Predict your next investment

Corporate Venture
ventures.coinbase.com

See what CB Insights has to offer

Investments

211

Portfolio Exits

4

Funds

1

About Coinbase Ventures

Launched in April 2018, Coinbase Ventures provides financing to early-stage cryptocurrency and blockchain startups with a focus on building out the crypto ecosystem. It does not have any strategic requirement to formalize a partnership with investments. They look to invest in companies by Coinbase alumni. Coinbase Ventures does not offer favored asset status to any companies they invest in.

Coinbase Ventures Headquarter Location

548 Market Street #23008

San Francisco, California, 94104,

United States

Predict your next investment

The CB Insights tech market intelligence platform analyzes millions of data points on venture capital, startups, patents , partnerships and news mentions to help you see tomorrow's opportunities, today.

Research containing Coinbase Ventures

Get data-driven expert analysis from the CB Insights Intelligence Unit.

CB Insights Intelligence Analysts have mentioned Coinbase Ventures in 3 CB Insights research briefs, most recently on May 17, 2022.

Latest Coinbase Ventures News

Meta offers a glimpse at next-generation VR headsets

Jun 20, 2022

Former FTC acting chair Maureen Ohlhausen spoke with Protocol about the current state of the agency. Photo: Nicholas Kamm/AFP via Getty Images June 20, 2022 Ben Brody (@ BenBrodyDC ) is a senior reporter at Protocol focusing on how Congress, courts and agencies affect the online world we live in. He formerly covered tech policy and lobbying (including antitrust, Section 230 and privacy) at Bloomberg News, where he previously reported on the influence industry, government ethics and the 2016 presidential election. Before that, Ben covered business news at CNNMoney and AdAge, and all manner of stories in and around New York. He still loves appearing on the New York news radio he grew up with. June 20, 2022 There’s one debate over privacy in Congress and another at the Federal Trade Commission, but the two are tightly linked, former FTC acting chair Maureen Ohlhausen told Protocol — and not in a way that’s good for the agency’s plans. Ohlhausen, a Republican, is now co-chair of a group that represents internet service providers, and she testified at a House hearing Tuesday on the bipartisan, bicameral privacy proposal currently under consideration. Although the measure still faces headwinds in the Senate, Ohlhausen said she thinks lawmakers are much closer to an agreement than when she left the FTC in 2018. She also said that, with some tweaks, the measure would have a lot more to offer the business sector than the status quo, despite the complaints from some powerful lobbying interests. The conversation kept returning to the FTC, however, and for Ohlhausen, many of her concerns about where privacy rules could go revolve around the agency where she also spent more than a decade as a staffer. She sees danger in current chair Lina Khan’s push for the FTC to undertake a privacy rule-making , as much to companies that use consumer information as to the agency itself. Khan has said she’s trying to reinvigorate an FTC that’s long let consumers down and deferred to big business, but Ohlhausen repeatedly joined Khan’s critics in urging her to stick to punishing companies one at a time, bring GOP commissioners back into decision-making and address staff discontent. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. You've testified in Congress about privacy legislation a few times over the last couple of years. How did this hearing rate? I think it's enormous progress. We have a lot of different people representing different aspects of the ecosystem. They are generally supporting the bill. And we also saw a lot of bipartisan agreement, bicameral agreement. We can see progress from the first time I testified on this after I left the FTC. You can see that there has been this movement of more people getting on board, more different pieces coming together. Preemption and consumer lawsuits have been the biggest fissures for years now, but lawmakers have mostly found compromises there. What did you hear at the hearing that seemed it might be among the toughest things for lawmakers to come together on now? You can see some of the issues involving the definitions. So [issues could arise on] the definition of “algorithm,” because that's very broad. I mean, the definition is “a computational process including” — not “limited to” — “one derived from machine learning or artificial intelligence techniques, that makes or facilitates a decision or facilitates human decision making with respect to covered data.” That's really broad, because those other things don't limit it. It says it includes them. I think that's one of the concerns, that it can be extremely burdensome if you need to do one of these [algorithmic] impact assessments for every computational process you do on data that helps a human decision. And then the other [potential issue] was on sensitive covered data. Several members mentioned we need to preserve the business model that has allowed all these free, incredible services to be available to consumers. Targeted advertising seems to be explicitly allowed with opt-out, but some of the definitions of sensitive data make it unclear, because it seems like it would actually require opt-in. I think there was an understanding that you don't want to break a business model. You want to give additional protections there, and maybe you want to change it. But it has been a source of, I think, enormous consumer benefit and competitive benefits. A lot of the folks who are testifying along with you were suggesting fixes. But we’re also seeing the