Hey Fintech Friends,

Amid bank runs, an AI frenzy, and a shifting venture landscape, one concept quietly drew attention from fintech investors in Q1: Carbon credit markets.

For new readers, Signals is the premium subscriber edition of TWIF designed to get you away from the headlines and to explore the larger trendlines. Each quarter, we break down four key questions on fintech activity:

  1. Which concepts are getting funded?

  2. Where are exits, M&A, and SPACs concentrated?

  3. Which firms are raising debt and venture funds for fintech?

  4. Which products were launched over the last quarter?

If you haven’t already, subscribe to future editions here!

Overall activity

Fintechs raised a total of $12.1 billion in Q1, over half of which was comprised of Stripe’s nail-biting, employee-RSU-triggering Series I. Excluding Stripe from the dataset, fintech funding decreased by $114 million, or 2%, from the prior quarter.

See the full Q1 ‘22 data here (for paid subscribers only).

Meanwhile, the S&P 500 ticked up 7%, Bitcoin climbed 70%, and public fintechs investors seem to be refocusing their attention from high revenue growth to profitability:

Source: Morgan Stanley, “FinTech Weekly Update” March 31, 2023.

Let’s dive into fintech activity in Q1.

Which concepts are getting funded? 🤑

Funding was relatively even across rounds as fintechs closed chunkier late-stage deals, with Series D and Series E round sizes ballooning by 98% and 183% respectively over the prior quarter. Notably, Rippling notably pulled off an emergency $500 million Series E in twelve hours to cover payroll for 50,000 employees whose incoming funds were frozen overnight during SVB’s collapse.

See the full Q1 ‘22 data here (for paid subscribers only).

Areas that saw the highest activity were:

See the full Q1 ‘22 data here (for paid subscribers only).

A few concepts received notable funding, including:

Where are exits, M&A, and SPACs concentrated? 📈

Here’s an unsurprising chart:

See the full Q1 ‘22 data here (for paid subscribers only).

Banks led acquisition activity, with bank runs driving UBS’ takeover of Credit Suisse, New York Community Bank to snap up Signature Bank, the acquisition of Silicon Valley Bank by First Citizens, and of SVB’s UK division by HSBC for a symbolic £1.

LevelField acquired Burling Bank in a bid to become the first full-service, FDIC-insured, chartered bank offering crypto services nationwide– though given the forced shut-down of Signature, regulators seemingly aren’t keen to bless new crypto banks anytime soon.

Which firms are raising debt and venture funds for fintech? 💰

Venture funds launched in fewer numbers, but with a resounding focus on early-stage platforms:

  • TTV Capital closed $250M for its sixth fund targeting early-stage fintechs.

  • Mendoza Ventures is raising $100M for its third fund focused on early growth-stage companies led by diverse teams.

  • Altari Ventures unveiled a $53M fund geared towards early-stage fintech and insurtech startups.

  • DFS Labs and Stellar Blockchain launched the Africa Fund I, focused on early-stage digital payments startups in Africa leveraging the Stellar network.

Which products were launched over the last quarter? 🚀

See the full Q1 ‘22 data here (for paid subscribers only).

In reaction to the bank drama, digital business banks and banking infrastructure providers like Mercury, Crescent, and Unit* all unveiled higher FDIC insurance limits on deposits.  

In business financial management, the race is on to ship AI features. Tribal Credit launched its GPT-powered Cash Copilot solution; similarly, Navan (fka TripActions) previewed ChatGPT-enabled expense reporting with a renewed focus on taking down SAP Concur. Brex launched (non-AI-powered) travel expensing, because apparently the race is also on to compete with SAP Concur.

In payments, entering card details is out; card autofill is in, with Google launching single-use virtual cards and Adyen’s card-on-file checkout feature. Apple’s payments arm also threw its hat in the consumer financing ring with the long-anticipated launch of Apple Pay Later.

* Former employer of yours truly 👋🏼.

