The post Who Owns Snowflake? appeared first on AI Funding Tracker.

• Owner: Microsoft Corporation
• Acquisition price: $7.5 billion in Microsoft stock
• Deal completed: October 25, 2018
• Original founders: Tom Preston-Werner, Chris Wanstrath, P. J. Hyett, and Scott Chacon
• Current structure: GitHub operates inside Microsoft’s developer and AI organization rather than as a separately traded company

Who Owns GitHub Today?

GitHub is owned by Microsoft Corporation, a publicly traded technology company listed on Nasdaq under the ticker MSFT. GitHub itself has no separately traded shares, public shareholders, or independent market capitalization.

Microsoft acquired all issued and outstanding GitHub shares in 2018. Its 2019 annual report states that the transaction was valued at $7.5 billion and that GitHub’s financial results were consolidated into Microsoft’s accounts from the acquisition date.

That structure means Microsoft shareholders indirectly own GitHub through their Microsoft stock. Large Microsoft investors may therefore have economic exposure to GitHub, but they do not hold direct stakes in GitHub, Inc.

GitHub was initially allowed to retain substantial operational independence after the acquisition. That independence narrowed after CEO Thomas Dohmke announced his departure in August 2025. Microsoft did not replace him with another standalone GitHub CEO and instead moved GitHub closer to its CoreAI organization, which combines AI platforms and developer tools.

GitHub Company Snapshot

GitHub remains a distinct brand, website, developer community, and product platform. Microsoft, however, controls its corporate strategy, leadership structure, capital allocation, and long-term integration with products such as Azure, Visual Studio, and Visual Studio Code.

How Did Microsoft Come to Own GitHub?

GitHub began in 2008 as a web-based platform built around Git, the open source version control system created by Linux founder Linus Torvalds. GitHub’s founders turned Git repositories into a social collaboration platform where software developers could review code, manage projects, and contribute to open source projects.

The company raised outside capital as it expanded. Andreessen Horowitz led a $100 million investment in 2012, while Sequoia Capital and other investors participated in a $250 million funding round in 2015. These investors owned private-company stakes before the Microsoft acquisition.

On June 4, 2018, Microsoft announced an agreement to buy GitHub for $7.5 billion in Microsoft stock. The transaction closed on October 25, 2018. Microsoft said GitHub would continue operating as an open platform and would preserve developer choice across programming languages, operating systems, devices, and cloud providers.

The acquisition also aligned with Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella’s effort to rebuild the company’s relationship with open source developers. Microsoft was already using GitHub for projects including Visual Studio Code, PowerShell, .NET, and portions of its technical documentation.

Where Does GitHub Fit Inside Microsoft?

GitHub gives Microsoft a central position in the software development lifecycle. Developers use the platform to store repositories, collaborate on code, run automated workflows through GitHub Actions, secure applications, and deploy software across different clouds.

This role extends beyond direct subscription revenue. GitHub can introduce individual developers and enterprise teams to Microsoft’s broader ecosystem, including Azure cloud services, Visual Studio, and AI development tools.

Microsoft has historically reported GitHub within its Intelligent Cloud segment rather than publishing a separate GitHub income statement. As a result, Microsoft does not routinely disclose GitHub’s standalone revenue, profit, or current valuation.

GitHub Copilot has made the platform more strategically important. The AI coding service turns 

GitHub from primarily a repository and collaboration platform into a distribution channel for AI-assisted software development. It also places GitHub alongside Azure AI and Visual Studio Code within Microsoft’s wider developer strategy.

What Is Changing at GitHub?

GitHub has become more tightly integrated with Microsoft’s AI organization. Thomas Dohmke, GitHub’s CEO from 2021 to 2025, announced in an August 2025 GitHub post that he was leaving to start another company.

Microsoft then shifted GitHub’s operating responsibilities into its CoreAI organization rather than appointing a direct CEO successor. This marked a change from the relatively independent structure Microsoft emphasized when it bought the company.

GitHub’s current leadership page lists functional executives such as Chief Operating Officer Kyle Daigle but does not present a standalone chief executive. The platform is therefore still a recognizable Microsoft subsidiary, although its leadership and product direction are more closely connected to Microsoft’s broader AI plans.

The practical question for developers is no longer whether Microsoft owns GitHub. It is how far Microsoft will integrate GitHub Copilot, repositories, development agents, Azure infrastructure, and Visual Studio tools while maintaining GitHub’s open-platform identity.

How Does GitHub Ownership Compare With Its Competitors?

GitLab is a separate publicly traded company, GitLab Inc., so its investors can buy GitLab shares directly.

Bitbucket is owned by Atlassian and sits within a broader portfolio that includes Jira and Confluence.

SourceForge is privately operated and focuses more heavily on software distribution and open source project hosting.

AWS CodeCommit is owned by Amazon and was designed mainly for customers working within Amazon Web Services.

GitHub differs because it combines a very large developer community, open source visibility, enterprise software tools, and Microsoft’s cloud and AI resources.

FAQ

Is GitHub owned by Microsoft or Google?

Microsoft owns GitHub. Google has its own developer infrastructure and contributes to many GitHub repositories, but it has no disclosed ownership stake in GitHub.

Does Microsoft own Git?

No. Microsoft owns GitHub, not Git. Git is an open source distributed version control system originally created by Linus Torvalds. GitHub is one of several platforms that host and manage Git repositories.

Who owned GitHub before Microsoft?

Before the acquisition, GitHub was a privately held company owned by its founders, employees, and investors. Its major outside investors included Andreessen Horowitz and Sequoia Capital.

Is GitHub still an independent company?

GitHub remains a separate brand and legal operating entity, but it is not independent in an ownership sense. Microsoft controls the company and has integrated its leadership more closely with Microsoft’s CoreAI and developer-tool operations.

Can you buy GitHub stock?

You cannot buy GitHub stock directly because GitHub is not separately listed. Investors seeking financial exposure to GitHub can buy Microsoft shares, although GitHub represents only one part of Microsoft’s much larger business.

Why did Microsoft buy GitHub?

Microsoft bought GitHub to strengthen its position with software developers, expand its open source presence, and connect the developer platform with Microsoft tools and cloud services. The later growth of GitHub Copilot made the acquisition especially important to Microsoft’s AI strategy.

The post Who Owns GitHub? appeared first on AI Funding Tracker.

CoreWeave is owned by its public shareholders, but co-founders Michael Intrator, Brian Venturo, and Brannin McBee retain effective control through super-voting Class B shares. CoreWeave is not a subsidiary of NVIDIA, Microsoft, Magnetar, or another parent company.

• CoreWeave trades on Nasdaq under the ticker CRWV.
• Michael Intrator held 38.70% of total voting power as of April 15, 2026.
• Brian Venturo and Brannin McBee held 20.30% and 14.59% of voting power.
• Magnetar-managed funds were the largest disclosed outside Class A holder.
• NVIDIA owned 10.66% of Class A stock, but only 3.27% of total voting power.

Who Owns CoreWeave Today?

CoreWeave’s ownership is divided between public Class A shareholders and founders holding Class B stock. The founders do not own every share, but the company’s dual-class structure gives them far more voting influence than their economic ownership alone would suggest.

Class A shares carry one vote each. Class B shares carry ten votes each. CoreWeave’s founders collectively held all outstanding Class B shares covered by the company’s April 2026 proxy ownership table.

Founder ownership and voting control

Together, CoreWeave’s executive officers and directors controlled 72.32% of total voting power. That gives the leadership group substantial influence over director elections, corporate governance, and other matters submitted to shareholders.

These figures represent beneficial ownership, which can include shares obtainable through options, awards, trusts, or other arrangements within the disclosure period. They should not be read simply as unrestricted shares held personally.

Largest disclosed outside shareholders

Magnetar controlled more disclosed Class A shares than any founder individually, but it did not control CoreWeave. Its one-vote Class A stock carried much less voting weight than the founders’ ten-vote Class B shares.

CoreWeave Company Snapshot

As of April 30, 2026, CoreWeave reported approximately 447.6 million Class A shares, 98.0 million Class B shares, and no outstanding Class C shares.

How Did CoreWeave’s Ownership Evolve?

CoreWeave began in 2017 as Atlantic Crypto, a cryptocurrency-mining operation founded by Intrator, Venturo, McBee, and Salanki. The company accumulated graphics processing units and later redirected that computing capacity toward cloud services and artificial intelligence workloads.