Chamber of Commerce more or less opposing this. It kind of represents business writ large. Do you think the business community is going to try to stop it? I think the business community really wants this to pass. The position that the Chamber put forward, I wasn't hearing that from the Republican committee members. All the witnesses represented different constituencies, some of them other business constituencies. They were generally positive on it. They weren't saying, “Oh, rip this up and start over.” They were saying, “Well, you know, watch out here, clarify that, don't go too far here.” But no sense of general opposition. There are concerns about some of the actions the FTC has been taking, and what it might do given very open-ended authority, but I've always said the way forward is for Congress to give the FTC clear direction. This bill really does that. FTC leadership wants to engage in very broad rule-making. But I think this bill is much more: Congress makes those hard cuts, [gives] clear guidance. The FTC has the enforcement role and the more limited role of filling in some of the details under congressional direction. [The bill] needs some tweaking, but I think it really is a good path forward. I do think there is a lot of business support for it. I think they would rather have this bill than some sort of open-ended FTC rule-making. I think the expectation from some who want to push that [rule-making] is that they will somehow be able to put all these new restrictions in there. The FTC only has the authority Congress gave it. They shouldn’t be a legislature. Chair Khan did a bunch of media interviews last week, and when she and I talked, she seemed to be particularly interested in regulating data, maybe even if Congress goes ahead with this law. If this bill passes, I think it would be kind of odd for the FTC to go off on its own and do some separate rule-making. I think you've gotten pretty clear direction from Congress about where the boundaries are, where Congress has made the decision on balancing consumer rights and the beneficial uses of data. I would hope the FTC wouldn't go forward. They’re going to have enough to do under this bill. The other thing is, when I was acting chairman for about a year and a half, we did plenty of privacy enforcement. It had to be bipartisan because it was just me and Terrell McSweeny: one Republican and one Democrat. Rule-making is not the only path. The FTC can proceed through case-by-case enforcement like it has, which I think has been fairly effective. It's also possible that there might be some limited rule-making that Republicans would support, and you've seen that already in some other consumer protection areas. It's possible that Chair Khan wants to go down this road, but there are a lot of risks and opportunity costs. If you're doing [rule-making], you're not bringing enforcement cases. We've seen a big drop-off in enforcement in her first year, and it's not because she didn't have a majority. I didn't have a majority, and enforcement did not fall off. Maybe she'll continue down that road, but I'm hopeful Congress passes this bill and then the FTC just moves forward on implementing the bill. People talk a lot about Khan’s tenure producing an unusually partisan commission. Do you think that's right? It's not as if there have never before been party-line votes, debates or stinging dissents. I think this is very different. [During my time,] we got a lot done. There were a few things we disagreed on. We agreed to disagree, and we moved forward. And we kept up a high level of enforcement. Staff was very happy , and that was at a time when there was a lot of anxiety: What's the Trump administration going to do? What we're seeing now is changes to reduce the ability of other commissioners to get information to participate in things. I haven't seen that before. I was at the commission for six and a half years; I was in the majority for three months. But it was always very, very functional. I didn't feel, when I was in the minority in the Obama administration, that I was cut off. The chair’s office runs things, but it was on a much more collegial basis. And I think you see that reflected also in how the staff has responded . There's lots of reports about career staff saying , “The chair doesn't talk to us. We don't get an opportunity to weigh in.” I'm not in the building, but I think that reflects a different management style than we've ever seen at the FTC previously. I wonder if you could talk about some of the external threats that the FTC is facing. I'm thinking of the Axon case coming up to the Supreme Court. It seems like, by next year, the justices may well say that companies facing the FTC’s internal, court-like system can challenge the whole process in federal court and make the FTC go through a sort of pre-litigation litigation . I used to say, “Avoid doing things that unite your enemies.” The FTC is a small agency with a vague statute. When it stuck generally to case-by-case enforcement on the antitrust side, and seeking redress in limited cases against fraudsters, it got a lot of support. Congress was happy. We brought cases that big companies didn't like, not saying that we didn’t. We challenged things, but the current FTC is pushing into saying, “Well, we now want to take on much more of a regulatory role. We want to do rule-making.” It's at a time also where the fundamental structure of agencies like the FTC is being re-examined. The FTC is facing a lot of headwinds in that area, and it needs to be careful. People say, “The FTC can do this, and they can do that, and all they risk is losing that case.” And I say that's absolutely not true. They gambled on disgorgement and lost big [at the Supreme Court], because it