capital is going to find itself stalking the bankruptcy courts.
Nor do I think this was a standard bankruptcy case. But I do think our firm specifically brings a very PE style to venture capital. That’s what we do as a firm. And I think this was an exceptional opportunity where you have a venture-like company with PE idealism and process that can go ahead and reconstitute its growth track. We expect venture growth with PE discipline, and we’re happy to marry the two.
The fact that we identified it in bankruptcy court is a huge testament to our firm, how we worked and how we adapted to chase after a vision that we really, really, found meaningful. I believe this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
So it’s not something you’ve done before?
I have some experience in this space, but this is not a situation that I’ve ever come across. We’ve looked at things in bankruptcy before, but I think if you talk to anybody involved in this particular case, they would say: “Never has anything like this existed” for 10 different reasons.
How do you distinguish yourselves as a VC firm, and did Bambu Ventures actually conduct this acquisition?
Bambu Ventures is an operating firm for a variety of venture capital funds. Specifically, our key fund right now is a $50 million to $100 million fund, and Lemonaid is not being purchased from the fund.
We offer co-investments and sometimes pursue side deals, and this was something that I think the fund will have some participation in, but this is an act outside of that fund.
The same principles, however exist, which is, as a firm we believe in finding the companies that are being given these low values, or are being sometimes overshadowed or overlooked, and then bringing our team to it, and bringing discipline and execution to it, and reinvigorating growth — overlooked assets, plus PE discipline in well-known environments. And that, plus our team, is a formula for our success.
The purchasing entity is actually Lemonaid SPV. Bambu Ventures is a guarantor, because that’s a new company.
How is this transaction similar or different from a PE-type acquisition?
The mechanics are a little bit different in that it’s not being owned by a fund or an LP. It’s owned by an SPV. This is very similar to any kind of corporate transaction. We have a cap table. We have set up what we think is an incredible list of investors. We’ve taken some fund money from other VC funds to help instill that it has a list of interested LPs and parties.
So I would say this is very, very similar. The only key difference is we’re investing in a different company … From an organizational governance perspective, we went ahead and moved the investor funds directly into a top, or holding, company with its own cap table, versus a fund.
What will you do differently with Lemonaid?
The 23andMe team have been great stewards to this company, they’ve been great partners in transition and have really set this transaction up for success. I think there are immediate opportunities to advance within patient care, and that’s adding product and reaching more patients.
We plan on investing in marketing spend. Obviously 23andMe, through its process, had reduced that marketing spend heavily.
Will you be competing with companies such as Ro and Hims & Hers?
There is more than enough white space that we can all operate within our own moats and in our own domains without this warriors’ battle.
I will say that we do have visions of incredible growth, and we do have visions of creating a holistic offering that serves more and creates an improved consumer experience.
Login