Private funding accelerated the transition. Magnetar became an important financial backer, while NVIDIA invested in CoreWeave and developed a broader supplier, customer, and strategic relationship with the company. Other investors participated during CoreWeave’s private-company phase, but not all remained reportable owners after the IPO.

CoreWeave completed its initial public offering in March 2025. The listing allowed outside investors to buy Class A shares while the founders retained Class B stock with ten votes per share. This preserved founder control after the company entered the public market.

In January 2026, NVIDIA invested another $2 billion, purchasing CoreWeave Class A stock at $87.20 per share. The transaction added roughly 23 million shares and nearly doubled NVIDIA’s position.

Does NVIDIA Own CoreWeave?

NVIDIA is a major shareholder and strategic partner, but it does not own or control CoreWeave.

CoreWeave’s April 2026 proxy listed NVIDIA as the beneficial owner of 47,213,353 Class A shares. That represented 10.66% of the Class A stock but only 3.27% of total voting power because NVIDIA did not hold the founders’ super-voting Class B shares.

The relationship is unusually close. CoreWeave builds its AI cloud around NVIDIA GPUs, sells infrastructure services to NVIDIA, and received major equity investments from the chipmaker. CoreWeave also disclosed that NVIDIA accounted for 17% of its supplier purchases in 2025.

That commercial interdependence can make NVIDIA appear like a parent company. Legally and operationally, however, CoreWeave remains an independent public corporation led and controlled by its founders.

Microsoft and OpenAI are also important customers or business partners, not CoreWeave’s owners. A large contract does not provide corporate control unless it comes with equity or voting rights.

What Is Changing in CoreWeave’s Ownership?

CoreWeave’s economic ownership can change as investors buy or sell Class A shares, employees exercise equity awards, and the company issues stock to finance expansion. Voting control changes more slowly because it is concentrated in Class B shares.

Transfers of Class B stock generally cause those shares to convert into Class A stock, with limited exceptions for approved estate-planning, trust, or charitable transfers. Founder sales can therefore reduce super-voting control over time.

CoreWeave disclosed a March 2026 Rule 10b5-1 plan under which Brannin McBee and related entities could potentially sell or convert several million shares, subject to the plan’s conditions. A plan authorizes possible transactions; it does not prove that every covered share will be sold.

The dual-class structure also has an expiration mechanism. Class B shares must automatically convert no later than May 31, 2032, unless an earlier triggering event occurs. One trigger relates to Michael Intrator no longer devoting substantially all of his working time to CoreWeave.

How Does CoreWeave’s Ownership Compare With Its Rivals?

CoreWeave differs from traditional cloud providers because it is publicly traded yet founder-controlled.

• Amazon Web Services is wholly owned by Amazon.
• Microsoft Azure operates within Microsoft.
• Google Cloud belongs to Alphabet.
• Lambda remains privately held and investor-backed.
• CoreWeave has public shareholders, but its founders hold the dominant voting position.

This structure gives public investors economic exposure to CoreWeave’s AI cloud growth without giving them voting influence proportional to the number of ordinary shares they own.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is CoreWeave owned by NVIDIA?

No. NVIDIA is a major Class A shareholder, supplier, customer, and strategic partner, but CoreWeave’s founders hold most of the voting power.

Who is CoreWeave’s largest shareholder?

It depends on the measure. Magnetar-managed funds were the largest disclosed outside Class A holder in CoreWeave’s April 2026 proxy. Michael Intrator had the greatest individual voting power because of his Class B shares.

Does Michael Intrator own CoreWeave?

Intrator does not own the entire company. He was its most powerful individual shareholder, with 38.70% of total voting power as of April 15, 2026.

Is CoreWeave public or private?

CoreWeave is a public company. Its Class A stock trades on Nasdaq under the ticker CRWV.

Who founded CoreWeave?

CoreWeave identifies Michael Intrator, Brian Venturo, Brannin McBee, and Peter Salanki as co-founders.

Does Microsoft own part of CoreWeave?

Microsoft was not listed among CoreWeave’s disclosed 5% shareholders in the April 2026 proxy. It has been an important customer, but customer contracts do not establish ownership.

Can public shareholders take control of CoreWeave?

It would be difficult while the founders retain substantial Class B holdings. Each Class B share has ten votes, compared with one vote for a Class A share.

The post Who Owns CoreWeave and Who Actually Controls It? appeared first on AI Funding Tracker.

Midjourney is an independent, privately held AI company founded and led by David Holz. The company says it is self-funded, has no outside investors, no controlling parent company, and no advertisers.

• Founder and CEO: David Holz
• Legal operator: Midjourney, Inc.
• Ownership type: Private and founder-led
• Outside investors: None disclosed
• Parent company: None
• Exact founder stake: Not publicly disclosed

Who Owns Midjourney Today?

David Holz is the founder, CEO, and central controlling figure behind Midjourney. However, Midjourney has not published a cap table or disclosed Holz’s exact percentage ownership, so it would be inaccurate to assign him a specific stake.

The clearest evidence comes from Midjourney itself. Its careers page describes the company as a small, self-funded team with “no investors, no big company controlling us, and no advertisers.” In 2025, Holz also said Midjourney remained an independent, community-backed research lab with no investors when announcing a technology partnership with Meta.

That structure means Midjourney is not owned by Google, Microsoft, Meta, Discord, Elon Musk, or a venture capital firm. Customers fund the company mainly through paid subscriptions and related products. Although Midjourney works with large technology platforms, commercial partnerships do not automatically create an ownership stake.

The safest ownership summary is therefore:

1. David Holz founded and leads the company.
2. Midjourney, Inc. operates the service as a private company.
3. No external shareholder or parent company has been publicly identified.
4. The exact distribution of shares among Holz and any employees is private.

Midjourney Company Snapshot

Midjourney calls itself an independent research lab focused on design, human infrastructure, and artificial intelligence. Its best-known product converts natural-language prompts into images and, more recently, video.

How Did David Holz Build Midjourney?

Holz built Midjourney after co-founding Leap Motion, a motion-control hardware startup. His experience with a heavily venture-funded company appears to have shaped Midjourney’s different approach: a small team, direct customer revenue, and no publicly announced venture capital.

Midjourney began operating in 2021 and opened its image-generation service to the public in July 2022. Instead of building a traditional social platform immediately, it distributed the product through Discord. That gave users a place to create images together while allowing Midjourney to reach a large audience without a conventional consumer-app launch.

The company became profitable early, according to Holz’s 2022 interviews. Subscription revenue allowed it to finance model training, computing costs, hiring, and product development without selling publicly disclosed equity to investors.

Midjourney later expanded beyond its Discord-first model by developing a web interface, image-editing tools, video generation, and other research projects. The company’s growth did not change its stated ownership position: it continued to describe itself as independent and self-funded.

How Does Midjourney Fit Into the AI Industry?

Midjourney occupies an unusual position among major generative AI companies. Many competitors have raised billions of dollars, accepted strategic investments, or operate inside larger technology groups. Midjourney has instead relied on revenue from its user community.

That independence can give management more control over product direction because outside investors are not publicly pressuring the company for a particular growth schedule or exit. It also concentrates decision-making around Holz and the internal team.

Midjourney still depends on outside infrastructure and partnerships. It has used cloud-computing resources, built its early community around Discord, and licensed aesthetic technology to Meta. These relationships are commercially important, but none has been disclosed as an acquisition or equity investment.

The company also faces the same industry pressures as other AI developers, including high computing costs, growing competition, content-moderation challenges, and copyright litigation over training data and generated outputs.

What Is Changing at Midjourney in 2026?

Midjourney’s scope is expanding well beyond its original text-to-image product.

The company made V8.1 its default image model on June 10, 2026, following its April release. It has also introduced additional web features and faster draft-generation tools, showing that image creation remains a core priority.

More surprisingly, Midjourney announced Midjourney Medical in June 2026. The project aims to develop a rapid full-body ultrasound scanning system and a wellness-focused scanning experience. Midjourney says its first spa is planned for San Francisco in 2027, although medical experts have questioned whether the company has published enough evidence to support comparisons with established imaging methods.

Midjourney also announced its first acquisition in late July 2026. The transaction signals that the company may use its internally generated cash to buy technology or teams rather than raise venture capital. The announcement did not indicate that Midjourney itself had been sold or that its ownership structure had changed.