brought together enough people saying, “There aren't enough guardrails on this. It's not rooted in the statute.” That's kind of what I see here: concern about pushing against all these boundaries that will put the entire structure of the agency at risk. Pushing these aggressive theories at a time when the agency’s foundational structure is being questioned just creates a dangerous possibility that the agency loses more than just that case. Keep ReadingShow less James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired. June 14, 2022 Some of the most astounding tech-enabled advances of the next decade, from cutting-edge medical research to urban traffic control and factory floor optimization, will be enabled by a device often smaller than a thumbnail: the memory chip. While vast amounts of data are created, stored and processed every moment — by some estimates, 2.5 quintillion bytes daily — the insights in that code are unlocked by the memory chips that hold it and transfer it. “Memory will propel the next 10 years into the most transformative years in human history,” said Sanjay Mehrotra, president and CEO of Micron Technology. A kind of semiconductor, memory chips are integrated circuits made of millions of capacitors and transistors that can store data. They are the backbone of the broader digital economy — enabling everything from safer transportation to greater broadband access and a more efficient energy grid — and they play an active part in almost every aspect of our daily life. Consider automobiles, for example, “Not long ago, automobiles contained very little memory to process data,” Mehrotra said. “Today, automobiles process huge quantities of fast-moving data in support of advanced safety features.” Electric vehicles, in essence, can be likened to data centers on wheels. The quantity of data has broader implications The 21st century runs on chips, but right now they can't be supported. A global shortage of semiconductors, which crimped the production of everything from pickup trucks to PlayStations, has industry experts and policymakers looking for a new strategy to avoid debilitating bottlenecks in the future supply chain of microprocessors. Semiconductors are in short supply because of several colliding factors, including spikes in demand for consumer electronic products and concurrent slowdowns in chip production caused by the pandemic. In 1990, the U.S. produced 37% of the world’s semiconductors. Today, it produces 12% . Meanwhile, 75% of the world’s chip manufacturing is concentrated in East Asia. Micron is the only memory manufacturer remaining in the Western Hemisphere, and it makes 2% of the global memory chips in the U.S. The increasing performance demands caused by technological leaps in artificial intelligence, 5G, the industrial Internet of Things, edge computing, autonomous cars and high-performance data centers have increased demand for chips. Every major industrial company is trying to figure out how it can manage the amount of data it generates to make its business stronger. Chips are an essential part of that. Meanwhile, foreign countries see the strategic importance of semiconductors and use government incentives to advance manufacturing while the United States government has watched it happen while sitting on the sidelines. Take China, which is projected to have the world’s largest share of chip production by 2030 due to an estimated $100 billion in government subsidies. How much has the United States invested in essential strategic manufacturing operations like semiconductors? Zero. And, without government incentives, U.S. domestic chip production will continue to collapse. After years of inaction, U.S. elected leaders have taken note, and are working to implement change. The House and Senate are working on legislation designed to increase global competitiveness, including the Facilitating American-Built Semiconductors Act , which aims to provide firms a 25% tax credit toward the construction, expansion or modernization of semiconductor fabrication plants and processing equipment in the U.S. In January 2021, Congress passed the Chips for America Act. This bipartisan legislation authorized a series of programs to promote the research, development and fabrication of semiconductors within the United States. Together, the Fabs and Chip Acts are meant to renew American competitiveness in chip manufacturing, processing, packaging and design. Large-scale investments like those the semiconductor industry are poised to make, coupled with targeted government incentives, can meaningfully benefit the U.S. economy in both the short and long term by boosting domestic manufacturing, enhancing supply chain resiliency and increasing national security. “Government support of these capital-intensive, long-term investments serve as a multiplier for advanced manufacturing across the industry, positioning the U.S. as a central figure in the fourth Industrial Revolution,” Mehrotra said. An investment in semiconductors is an investment in the foundational technology that will support innovation across sectors and industries in the United States. Already there are hopeful signs. A billion-dollar chip factory just opened in upstate New York, and in October 2020, the Department of Defense awarded more than $197 million to help the American microelectronics companies create state-of-the-art design and manufacturing facilities. Advanced computer chips not only drive economic and scientific advancement but military capabilities. Through the Rapid Assured Microelectronics Prototypes plans, the DoD hopes to create a reliable and resilient domestic source of chips for its artificial intelligence, 5G communications, quantum computing and autonomous vehicle needs. “The