Q1’23 Signal: Carbon credits

While venture funding dampened across the board, one concept quietly gained momentum in Q1: Carbon credits. Of the $12 billion in funding that went to fintechs, 2% went to carbon credit platforms, with Xpansiv, Carbonplace, Senken, Renew West, Alcove, Carbonable, Agreena, and HeavyFinance racking up a total $238 million in equity financing.

Despite having been around for over 25 years, carbon credit markets are still notoriously opaque, with studies finding that up to 90%-96% of carbon credits offered by the leading issuer don't actually reduce emissions to any meaningful degree. Meanwhile, companies' appetite for carbon credits is set to grow by a factor of 15x and attain upwards of $50 billion in value by 2030.

Source: McKinsey, “A blueprint for scaling voluntary carbon markets to meet the climate challenge”

Theoretically, carbon credit markets would efficiently match carbon offset projects with funding from companies looking to buy high-quality credits. In reality, the market’s lack of transparent standards has scared buyers away from providing liquidity and left legitimate carbon offset projects struggling to raise money.

New standards are emerging to bring greater transparency to carbon credits, and if successful, there's a major opportunity for platforms to unlock liquidity in a space that until now has been largely inaccessible to mainstream financial markets.

Carbon credits: A tl;dr

Carbon credits trade in two markets: 1. Regulated markets, in which a government imposes a cap-and-trade system forcing companies emitting carbon above a certain threshold to buy carbon credits from companies that emit below the threshold, and 2. Voluntary markets, wherein companies– as the name implies, voluntarily– buy carbon offsets to help achieve environmental impact targets (think: Google's "carbon neutrality" commitment, or airlines letting you tack $20 onto your airfare to "offset" the climate impact of your flight).

Regulated carbon markets exist in 34 jurisdictions today, including the EU, Canada, China, and eleven US states. In certain regulated markets, companies can substitute carbon offsets for government-issued carbon credits.

Source: Redshaw Advisors, "Good, Bad, and Ugly Carbon Investment"

There's a lot of criticism surrounding the fact that carbon offsets don't actually, you know... offset any carbon. In absence of transparent ways to measure carbon credits' impact and in the face of low price availability (75% of credits trade OTC, so there's little volume on exchanges to indicate market values), investors are staying on the sidelines. In Europe, speculators hold less than 1% of open positions in the carbon credit market.

New opportunities for carbon credit markets

International governance bodies like the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market and Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative are working to restore trust by creating universal rules and transparency mechanisms. If successful, this would lay the groundwork for carbon credit markets to route a lot more funding to high-quality carbon offset projects.

Some key opportunities for tech platforms:

  • Carbon accounting- Better-functioning voluntary carbon markets drives pressure on companies to reduce their carbon footprints, thus a need for infrastructure that helps companies measure, track, and offset emissions.

  • Bulk transactions- Heterogenous data makes it nearly impossible to compare any two credits (how would you weigh offsets from a water filtration project in Vietnam vs. a reforestation project in Brazil?), especially for companies that need to fill large orders with credits meeting specific criteria. A standardized schema would make it easier for companies to find credits that meet their needs and purchase them in a single basket.

  • Ex-ante credits- Projects in need of funding today will raise money by selling "ex-ante credits", or credits promising the offset of future emissions. Ex-ante credits hold so much potential for longer-term carbon reductions, but carry higher uncertainty that’s compounded by the current lack of standardized metrics. A common framework for grading ex-ante credits would minimize this uncertainty and create a market for forward-looking carbon offset initiatives.

  • Retail buyers- Individual investors looking to get exposure to carbon credits, or simply buy them to gift offsets in someone else's name (shoutout to Patch for this piece of marketing brilliance ⬇️) will push up demand for retail-accessible products from investment & carbon platforms.

Credit: Patch, a unified climate action platform.

Calls for transparency in carbon credit markets are bringing about a new dawn for the industry. Assuming that the transparency & oversight standards emerging in the coming months (years?) manage to restore trust, tech platforms are positioning themselves to let companies, investors, and carbon offset projects harness the full potential of this space.

Reply

Avatar

or to participate

KEEP READING