These moves matter because Midjourney is evolving from a single-product AI image company into a broader research organization. For now, the company still publicly presents itself as independent and investor-free.

How Does Midjourney’s Ownership Compare With Competitors?

• OpenAI: Operates through a more complex nonprofit and for-profit structure and has received major outside investment.
• Stability AI: A privately held generative AI company that has raised venture funding and undergone leadership changes.
• Adobe Firefly: Owned and operated by publicly traded Adobe.
• Google Imagen: Developed inside Alphabet-owned Google.
• Microsoft Designer: Developed within publicly traded Microsoft.
• Midjourney: Privately held, founder-led, self-funded, and not controlled by a larger technology company.

Midjourney’s closest distinction is not simply product quality. It is the absence of disclosed venture investors or a corporate parent despite competing with some of the world’s best-funded AI platforms.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Midjourney owned by David Holz?

David Holz founded and leads Midjourney, and available evidence indicates that he is its principal controlling figure. However, the company has not disclosed his exact shareholding or a complete ownership table.

Is Midjourney owned by Discord?

No. Midjourney originally used Discord as the main interface and community platform for its image generator, but Discord does not publicly own Midjourney.

Did Meta buy Midjourney?

No. Meta announced a licensing and technical collaboration with Midjourney in 2025. Both companies described Midjourney as remaining independent, and no acquisition or equity investment was announced.

Is Midjourney publicly traded?

No. Midjourney is a private company, so its shares are not available on a public stock exchange.

Does Midjourney have venture capital investors?

Midjourney says it has no investors and is supported by its community. No venture capital funding round has been publicly announced.

Who owns images created with Midjourney?

Midjourney’s current terms say users own the assets they create to the fullest extent allowed by applicable law, subject to the agreement and third-party rights. Copyright protection for largely AI-generated work can still depend on jurisdiction and the level of human authorship.

Could Midjourney be acquired?

A future acquisition is possible because Midjourney is privately held, but there is no public evidence as of August 5, 2026 that the company is for sale or controlled by an outside buyer.

The post Who Owns Midjourney in 2026? Founder and Ownership Explained appeared first on AI Funding Tracker.

Quick Answer

Perplexity AI is owned by its four co-founders, employees with equity, and outside investors. CEO Aravind Srinivas is the company’s most visible founder, but no reliable public disclosure shows that he or any other shareholder owns a controlling majority.

• Perplexity AI is a privately held company, not a public stock.
• Its co-founders are Aravind Srinivas, Denis Yarats, Johnny Ho, and Andy Konwinski.
• Major reported investors include Accel, IVP, New Enterprise Associates, Nvidia, and SoftBank Vision Fund 2.
• Jeff Bezos, Elad Gil, Nat Friedman, Daniel Gross, and other prominent individuals have also invested.
• A September 2025 funding report valued Perplexity at about $20 billion, although Reuters could not independently verify the reported round.

Who Owns Perplexity AI Today?

Perplexity AI’s ownership is divided among its founders, current and former employees, venture-capital firms, strategic investors, and angel investors. Because the company is private, the percentages held by these groups are not publicly available.

The four co-founders

Aravind Srinivas co-founded Perplexity and serves as CEO. Denis Yarats is a co-founder and chief technology officer, while Johnny Ho and Andy Konwinski helped build the company’s technical and strategic foundation. NEA’s account of its investment identifies all four as members of the founding team.

The founders almost certainly received common stock when the company was formed. However, later funding rounds would normally dilute their percentage stakes as new shares were issued to investors and employees. Dilution does not necessarily mean the founders lost operational influence, particularly when voting rights, board seats, and executive positions are considered.

Institutional and strategic investors

Perplexity has raised more than $1 billion in venture investment, according to company descriptions posted through Accel’s portfolio job board. Named backers include Accel, IVP, NEA, Nvidia, Samsung, and other firms. SoftBank Vision Fund 2 has also been widely reported as an investor.

These investors generally receive preferred shares, which can carry economic protections or approval rights that differ from the common stock held by founders and employees. Their ownership may be financially significant without giving any one investor outright control.

Individual investors

Reported individual backers include Jeff Bezos, Elad Gil, Nat Friedman, Daniel Gross, and Shopify co-founder Tobi Lütke. Being an investor does not make Bezos, Nvidia, or any other named backer the “owner” of Perplexity in the everyday sense. Each appears to hold a minority interest within a broader shareholder group.

No public source establishes that one shareholder controls more than 50% of Perplexity’s voting power. In practice, Srinivas and the executive team direct daily operations, while the board and major investors may influence financing, governance, and major corporate transactions.

Perplexity AI Company Snapshot

Perplexity describes itself as an AI-powered answer engine that supplies current responses supported by sources. Its products combine web search with large language models, allowing users to ask follow-up questions and receive a direct answer rather than only a list of links.

How Did Perplexity’s Ownership Develop?

Perplexity was founded in 2022 by a team with experience in AI research, machine learning, ranking systems, and technology-company development. Srinivas previously conducted research at organizations including OpenAI, Google, and DeepMind. Yarats worked in AI research and machine learning, while Ho brought technical and strategy experience. Konwinski was also a co-founder of Databricks.

NEA led Perplexity’s Series A financing. A January 2024 Series B raised $73.6 million and was led by IVP, with participation from Nvidia, Bezos Expeditions, NEA, Databricks, and other investors. Further rounds brought in additional capital and raised the company’s valuation.

Reuters reported in May 2025 that Accel was expected to lead a $500 million financing at a $14 billion valuation. In September 2025, Reuters cited a report that Perplexity had secured commitments for another $200 million at a $20 billion valuation. Reuters said it could not independently verify that later report, so the $20 billion figure should be treated as a reported private-market valuation rather than an audited measure of value.

Each round likely expanded the investor group and diluted earlier shareholders. The exact impact cannot be calculated without Perplexity’s cap table, share classes, option pool, and financing documents.

Where Does Perplexity Fit in the AI Industry?

Perplexity sits between a search engine, an AI assistant, and a research platform. It competes with Google Search and Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, OpenAI’s products, Anthropic’s Claude, and other conversational AI services.

The company is independent rather than a subsidiary of Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Nvidia, or OpenAI. It uses infrastructure and AI models supplied by several technology companies, but commercial dependence is not the same as ownership. Perplexity’s Android listing, for example, says the service uses models from providers including OpenAI, Anthropic, and Meta.

Its revenue comes from products such as Perplexity Pro, enterprise subscriptions, and the Sonar API. A broader product range can improve the company’s bargaining position, but its high computing costs also make continued access to capital and infrastructure strategically important.

What Is Changing at Perplexity in 2026?

Perplexity is expanding beyond question answering into agentic browsing, shopping, and task completion. That shift could make its technology more valuable, while also increasing legal and platform risk.

On August 4, 2026, a U.S. appeals court overturned an injunction that had restricted Perplexity’s AI shopping tools from operating on Amazon. The ruling addressed whether users or Perplexity were responsible for the relevant access and may influence how AI agents interact with online platforms.

Days earlier, a federal judge allowed significant parts of Reddit’s data-scraping lawsuit against Perplexity and associated providers to continue. Perplexity disputes the allegations. These cases do not change who owns the company, but legal costs, licensing agreements, and platform restrictions can affect valuation and the terms investors demand in future rounds.

Ownership could also change through new financing, employee equity grants, secondary share sales, an acquisition, or an eventual initial public offering. Perplexity has not announced a public listing, so ordinary investors cannot currently buy its shares on a stock exchange.

How Does Perplexity’s Ownership Compare With Its Rivals?

Perplexity resembles Anthropic and xAI in being a privately financed AI company with prominent founders and large outside investors. It differs from Google Gemini and Microsoft Copilot, which are products of publicly traded parent companies. OpenAI has a more complex organizational and governance structure than a conventional venture-backed startup.

The key point is that Perplexity remains an independent private company. Strategic partnerships with Nvidia, model access from OpenAI or Anthropic, and disputes with Amazon or Reddit do not make those companies its owners.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Perplexity AI owned by Google?

No. Google does not own Perplexity AI. Perplexity is an independent private company and competes with Google in search and AI-assisted research.

Does Jeff Bezos own Perplexity AI?

Jeff Bezos is a reported investor through Bezos Expeditions, but there is no evidence that he owns a controlling stake. He is one shareholder among founders, institutions, employees, and other investors.