microelectronics industry is at the root of our nation’s economic strength, national security and technological standing,” said Michael Kratsios, former acting undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. Ultimately, the result of the silicon resurgence — in processing power and speed as well as energy efficiency — will be to help build bold new business models, many of which we have yet to dream up. But, with the right investments in our chip-driven future, these dreams can turn into an exciting new reality and protect the future of America. Keep ReadingShow less Brian ( @blkahn ) is Protocol's climate editor. Previously, he was the managing editor and founding senior writer at Earther, Gizmodo's climate site, where he covered everything from the weather to Big Oil's influence on politics. He also reported for Climate Central and the Wall Street Journal. In the even more distant past, he led sleigh rides to visit a herd of 7,000 elk and boat tours on the deepest lake in the U.S. June 19, 2022 Scorching temperatures have blanketed the U.S. Searing heat has hit Europe, too, with a ferocity unseen in recorded history for this time of year. And summer? It’s just getting started. Climate change is making extreme heat more likely and intense. And the air conditioners we use to stay cool are making matters worse. As more locations turn to air conditioning, a novel solution is springing up that could keep things cool in summer and warm in winter — and not ravage the climate. Heat pumps are gaining increasing traction in the public consciousness, and policymakers are starting to get the memo, too. The drumbeat for heat pumps started in earnest last year, after the Pacific Northwest roasted through a heat wave that was dubbed a “mass casualty event.” The stifling heat hit a region where many people don’t have air conditioning at all due to relatively mild summers. Heat pumps are able to do double duty by both heating and cooling, making them a good fit for a region that can be rather, shall we say, inclement in the winter. But the profile of heat pumps has risen even further in the wake of the Russian war against Ukraine. Climate author and activist Bill McKibben first raised the idea of #heatpumpsforpeace as a way to help Europe and the U.S. lower demand for Russian gas this coming winter. And President Joe Biden used the Defense Production Act earlier this month to kick heat pump manufacturing into overdrive. “Reducing America’s dependence on gas and oil is critical to U.S. national security,” Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks said at the time of the announcement. Heat pumps come in two main flavors: air and ground source. They work using roughly the same principle, though: by either pumping or dumping heat from your home. (“This Old House” has a great explainer .) This all happens without the use of fossil fuels, making heat pumps a key tool in the fight to decarbonize the world. Air conditioners work the same way, so heat pumps aren’t a huge source of energy and carbon savings in the summer. But where they shine is the winter, which is when people usually fire up gas-powered furnaces or wood- and oil-burning ones that are even bigger polluters. A report by home energy research firm Carbon Switch estimates that switching U.S. single-family homes to heat pumps could save 142 million metric tons of carbon each year. The Defense Production Act could help start that transition. One particularly effective avenue might be guaranteeing sales, according to Carbon Switch founder Michael Thomas. That would be akin to Big Tech’s recent $925 million carbon dioxide removal commitment , but with the muscle of the federal government behind it and climate-saving technology that already exists. That could also help bring costs down for individuals looking to chuck a heat pump in their basement or outside their home, which would be a huge boon. Carbon Switch’s research shows that heat pumps would save the average home $557 per year, but they do require a rather a bit more of an upfront investment compared to furnaces or air conditioning. A bill introduced by Sen. Amy Klobuchar last month called the HEATR Act would make heat pumps even more affordable by offering up to $1,000 in tax credits. Despite the clear appeal of heat pumps as the world tries to electrify everything and reduce carbon pollution, hurdles still remain. For one, the Biden administration will need Congress to kick in more money for the Defense Production Act, which has been invoked for everything from solar panels to baby formula in recent months. Without money, the proclamation is largely symbolic. Congress also needs to actually pass the HEATR Act for any of those benefits to make it to heat pump-curious homeowners. Then there are the supply chain woes affecting seemingly everything, including heat pump parts. Thomas said he’s heard from numerous installers that they have a record number of orders and a shortage of parts to fulfill said orders. Clearing up that bottleneck will be crucial to speeding up deployment. There’s a weird paradox we’ll also have to overcome with heat pumps. They run on electricity rather than fossil fuels. That’s decidedly a good thing for the climate, but the grid will also have to evolve in tandem to ensure we have enough carbon-free electricity to keep the lights, heat pumps and more on. “The solution … isn't to keep using fossil fuel heating. It's to build more renewables and capacity,” Thomas said. “That's why it's so important that we increase the production of renewables and do everything we can to get around NIMBYs and utility lobbying, all this stuff that's really holding the grid back.” Keep ReadingShow less Nat Rubio-Licht is a Los Angeles-based news writer at Protocol. They graduated from Syracuse University with a degree in newspaper and online journalism in May 2020. Prior to joining the team, they worked at the Los Angeles Business Journal as a technology and aerospace reporter. June 19, 2022 Photo-sharing app Poparazzi has some unusual rules: Users can’t post photos of themselves, or post on their own profiles at all. Instead, they can only share on their friends’ profiles. The purpose is to showcase “the real you, by your real friends,” Poparazzi co-founder and CEO Alex Ma told Protocol. The platform is part of a rising tide of social media apps attempting to catch Gen Z’s attention by eschewing the norms of traditional platforms like Facebook and Instagram. And it’s working. A fast rise After launching in the App Store last year, Poparazzi quickly skyrocketed to No. 1. The unexpected and “extremely overwhelming” rise forced it to speed up hiring, expanding quickly from a staff of four to 15, Ma said. Since Poparazzi’s launch, the app has been downloaded 5 million times, with over 100 million photos and videos shared, the company said. Because of how the app works, users tend to sign up in groups, rather than individually, which boosts user numbers. The app’s main demographic is Gen Z (users must be at least 12 to create an account): Around 95% of Poparazzi’s active users are under 21, and more than 75% are between 14 and 18. Ma attributes this to users actually being drawn to post, rather than lurking or remaining anonymous due to the pressures of making content that’s good enough. “Instagram and TikTok are not really a place for friends to just be friends with each other anymore,” Ma said. “1% of people are creating content for 99% of people. And then 99% of people don't feel like their content, or their lives, are worth sharing.” On Poparazzi, you can't post on your own profile — only on your friends' pages. Image: Poparazzi It’s clear that Gen Z doesn’t want to use the social platforms its parents do. Facebook’s daily active users dipped for the first time at the end of last year (though it recently bounced back slightly). Meanwhile, Poparazzi is gaining fast traction, and photo-sharing app BeReal , which allows users to post just once at a random time of day, has also skyrocketed in popularity, gaining 13.5 million global installs in the App Store and Google Play since June 2021, according to Sensor Tower. BeReal also hit a growth spurt in April, racking up a high of 3.6 million installs during the month. “Gen Z [doesn't] feel like they have a safe place on the internet to just express themselves authentically without the pressure of getting likes and comments and having content,” Ma said. Industry attention Along with gaining the attention of young users, apps that go against the typical social platform grain have also managed to recruit top talent and VC funding. Ma said that Poparazzi was able to recruit employees from Instagram, Snap and Facebook; the company also announced $15 million in series A funding earlier this month. “The Poparazzi team understand their audience, and want to give Gen Z a platform that speaks to their values and relieves them of their social media fatigue,” said Alexia Tsotsis, founder and managing director at VC firm Dream Machine, which invested in the app. “They got launch right, and at over 5 million downloads, have the momentum and resources they need to build for a future where social is more social and less media.” BeReal also raised $30 million in funding and reportedly has a valuation of more than $600 million , and relationship-focused messaging platform HalloApp is led by veterans of WhatsApp and Facebook. Poparazzi is still working on its business model, but similar to HalloApp, which promises to never run ads, advertising isn’t it. As soon as users start seeing an excessive amount of ads on platforms, Ma said, “the product becomes compromised.” Poparazzi may monetize with brand merchandise and events rather than monetize the platform’s users, but those talks are still early days. Though gaining users is in any social media company’s best interest, Ma doesn’t consider Facebook or Instagram to be a Poparazzi rival. Meta’s platforms are “fighting for the attention economy” because of their ad model, he said, detracting from the apps’ original intention to be tools for connection. Because Poparazzi isn’t fighting for attention in the same way, Ma thinks it’s going to “win in the long term.” “TikTok, Instagram, Facebook — they serve a very different purpose. But Poparazzi is always going to be a place for friends,” Ma said. “It's a place for friends now, but it'll be a place for friends even five to 10 years from now.” Keep ReadingShow less Biz Carson ( @bizcarson ) is a San Francisco-based reporter at Protocol, covering Silicon Valley with a focus on startups and venture capital. Previously, she reported for Forbes and was co-editor of Forbes Next Billion-Dollar Startups list. Before that, she worked for Business Insider, Gigaom, and Wired and started her career as a newspaper designer for Gannett. June 18, 2022 The crypto industry has seen crypto winters before. The price of bitcoin falls, investors pull back as they retreat from losses and startups go lean (or go under) as they try to survive. A major difference with this crypto winter emerging in 2022 is that the companies feeling the frost are also the ones doing the investing. The last few years saw crypto companies play an active part in the crypto investing explosion. FTX Ventures put aside a $2 billion fund, and Binance raised $500 million to back the next wave of blockchain startups. The challenge now is that, as many companies cut their staff and trim costs, crypto corporate venture capital will have to balance