Is Nvidia the owner of Perplexity?

No. Nvidia is an investor and an important technology provider. Its relationship with Perplexity includes funding and computing infrastructure, but no public disclosure shows that Nvidia controls the company.

How much of Perplexity does Aravind Srinivas own?

Perplexity has not disclosed Srinivas’s exact ownership percentage. Estimates that assign him a precise stake are speculative unless supported by a company filing, cap table, or direct statement.

Can I buy Perplexity AI stock?

Perplexity does not have publicly traded shares or a stock symbol. Some accredited investors may obtain exposure through private secondary transactions, but availability, pricing, fees, and shareholder rights can differ substantially from public stock.

What is Perplexity AI worth?

The latest widely reported benchmark is a $20 billion private valuation from September 2025. That figure reflects the reported price of a financing round, not the company’s revenue, cash balance, or guaranteed sale value.

Who is the CEO of Perplexity AI?

Aravind Srinivas is Perplexity’s co-founder and CEO. His executive role gives him substantial operational influence, but it does not prove that he holds majority economic ownership.

The post Who Owns Perplexity AI? Founders, Investors, and Structure In 2026 appeared first on AI Funding Tracker.

Waymo is a privately held subsidiary of Alphabet, Google’s parent company. Alphabet remains Waymo’s majority investor, while outside institutions own minority stakes acquired through private funding rounds.

• Parent and majority investor: Alphabet Inc.
• Company status: Private, with no standalone public stock
• Latest valuation: $126 billion post-money in February 2026
• Latest financing: $16 billion from Alphabet and outside investors
• Leadership: Co-CEOs Tekedra Mawakana and Dmitri Dolgov

Who Owns Waymo Today?

Alphabet owns and controls Waymo as its parent company and majority investor. However, Waymo is no longer wholly owned by Alphabet because private investors have purchased minority equity stakes in several financing rounds.

Waymo does not publish a complete cap table or disclose Alphabet’s precise ownership percentage. Claims that outside investors own a specific percentage should therefore be treated as estimates unless supported by private transaction documents.

In February 2026, Waymo raised $16 billion at a $126 billion post-money valuation. The company said Alphabet continued its “strong sustained support” as the majority investor.

The round was led by:

• Dragoneer Investment Group
• DST Global
• Sequoia Capital

Other participating investors included Andreessen Horowitz, Mubadala Capital, Bessemer Venture Partners, Silver Lake, Tiger Global, T. Rowe Price, BDT & MSD Partners, CapitalG, Fidelity, GV, Kleiner Perkins, Perry Creek Capital and Temasek.

These firms are shareholders, but none has been identified publicly as having control equal to Alphabet. Waymo’s board, shareholder agreements and Alphabet’s majority position ultimately shape corporate control.

Waymo Company Snapshot

• Legal name: Waymo LLC
• Parent company: Alphabet Inc.
• Origin: Google Self-Driving Car Project
• Waymo launch: 2016
• Headquarters: Mountain View, California
• Co-CEOs: Tekedra Mawakana and Dmitri Dolgov
• Core product: Waymo Driver autonomous driving system
• Ride-hailing service: Waymo One
• Latest disclosed valuation: $126 billion

Waymo develops autonomous vehicle technology and operates fully autonomous ride-hailing services. Alphabet reports Waymo within its “Other Bets” segment rather than breaking out Waymo’s revenue, profit or losses separately.

How Did Waymo’s Ownership Develop?

Waymo began inside Google in 2009 as a secretive research project led by figures associated with early autonomous driving, including Sebastian Thrun, Anthony Levandowski and Chris Urmson. Its engineers tested self-driving vehicles on public roads with safety drivers before moving toward fully driverless operation.

When Alphabet reorganized Google into a holding-company structure, the project became a separate Alphabet business. It was renamed Waymo in December 2016, a name derived from “a new way forward in mobility.”

John Krafcik, a former automotive executive, became Waymo’s first CEO. Under his leadership, the company moved beyond research, formed partnerships with Fiat Chrysler and other traditional car companies, and launched the Waymo One ride-hailing service. Krafcik stepped down in 2021, and Mawakana and Dolgov became co-CEOs.

Alphabet initially funded the company internally. Waymo later brought in outside capital, including a $2.25 billion round in 2020, additional funding in 2021 and a $5.6 billion round in 2024. The $16 billion financing in 2026 substantially expanded the outside investor group while preserving Alphabet’s majority position.

How Does Waymo Fit Within Alphabet?

Waymo is one of Alphabet’s “Other Bets,” a group of businesses outside Google’s core advertising, cloud and consumer services operations. Alphabet’s 2025 annual report described Waymo as a business scaling commercialization, expanding to more cities and entering international markets.

This structure gives Waymo access to Alphabet’s capital, artificial intelligence expertise and technical infrastructure. It also creates opportunities to work with other Alphabet companies. For example, Gemini has been added to the passenger experience in Waymo’s new Ojai vehicle, though Waymo says the assistant operates separately from the Waymo Driver and does not control vehicle movement.

Waymo’s operations include San Francisco, Los Angeles, Phoenix and other cities, with ride access offered through the Waymo app and, in selected markets, ride-hailing partners. Its ownership is therefore separate from operational relationships with automakers and platforms. A company that supplies vehicles or distributes rides does not automatically own Waymo equity.

What Is Changing at Waymo in 2026?

Waymo is shifting from a limited robotaxi company into a much larger autonomous mobility network. The February funding announcement said the company completed 15 million rides in 2025 and was providing more than 400,000 rides per week across six major U.S. metropolitan areas.

Recent expansion has continued quickly. In June 2026, Waymo opened its fully autonomous Nashville service to the public. In July, it said it was preparing driverless operations in Denver, Las Vegas, San Diego and Tampa while testing Hyundai IONIQ 5 vehicles with its sixth-generation autonomous system.

Waymo also introduced premium membership benefits, an updated in-car interface and Gemini-powered passenger features. These changes point to a broader commercial strategy built around service tiers, new vehicle platforms and more cities rather than autonomous driving research alone.

The company remains capital intensive. Alphabet reported a larger 2025 operating loss for Other Bets, driven partly by Waymo-related compensation expenses. That financial dependence helps explain why Alphabet’s continued majority ownership and outside funding both matter.

How Does Waymo’s Ownership Compare With Its Rivals?

Zoox is wholly owned by Amazon, giving it a single large corporate parent without Waymo’s disclosed group of outside financial investors.

Cruise is controlled by General Motors, which tightened its control after previously accepting outside investments from companies such as Honda and Microsoft.

Tesla’s robotaxi effort sits inside publicly traded Tesla rather than a separately funded private subsidiary.

Baidu’s Apollo Go operates within Baidu’s autonomous driving ecosystem, while several Chinese robotaxi companies have separate public or private ownership structures.

Waymo is unusual because it combines majority ownership by a technology conglomerate with substantial minority investment from venture capital, growth equity and sovereign investment firms.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Waymo owned by Google or Alphabet?

Waymo is owned by Alphabet, which is also Google’s parent company. Google and Waymo are sister businesses within the Alphabet group, although Waymo originated as a Google project.

Can you buy Waymo stock?

Waymo has no public stock ticker, so ordinary investors cannot buy its shares directly on a stock exchange. Buying Alphabet shares provides indirect exposure, but Alphabet’s valuation includes Google and many other businesses, not Waymo alone.

Does Alphabet own 100% of Waymo?

No. Outside investors have acquired equity through private funding rounds. Alphabet remains the majority investor, but neither Waymo nor Alphabet has disclosed its exact current percentage.

Who are Waymo’s CEOs?

Tekedra Mawakana and Dmitri Dolgov serve as co-CEOs. Mawakana’s background centers on operations, policy and commercialization, while Dolgov has long led Waymo’s autonomous driving technology development.

Is Waymo planning an IPO?

Waymo has not announced a confirmed IPO date or formal public listing plan. Its large private financing gives it capital to expand without immediately entering the public market.

The post Who Owns Waymo? Ownership Explained for 2026 appeared first on AI Funding Tracker.

This article breaks down exactly who owns Pinterest in 2026, how much each stakeholder holds, and why the dual-class share structure means that economic ownership and actual control are two very different things.