taking advantage of opportunities in a crisis while navigating the pressure to conserve cash. Investors that touted the upside of access to a corporate balance sheet are now feeling the downside pinch. “The budget going to the venture arm of these corporates is likely going down,” said Oppenheimer analyst Owen Lau, who covers companies like Coinbase. “It’s just hard to find an argument when they’re downsizing that you’re allocating more money into this venture, which typically invests in more longer-term-duration assets and does not generate immediate return for a company.” It’s a tricky balance between short-term cash needs and the long-term strategic plays that can end up being the “hidden value” in companies like Coinbase, as Lau calls it. The crypto exchange has one of the most active corporate VC arms across the tech industry, at times doing more deals than well-known Big Tech firms like GV (one of Alphabet’s funds) and Salesforce Ventures. But Coinbase has also been one of the hardest hit in the last few weeks. The company went from instituting a hiring freeze to rescinding offers to new hires. On Tuesday, it announced it was letting go of 18% of its staff. Coinbase wasn’t spared in the layoffs with at least one team member posting publicly that they were no longer working with the company. (Coinbase declined to comment on the number of folks affected on the team.) But it doesn’t mean that Coinbase will no longer invest or that its budget has been majorly slashed. “Coinbase Ventures does exist and is still very much alive. We just had our investment committee meeting today,” said Coinbase Head of Corporate Development and Ventures Shan Aggarwal when asked if it also fell victim to cost-cutting plans. “Despite the market conditions and market turmoil, we’re still very much continuing to invest.” That doesn’t mean it's full steam ahead for Coinbase or anyone like in the market heyday of 2021. The deal pace has slowed down, both because founders don’t need a ton of capital, having raised a ton of money, and because some investors are tightening their belts and raising the bar of what they’re going to invest in, Aggarwal said. Crypto VCs are also in a stage of price discovery as they figure out what the new normal is going to be — which is harder to do when there aren’t many public market comps out there. The upside of a pause for price discovery is the widespread belief that this is actually a great time to find deals. At the Consensus conference last week, the mood was still buoyant, with no one even saying “crypto winter” (out loud, at any rate). Whether it’s a crisis or a bump in the road, the market meltdown and uncertainty has some companies taking advantage of the time to go deeper in investing. Binance Labs just raised a $500 million fund in early June, including from outside investors like Breyer Capital and DST, to fund more blockchain and Web3 companies. The investment group is looking to take advantage of the price uncertainty to get better returns, Binance.US CEO Brian Shroder told Protocol’s Benjamin Pimentel. “Frankly speaking, Binance Labs is in a really great spot right now because the valuations for a lot of these firms will be depressed given the crypto winter, and the ones that survive this winter will thrive in a bull market period,” Shroder said. “So to the extent that investors are actually investing now, that actually has kind of the greatest amount of return from my perspective.” Coinbase actually got its start in the last crypto winter in early 2018 when it started investing in companies like OpenSea. Aggarwal isn’t fond of reminiscing on the price swings of that time — when bitcoin fluctuated from nearly $20,000 to $3,000 in 2017 to 2018 — but the turmoil helped investors like Aggarwal find the true believers. “I'll sound like the ‘Oh, I've been in the space for a long time’ old guy at this point, but I look back on those days and I think I cherish them a lot, because from an investing perspective, the signal-to-noise ratio was a lot higher,” Aggarwal said. History could repeat itself this crypto winter if other firms follow Coinbase’s path. In a pullback, less-competitive deals means there could be room in the cap table for other, smaller crypto companies and new investors, said PitchBook crypto analyst Robert Le. What makes the crypto CVC space unique in the broader VC ecosystem is that there’s much more of an openness and a willingness to accept money even from a competitor. That makes the barrier to entry for a corporate VC even lower. “The whole ethos is a rising tide floats all boats,” Le said. “Because we're at such an early stage of the development of the crypto space, there is acceptance of new projects accepting capital from Coinbase, even though they're developing a competitive product. I think once the market matures, you’ll see less of that, but right now you’re seeing a lot of investing in competitors.” The question now is whether the tide can rise if the ocean is frozen over. PitchBook’s Le expects crypto CVC to fall back roughly in line with broader VC investing. Unlike with the last crash, which a lot of CVCs sat out, Le doesn’t think any firm will choose to sit on the sidelines this time. The wild card here is that, unlike the 2018 crypto winter, this one coincides with markets tightening, rising inflation and widespread economic uncertainty. “The broader implications of that on the funding environment are going to be very different. It could deter many founders from starting companies if they don't feel that there's sufficient investment capital for their business, and that's something that we're still trying to get our heads around,” Coinbase’s Aggarwal said. “It's very dynamic, and it's very fluid.” Keep ReadingShow less