Current Pinterest Ownership Structure (2026)

Pinterest (NYSE: PINS) is a publicly traded company. As of early 2026, the broad ownership breakdown is as follows:

• Institutional investors: approximately 84 to 85% of shares outstanding
• Insiders (founders and executives): approximately 7 to 8% of shares outstanding
• Public retail investors: the remaining float

The critical distinction at Pinterest is between economic ownership, which is who holds shares, and voting control, which is who actually makes the major decisions. Because of a dual-class share structure introduced at the 2019 IPO, those two things are very different at Pinterest.

As of February 26, 2026, Pinterest’s market capitalization is approximately $12 billion, with the stock trading around $15 to $17 per share after a sharp selloff following the company’s Q4 2025 earnings report.

Who Founded Pinterest?

Pinterest was founded in late 2009 by three co-founders.

Ben Silbermann is the primary driving force behind Pinterest. A former Google advertising analyst from Des Moines, Iowa, Silbermann left Google in 2008 to build products he actually cared about. He partnered with college friend Paul Sciarra to form Cold Brew Labs, their startup parent company. Their first product was a mobile shopping app called Tote, designed to help users shop from online catalogs. Tote failed to gain meaningful traction, partly because mobile payment technology in 2009 was too underdeveloped for seamless transactions. While building Tote, Silbermann noticed users were not buying items so much as saving and collecting them. That insight became Pinterest.

Paul Sciarra was Silbermann’s college friend and early co-founder who helped build the first version of the product alongside Silbermann. Sciarra left Pinterest in April 2012 to become an entrepreneur-in-residence at Andreessen Horowitz, one of the company’s early investors. He retains an equity stake in the company but has had no operational role since 2012.

Evan Sharp is a designer and former architecture student who Silbermann met in New York in 2009 through a mutual contact. Sharp joined the founding team to lead design and user experience, shaping the visual grid layout that became Pinterest’s signature interface. He served as Chief Design and Creative Officer until transitioning to an advisory role in 2021. He remains a shareholder.

Development began in December 2009. Pinterest launched as a closed beta in March 2010 and grew slowly at first. Silbermann personally emailed early users, shared his phone number for feedback, and organized in-person meetups with the first 5,000 users to build the community from the ground up. The name Pinterest, a combination of “pin” and “interest,” was suggested by Silbermann’s wife in November 2009.

Ben Silbermann: The Largest Individual Shareholder

Ben Silbermann remains Pinterest’s largest individual shareholder. According to the most recent disclosures, he holds approximately 50.84 million shares, representing about 7.64% of the company’s total shares outstanding. At current prices, that stake is valued at approximately $860 to $900 million.

His more important number is voting power. Pinterest’s dual-class structure gives Class B shares 20 votes per share versus 1 vote per share for Class A shares. At the time of the 2022 CEO transition, Silbermann’s Class B holdings gave him approximately 37% of total voting power, even though he held a far smaller percentage of the company economically.

Since then, Silbermann has been gradually converting Class B shares to Class A and selling tranches under scheduled Rule 10b5-1 trading plans. In March 2025, he sold approximately $3.44 million in shares. In May 2025, he sold approximately $3.28 million. These transactions involve converting Class B shares to Class A before selling, which means each sale modestly reduces his super-voting position as well.

There is also a structural sunset to be aware of. Pinterest’s IPO documents specified that Class B shares would automatically convert to Class A shares seven years after the IPO if holders had sold more than half of their original stake. The IPO was in April 2019, making April 2026 a significant date. Silbermann’s ongoing stake management is partly shaped by these provisions.

In June 2022, Silbermann stepped down as CEO and transitioned to the role of Executive Chairman, a position that keeps him on the board with strategic influence but no day-to-day operational responsibility.

The Current CEO: Bill Ready

Bill Ready became Pinterest’s CEO on June 28, 2022, succeeding Silbermann. Ready joined from Google, where he served as President of Commerce. Before Google, he was CEO of Braintree and PayPal’s merchant services division, giving him deep experience in digital payments and e-commerce.

Under Ready, Pinterest posted nine consecutive quarters of record monthly active users. Full year 2025 revenue reached $4.22 billion, up 16% year over year. The company achieved 619 million monthly active users in Q4 2025, an all-time high. Ready has positioned Pinterest as an AI-powered visual shopping assistant rather than a traditional social media platform, describing the transformation as moving from a “digital mood board” to a “personalized shopping destination.”

However, Q4 2025 results disappointed investors. Revenue of $1.319 billion for the quarter came in roughly in line with estimates, but the company’s Q1 2026 revenue guidance of $951 million to $971 million fell short of analyst expectations. Pinterest said large U.S. retailers had pulled back on advertising due to margin pressures from tariffs, hitting Pinterest disproportionately because of its high exposure to the retail advertiser segment.

In January 2026, Pinterest announced it would lay off less than 15% of its workforce as part of a restructuring to shift resources toward AI-powered product development. The stock dropped more than 20% following the Q4 2025 earnings call in February 2026.

The Dual-Class Share Structure: Who Really Controls Pinterest

Pinterest’s April 2019 IPO introduced a dual-class share structure that remains the defining feature of its governance.

Class A shares are publicly traded on the NYSE under the ticker PINS and carry 1 vote per share. These are what institutional investors, retail investors, and most public market participants hold.

Class B shares are held by founders and certain early insiders and carry 20 votes per share. Class B shares convert to Class A automatically upon transfer or when a holder sells more than half of their original post-IPO stake.

The practical effect is significant. Institutional investors hold the vast majority of Pinterest’s economic value, but founders retain disproportionate control over major governance decisions. The structure was modeled on similar arrangements at Alphabet, Meta, Snap, and Zoom, all of which went public around the same period.

A built-in sunset provision was included in Pinterest’s IPO documents: Class B shares convert automatically to Class A shares seven years after the IPO date, which falls in April 2026, assuming the holder has sold more than half their stake. This means the super-voting structure at Pinterest is approaching its natural end point, and the governance balance of power is gradually shifting toward standard one-share-one-vote dynamics.

Major Institutional Shareholders

As of early 2026, based on the most recent 13F filings, the largest institutional holders of Pinterest stock are the following.

The Vanguard Group is Pinterest’s largest institutional shareholder, holding approximately 57.7 million shares, representing around 9.6% of the company. Vanguard holds Pinterest passively through index funds such as its Total Stock Market Index Fund.

BlackRock holds approximately 24.2 million shares, representing around 4% of outstanding shares. BlackRock cut its position by approximately 2 million shares (down 7.7%) in the most recent disclosed period, according to TIKR data.

Elliott Management holds approximately 28 million shares, representing around 4.7% of outstanding shares, valued near $994 million at recent prices. Elliott has made no change to its position in the most recent reported period.

T. Rowe Price holds approximately 21.8 million shares (around 3.6%), though it sharply reduced its position by approximately 9.6 million shares (down 30.7%) in the most recent disclosed period.

Victory Capital Management holds approximately 17.3 million shares (2.9%) after dramatically increasing its stake in the most recent period.

Columbia Threadneedle holds approximately 15.9 million shares (2.7%).

State Street Corporation holds approximately 13.9 million shares (2.3%).

Norges Bank holds approximately 13.3 million shares (2.2%).

In total, institutional investors collectively hold approximately 84 to 85% of Pinterest’s shares outstanding, according to WallStreetZen data as of early 2026.

Elliott Management and the 2022 Turning Point

Elliott Management’s arrival at Pinterest in mid-2022 is the most consequential single ownership event in the company’s post-IPO history.

In July 2022, the Wall Street Journal reported that Elliott had accumulated more than 9% of Pinterest’s shares, making it the company’s largest individual shareholder at the time. Pinterest shares had collapsed more than 70% over the preceding 12 months, falling below the $19 IPO price. User growth had stalled as pandemic-era behavioral tailwinds faded.

Elliott’s involvement coincided with Silbermann’s announcement that he was stepping down as CEO. The firm publicly endorsed his successor, Bill Ready, framing the situation as a collaborative engagement. Elliott specifically cited Ready’s commerce background as the right fit for Pinterest’s strategic evolution.

By December 2022, Pinterest and Elliott formalized a long-term cooperation agreement. Elliott’s Senior Portfolio Manager Marc Steinberg joined Pinterest’s board of directors effective December 16, 2022. Under the agreement, Elliott committed to standstill and voting obligations, and Pinterest gained a commercially focused institutional voice in the boardroom.