Coinbase Ventures Investments

211 Investments

Coinbase Ventures has made 211 investments. Their latest investment was in zCloak Network as part of their Seed VC on June 6, 2022.

CBI Logo

Coinbase Ventures Investments Activity

investments chart

Date

Round

Company

Amount

New?

Co-Investors

Sources

6/17/2022

Seed VC

zCloak Network

$5.8M

Yes

1

6/14/2022

Pre-Seed

ScienceMagic.Studios

$10.3M

Yes

5

6/8/2022

Series B

Valkyrie

$11.15M

Yes

2

6/8/2022

Seed VC

Subscribe to see more

$99M

Subscribe to see more

10

6/8/2022

Seed VC

Subscribe to see more

$99M

Subscribe to see more

10

Date

6/17/2022

6/14/2022

6/8/2022

6/8/2022

6/8/2022

Round

Seed VC

Pre-Seed

Series B

Seed VC

Seed VC

Company

zCloak Network

ScienceMagic.Studios

Valkyrie

Subscribe to see more

Subscribe to see more

Amount

$5.8M

$10.3M

$11.15M

$99M

$99M

New?

Yes

Yes

Yes

Subscribe to see more

Subscribe to see more

Co-Investors

Sources

1

5

2

10

10

Coinbase Ventures Portfolio Exits

4 Portfolio Exits

Coinbase Ventures has 4 portfolio exits. Their latest portfolio exit was Dharma Labs on January 18, 2022.

Date

Exit

Companies

Valuation
Valuations are submitted by companies, mined from state filings or news, provided by VentureSource, or based on a comparables valuation model.

Acquirer

Sources

1/18/2022

Acquired

$99M

7

12/21/2021

Acquired

Subscribe to see more

$99M

Subscribe to see more

10

3/8/2021

Acquired

Subscribe to see more

$99M

Subscribe to see more

10

1/19/2021

Acquired

Subscribe to see more

$99M

Subscribe to see more

10

Date

1/18/2022

12/21/2021

3/8/2021

1/19/2021

Exit

Acquired

Acquired

Acquired

Acquired

Companies

Subscribe to see more

Subscribe to see more

Subscribe to see more

Valuation

$99M

$99M

$99M

$99M

Acquirer

Subscribe to see more

Subscribe to see more

Subscribe to see more

Sources

7

10

10

10

Coinbase Ventures Fund History

1 Fund History

Coinbase Ventures has 1 fund, including Coinbase Venture Fund.

Closing Date

Fund

Fund Type

Status

Amount

Sources

4/6/2018

Coinbase Venture Fund

2

Closing Date

4/6/2018

Fund

Coinbase Venture Fund

Fund Type

Status

Amount

Sources

2

Discover the right solution for your team

The CB Insights tech market intelligence platform analyzes millions of data points on vendors, products, partnerships, and patents to help your team find their next technology solution.

Request a demo

CBI websites generally use certain cookies to enable better interactions with our sites and services. Use of these cookies, which may be stored on your device, permits us to improve and customize your experience. You can read more about your cookie choices at our privacy policy here. By continuing to use this site you are consenting to these choices.