The episode is instructive about how dual-class structures shape activist dynamics. Elliott could not force a CEO change or a sale because Silbermann’s voting block made confrontation futile. The activist had to work with management, and the result was an accelerated focus on monetization, shopping integrations, and margin discipline.

Pinterest’s Early Investors

Before the April 2019 IPO, Pinterest raised approximately $1.5 billion across multiple private rounds. Key early backers include the following.

FirstMark Capital was one of the very first institutional investors in Pinterest, participating in the company’s initial angel round. Rick Heitzmann of FirstMark was an early board member and a consistent supporter through the pre-IPO years. FirstMark received Class B shares at the IPO alongside the founders, though it has reduced its position significantly since.

Bessemer Venture Partners led Pinterest’s Series A in early 2011, a $10 million round. Sarah Tavel of Bessemer was a key champion of the company during its early growth phase.

Andreessen Horowitz participated in a $27 million round in October 2011 that valued Pinterest at $200 million. Paul Sciarra later joined Andreessen Horowitz as an entrepreneur-in-residence after leaving Pinterest in 2012.

Rakuten, the Japanese e-commerce company, led a $100 million investment in May 2012 that valued Pinterest at $1.5 billion, alongside Andreessen Horowitz, Bessemer, and FirstMark.

Subsequent rounds brought in additional hundreds of millions, including a Series G in 2015 that valued Pinterest at $11 billion. By the time of the IPO in April 2019, most early VC stakes had been substantially diluted by new share issuances and partially reduced through secondary sales.

Pinterest’s IPO and Public Market Journey

Pinterest went public on April 18, 2019, on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker PINS. The IPO priced at $19 per share, valuing the company at approximately $12.7 billion, and raised about $1.4 billion in fresh capital.

The stock surged in the years following the IPO as Pinterest’s user growth and advertising revenue accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Shares reached an all-time high above $80 per share in early 2021. The reversal was sharp: as pandemic behavioral tailwinds faded, user numbers declined and the broader growth stock selloff hit PINS hard. The stock fell below $20 by mid-2022, trading at or below its IPO price.

The period from 2022 to 2025 under Bill Ready was a methodical recovery. Pinterest posted nine consecutive quarters of record MAUs, grew revenue from approximately $2.8 billion in 2022 to $4.22 billion in 2025, and reached its first full year of meaningful GAAP profitability at $417 million in net income for 2025.

However, the February 2026 earnings report introduced fresh uncertainty. Weaker Q1 2026 guidance, a January 2026 restructuring involving layoffs of up to 15% of staff, and ongoing pressure from large retailer ad pullbacks have driven the stock to approximately $15 to $17 per share as of late February 2026, giving Pinterest a market capitalization of roughly $10.4 billion.

What Pinterest’s Ownership Means for Strategy

The ownership structure at Pinterest creates a distinctive dynamic that has shaped every major strategic decision since the IPO.

Silbermann’s historical voting control meant Pinterest could take a long-term view without fear of hostile takeovers or short-term activist pressure. This is precisely why the Elliott engagement in 2022 was collaborative rather than confrontational. The activist could not force changes unilaterally and had to work with management.

The heavy institutional presence from passive giants like Vanguard, BlackRock, and State Street means Pinterest faces constant scrutiny on quarterly results and capital allocation. These investors vote their shares on governance matters and care deeply about margins, buybacks, and execution discipline.

Ready’s commerce-first strategy reflects the balance between these forces. The December 2025 acquisition of tvScientific, a connected TV performance advertising platform, signals a push into new ad formats. The Amazon partnership allowing direct checkout from Pinterest pins is an attempt to close the gap between discovery and purchase. The Pinterest Assistant, a voice-activated shopping guide powered by AI, is positioned as the platform’s answer to growing competition from AI chatbots.

The approaching dual-class sunset in April 2026, combined with Silbermann’s ongoing share sales, means Pinterest’s governance is gradually normalizing toward standard public company dynamics. That shift may invite greater institutional assertiveness on strategy and management accountability in the coming years.

Key Takeaways on Pinterest Ownership

1. Pinterest is publicly owned but has been founder-controlled. Ben Silbermann holds approximately 7.64% of shares and about 50.84 million shares as of early 2026. His Class B super-voting shares gave him approximately 37% of voting power at the time of the 2022 transition, though this has been declining.

2. The dual-class structure is approaching its sunset. Class B shares were set to auto-convert to Class A shares seven years after the April 2019 IPO under certain conditions, making April 2026 a significant governance milestone for Pinterest.

3. Institutional investors dominate economically. Vanguard (9.6%), Elliott Management (4.7%), BlackRock (4%), and T. Rowe Price (3.6%) are the largest institutional shareholders. Together, institutions hold approximately 84 to 85% of shares outstanding.

4. Elliott Management changed Pinterest’s trajectory. The activist’s 9% stake in 2022 and board seat in December 2022 accelerated Pinterest’s pivot to commerce and monetization, all without a hostile confrontation, precisely because of the dual-class structure.

5. Bill Ready is the operational leader, not the controlling shareholder. Ready replaced Silbermann as CEO in June 2022. He holds no comparable voting block and is accountable to the board and institutional shareholders in the standard way.

6. Pinterest is profitable but facing headwinds. Full year 2025 GAAP net income was $417 million on $4.22 billion in revenue. However, Q1 2026 guidance disappointed investors, and a January 2026 restructuring involving layoffs of up to 15% of staff signals near-term operational pressure.

7. 619 million users, Gen Z majority. Gen Z now represents more than half of Pinterest’s monthly active user base. Nine consecutive quarters of record MAU growth is a genuine positive amid a challenging ad market.

8. The stock is at multi-year lows. Pinterest’s market cap is approximately $10.4 billion as of late February 2026, well below its $12.7 billion IPO valuation from 2019 and far beneath the $40 billion peak reached in early 2021.

What This Means for Pinterest’s Future

Pinterest occupies a distinctive position in the digital media landscape. It is not a communication platform. It is not a short-form video app. It is a visual search and discovery engine built around intent, the kind of platform where users arrive already thinking about what they want to do, buy, or make. That positioning is genuinely differentiated from TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube, even if it is harder to monetize at scale.

The AI investments are showing results in engagement metrics. Visual search queries grew 44% year over year in Q3 2025. The Pinterest Assistant is a step toward ambient, proactive shopping recommendations. The tvScientific acquisition adds connected TV capabilities, opening a new ad format category.

The core challenge remains the same one Pinterest has faced since going public: international users make up the majority of the platform’s audience but generate a fraction of the revenue per user compared to the United States. The Rest of World segment grew revenue 66% year over year in Q3 2025, but average revenue per user in those markets is still a small fraction of US levels. Closing that monetization gap is the key variable determining whether Pinterest’s current market cap represents a floor or a ceiling.

The ownership picture heading into late 2026 is one of a company transitioning from founder-governed to institutionally governed as Class B shares sunset, facing near-term ad market headwinds, but sitting on a user base of 619 million people who arrive on the platform with genuine commercial intent. Whether Bill Ready and the board can convert that intent into durable earnings growth will define Pinterest’s next chapter.

Data sourced from Pinterest’s Q4 2025 and full year 2025 earnings release (February 12, 2026), TIKR institutional ownership disclosures, WallStreetZen, SEC Form 4 filings, and Macrotrends market capitalization data as of February 26, 2026.

The post Who Owns Pinterest? Complete Ownership Breakdown (2026) appeared first on AI Funding Tracker.

The answer is complicated. Databricks remains private, which means ownership is split between founders, employees, and more than 120 institutional investors. Unlike public companies, the exact ownership percentages aren’t disclosed.

But we can piece together who holds the biggest stakes based on funding rounds, board positions, and public statements.

The Quick Answer

Databricks ownership breaks down into three main groups:

• Founders still control a substantial portion. Ali Ghodsi (CEO), Matei Zaharia (CTO), and Ion Stoica (Executive Chairman) lead the company and likely hold significant equity. The exact percentages aren’t public, but founders typically retain 10-20% ownership after raising over $20 billion across 14 funding rounds.
• Institutional investors own the largest share. Over 120 venture capital firms and asset managers have invested across 14 funding rounds totaling more than $20 billion in equity. Major holders include Insight Partners, Fidelity, Andreessen Horowitz, Thrive Capital, and strategic investors like Microsoft, Amazon, Google, NVIDIA, and JPMorgan Chase.
• Employees own shares through stock options and RSUs. With over 8,000 employees, this represents a meaningful portion of the company. Databricks has provided liquidity through secondary sales, allowing employees to cash out some holdings.

The Seven Founders of Databricks

Databricks was founded in 2013 by seven computer scientists from UC Berkeley who created Apache Spark:

• Ali Ghodsi – Co-Founder and CEO since 2016
• Ion Stoica – Co-Founder and Executive Chairman
• Matei Zaharia – Co-Founder and Chief Technology Officer
• Patrick Wendell – Co-Founder
• Reynold Xin – Co-Founder
• Andy Konwinski – Co-Founder
• Arsalan Tavakoli-Shiraji – Co-Founder

The top three founders remain active in company leadership, which is unusual for a company this mature. Most tech giants see founders exit or move to advisory roles. At Databricks, Ghodsi runs the company, Zaharia leads technical vision, and Stoica chairs the board.

This founding team brings serious academic credentials. They met at UC Berkeley’s AMPLab (now RISELab) while working on distributed systems research. Before Databricks, they created Apache Spark, the open-source data processing framework that became the foundation for the entire company.

How Much Do Founders Own?

The exact ownership percentages aren’t public. But we can estimate based on how dilution works.

Databricks has raised more than $20 billion in equity across 14 funding rounds. That’s massive dilution. Every time the company raises money, founder ownership gets diluted.

A typical founding team starts with 100% ownership. After seed funding, they might own 80-85%. After Series A, that drops to 60-70%. By Series J or Series L, founder ownership typically falls to 10-20% of the company.

The Major Institutional Investors

More than 120 institutional investors own stakes in Databricks. The biggest players have invested across multiple rounds and likely hold board seats.

Lead Investors (Largest Stakes)

Insight Partners co-led the latest Series L round in December 2025 and participated in the February 2026 completion. They’re a growth equity firm focused on software and have been in Databricks since 2021. They likely own 8-12% of the company.

Fidelity Management & Research co-led Series L and has participated since Series G in 2021. As one of the world’s largest asset managers, Fidelity typically takes large positions. They probably own 6-10%.

Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) led Databricks’ first major funding round in 2013 with $13.9 million. They’ve participated in multiple rounds since and likely own 5-8%.

Thrive Capital has invested heavily across multiple late-stage rounds. They’re known for concentrated bets on category leaders and probably own 4-7%.

JPMorgan Chase joined in Series J (December 2024) and significantly expanded their investment in February 2026 through their Security and Resiliency Initiative’s Strategic Investment Group. They led the $2 billion debt financing and likely own 3-5% in equity.

Strategic Tech Investors

Several tech giants have invested directly in Databricks, which creates interesting strategic dynamics:

Microsoft first invested in 2019 during Series E, then rejoined in the February 2026 Series L completion. They’ve integrated Databricks deeply with Azure. The partnership gives Microsoft leverage in cloud competition against AWS, even though Amazon also invests in Databricks. Microsoft likely owns 2-4%.

Amazon Web Services invested despite competing with Databricks in cloud services. AWS wants to offer Databricks to its customers, which requires maintaining the relationship. They probably own 1-3%.

Google/CapitalG invested through CapitalG, Alphabet’s growth equity arm. Google Cloud competes with both Microsoft and Amazon, making this a defensive play. They likely own 1-3%.

NVIDIA invested in Series J (December 2024). The AI chip giant wants Databricks customers buying NVIDIA hardware. They probably own 1-2%.

Meta also invested in Series J, though their strategic rationale is less clear. They likely own 1-2%.

Other Major Investors (February 2026 Update)

Goldman Sachs – Joined via Growth Equity at Goldman Sachs Alternatives in Series L (2-4%)
T. Rowe Price – Large asset manager with multi-round participation (3-5%)
BlackRock – World’s largest asset manager, invested in Series L (2-4%)
Blackstone – Private equity giant, invested in Series L (2-4%)
Coatue – Tech-focused hedge fund with Series J and L participation (2-4%)
Glade Brook Capital – Joined in Series L February 2026 (1-3%)
Morgan Stanley – Joined in Series L February 2026 (1-2%)
Neuberger Berman – Joined in Series L February 2026 (1-2%)
Qatar Investment Authority – Sovereign wealth fund, joined Series L (1-2%)
UBS – Swiss bank joined in Series L February 2026 (1-2%)
NEA (New Enterprise Associates) – Veteran VC firm (2-3%)
Ontario Teachers Pension Plan – Canadian pension fund (1-2%)
Temasek – Singapore sovereign wealth fund (1-2%)
GIC – Another Singapore sovereign fund (1-2%)

The Board of Directors

Databricks doesn’t publicly list its complete board, but we can identify key members based on the company’s leadership structure and investor presence.

Ali Ghodsi – CEO and Co-Founder, definitely on the board

Ion Stoica – Executive Chairman, leads the board

Matei Zaharia – CTO and Co-Founder, likely has a board seat

Beyond the founding team, the board almost certainly includes representatives from:

• Andreessen Horowitz – As the earliest major investor
• Insight Partners – As the lead in Series L
• Fidelity – As a major late-stage investor
• Thrive Capital – As a significant multi-round participant
• JPMorgan Chase – After expanding investment in February 2026

The exact board composition isn’t public, which is normal for private companies. But these investors have enough ownership and strategic importance to demand board representation.

Employee Ownership Through Stock Options

Databricks has over 8,000 employees, many of whom own equity through stock options or restricted stock units (RSUs).

Employee equity typically works like this:

Early employees (2013-2018) got large option grants when Databricks was worth under $1 billion. Those employees are now sitting on tens of millions in paper wealth. A typical early engineer with 0.1% ownership would have $134 million at today’s valuation.

Mid-stage employees (2018-2022) joined when Databricks was valued between $6 billion and $38 billion. Their options are still extremely valuable but less explosive than early employee grants.

Recent employees (2022-2026) receive options at much higher strike prices. The wealth creation is less dramatic but still significant if Databricks IPOs above $134 billion.

Collectively, employees probably own 10-15% of the company. That’s standard for a late-stage private company that’s raised this much capital.

The important thing is that Databricks has provided liquidity opportunities. The company has allowed employees to sell shares in secondary markets during funding rounds, which is uncommon generosity for a private company. This lets employees cash out some wealth without waiting for an IPO.

How Databricks Ownership Has Changed Over Time

Databricks has raised funding consistently since 2013. Each round diluted existing shareholders but brought in strategic investors who added value beyond capital.

Here’s how the ownership structure evolved:

2013 – Seed ($13.9M): Andreessen Horowitz led. Founders owned roughly 80-85% after dilution.

2014-2017 – Series A through D: Multiple rounds brought in NEA, Coatue, and other growth investors. Founder ownership dropped to 50-60%.

2021 – Series G ($1B at $28B): Franklin Templeton led. This was the first mega-round that signaled Databricks was becoming a category leader. Founder ownership probably fell to 30-40%.

2021 – Series H ($1.6B at $38B): Counterpoint Global led just six months after Series G. Founder ownership dropped to 25-35%.

2024 – Series J ($10B at $62B): The largest funding round included Meta, NVIDIA, Microsoft, Amazon, and Google as strategic investors. This fundamentally changed the ownership structure. Founders likely fell to 15-25%.

2025 – Series K ($1B at $100B): Less than eight months after Series J, showing how fast Databricks is growing. Founder ownership probably 12-22%.

2025 – Series L Announced ($4B+ at $134B): In December 2025, Databricks announced raising more than $4 billion. This compressed timeline shows investor demand outpacing company need for capital. Founder ownership likely 10-20%.

2026 – Series L Completed ($5B equity + $2B debt): In February 2026, Databricks completed the Series L with approximately $5 billion in equity financing plus $2 billion in additional debt capacity, for a total of over $7 billion. New investors included JPMorgan Chase (expanded), Goldman Sachs, Glade Brook Capital, Morgan Stanley, Neuberger Berman, Qatar Investment Authority, UBS, and Microsoft rejoined. Current founder ownership probably 10-18%.

Why So Many Funding Rounds?

Series L rounds are extremely rare. Most companies IPO long before reaching Series H or I. So why has Databricks raised 14 private rounds totaling over $20 billion in equity?

The IPO market timing isn’t right yet. Databricks could have gone public in 2022-2023, but market conditions were terrible for tech IPOs. By staying private, they avoided getting valued below their private market price.

Providing employee liquidity matters. Secondary sales during funding rounds let employees cash out stock options without an IPO. This keeps employees happy and reduces pressure to go public.

Building a war chest for competition. Databricks competes with Snowflake, Amazon, Microsoft, and Google. Having billions in the bank lets them invest aggressively in product development without worrying about quarterly earnings. Ghodsi told Reuters the $7 billion capital injection makes the company “really well capitalized, in case there’s a winter coming.”

Delaying dilution from an IPO. When companies go public, they typically sell 10-20% of the company to new shareholders. By raising money privately at increasing valuations, Databricks maintains control over dilution.

When Will Databricks Go Public?

An IPO is coming, but the timing is uncertain.

In 2022, Databricks reportedly told investors they were planning a summer 2023 IPO. That didn’t happen. CEO Ali Ghodsi said in 2023 that weak market conditions delayed the plans.

After raising $10 billion in December 2024 at $62 billion, then $1 billion in August 2025 at $100 billion, then completing another $7 billion (equity + debt) in December 2025-February 2026 at $134 billion, the IPO looks further away than ever.

Ghodsi told CNBC in February 2026 that Databricks will go public “when the time is right.” That’s classic CEO-speak for “we’re in no rush.” He added that by continuing to operate privately, “the company can scale and grow without getting distracted by market fluctuations.”

The company doesn’t need money. They achieved positive free cash flow over the last 12 months. Revenue hit $5.4 billion in Q4 2025/Q1 2026, growing 65% year over year. The business fundamentals easily support a public listing.

What’s holding them back? Probably valuation. At $134 billion private valuation, Databricks would be the largest software IPO ever. But public market multiples for software companies have compressed. Going public at a lower valuation would anger private investors who bought at $134 billion.

What Happens to Ownership at IPO?

When Databricks goes public, the ownership structure changes dramatically.

Founders maintain control through dual-class shares. Databricks will likely implement a dual-class structure where founder shares carry 10 votes per share while public shares carry 1 vote. This lets founders control the company despite owning a minority of total equity. Google, Facebook, and Snowflake all use this structure.

Institutional investors sell some shares. Venture capital firms need to return capital to their limited partners. They’ll likely sell 20-40% of their holdings at IPO, with lockups preventing more sales for 6-12 months.

Employees can finally cash out. After a 6-month lockup period, employees can sell their vested options on the public market. This is when early employees become very wealthy.

New public shareholders enter. The IPO will sell 10-15% of the company to new shareholders, including retail investors who can buy Databricks stock in their brokerage accounts.

After the IPO, expect founder ownership to be around 8-15% (but with voting control through dual-class shares), institutional investors at 60-70%, employees at 8-12%, and public float at 10-15%.

How Databricks Ownership Compares to Competitors

Databricks isn’t the only data company with a complex ownership structure. Here’s how it compares to competitors:

Snowflake (public, $58B market cap as of Feb 2026): Went public in 2020 at $33 billion, the largest software IPO ever at the time. Founders owned about 5% at IPO. Berkshire Hathaway and Salesforce became major investors. Today, founders own less than 3%. Snowflake reported $1.21 billion in revenue for Q3 2025, making Databricks now larger at $5.4 billion annualized.

Palantir (public, $180B market cap): Stayed private for 17 years before going public in 2020. Founders retained massive control through dual-class shares. CEO Alex Karp still controls roughly 10% of votes despite owning less than 2% of economic value.

MongoDB (public, $24B market cap): IPOed in 2017 at $1.6 billion. More traditional ownership structure with founders owning 10-15% at IPO and venture capital firms owning 60-70%.

Databricks is following the Palantir playbook: stay private as long as possible, raise massive amounts at increasing valuations, and maintain founder control through voting shares at IPO.

The Acquisition Alternative

Could Databricks get acquired instead of going public?

It’s possible but unlikely. At $134 billion, only a handful of companies could afford to buy Databricks:

Microsoft is the most logical acquirer. They already partner deeply with Databricks on Azure and rejoined as an investor in February 2026. Microsoft’s market cap is $3 trillion, making a $140-160 billion acquisition feasible. But regulators would scrutinize this heavily given Microsoft’s dominant position in cloud computing.

Amazon could buy Databricks to prevent Microsoft from acquiring them. But AWS competes directly with Databricks’ data platform, making integration complex.

Google has the money but struggles with acquisitions. They’d face regulatory hurdles and internal cultural clashes.

Oracle desperately needs modern data infrastructure. They have the balance sheet to do a $150 billion deal. But Databricks is built on open source, which conflicts with Oracle’s proprietary approach.

Salesforce or SAP could consider Databricks to move upmarket into data infrastructure. Both face challenges competing with cloud giants and need differentiation.

My take: acquisition is unlikely. Databricks founders want to build an independent company. They’ve turned down acquisition approaches before. The IPO path provides more founder control and potentially more wealth creation.

Who Benefits Most from Databricks’ Success?

At $134 billion, everyone who owns Databricks equity is winning. But some stakeholders benefit more than others.

Early employees are the biggest winners. Engineers who joined in 2013-2016 with stock options could have 0.05-0.2% ownership. That’s $67 million to $268 million at today’s valuation. Life-changing wealth.

Founders come next. Even with heavy dilution, owning 2-6% of a $134 billion company makes you a multi-billionaire.

Early-stage VCs like Andreessen Horowitz who invested at $100 million valuations now own assets worth 1,000x+ their original investment. This is exactly what venture capital is supposed to do.

Late-stage investors like Fidelity and JPMorgan are doing fine but not making venture-style returns. Buying at $62-100 billion and marking at $134 billion is a 34-116% return in 6-14 months, which beats the stock market but isn’t the 50x returns that early investors see.

Recent employees are the wild card. Those hired in 2024-2026 received options at $100-134 billion valuations. They need the IPO to value Databricks above $150 billion to see meaningful gains.

Key Financial Metrics (February 2026)

Understanding Databricks’ financial performance helps explain the $134 billion valuation:

Revenue: $5.4 billion annualized run-rate (Q4 2025/Q1 2026)
Growth: 65% year-over-year (accelerating from 55% in Q3)
AI Revenue: $1.4 billion ARR (26% of total revenue, growing faster than core business)
Free Cash Flow: Positive over the last 12 months
Net Retention Rate: Over 140% (sustained)
Gross Margins: Over 80%
Customers: More than 20,000 organizations worldwide
Fortune 500: Over 60% use Databricks
$1M+ Customers: 800+ organizations
$10M+ Customers: 70+ organizations

These metrics justify the premium valuation. Databricks is growing 65% at $5.4 billion scale while generating positive cash flow—a combination almost never seen in enterprise software.

The Bottom Line on Databricks Ownership

Databricks remains one of the world’s most valuable private companies with complex ownership distributed across founders, employees, and over 120 institutional investors.

Founders Ali Ghodsi, Matei Zaharia, and Ion Stoica still lead the company and own significant stakes, likely 10-18% combined worth $13-24 billion. They’ll maintain voting control through dual-class shares at IPO.

Institutional investors led by Insight Partners, Fidelity, Andreessen Horowitz, JPMorgan Chase, and strategic players like Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and NVIDIA own the majority of the company. They’ve invested over $20 billion in equity across 14 funding rounds, with the latest Series L adding approximately $5 billion in February 2026.

Employees own meaningful equity through stock options. Early employees are paper multi-millionaires or billionaires. Recent employees will need a successful IPO above current valuations to see large gains.

The company will likely IPO in late 2026 or 2027 at a valuation between $120 billion and $160 billion, depending on market conditions. With $5.4 billion in revenue growing 65% year-over-year and positive free cash flow, the business fundamentals support a public listing whenever market conditions improve.

Until then, ownership stays private and concentrated among the investors who backed Databricks through its remarkable growth from university research project to AI infrastructure leader generating $5.4 billion annually. Whether you’re an employee, investor, or just watching from the sidelines, Databricks represents one of the most successful private company journeys in tech history. The ownership structure reflects that success: heavily diluted but massively valuable, with founders still in control and everyone holding equity positioned to benefit from an eventual public listing.

The post Who Owns Databricks? Inside the $134B Data & AI Giant appeared first on AI Funding Tracker.