Is Figma’s rating to the New York Stock Exchange is the marker that many tech players expected, whether they were founders, employees and of course investors? Valored at more than $ 60 billion from the first session (valuation that has dropped greatly since), will it be the IPO capable of reappearing the appetite of tech financiers and relaunching a cycle of IPOs? It is of course the questions that we immediately asked ourselves and to which we will give you some elements of answers throughout the week through a review of the next potential IPOs.
But let’s go back more precisely to this IPO, which is part of a context where The major tech players are experiencing a strong resumption of activity. So you will not have failed to notice that the GAFAM and other giants are recording this year Record resultsfigures worn by AI, Cloud or Digital Advertising, and coupled with a strong rationalization of their workforce To be in line with the AI AD OUT.
This IPO could be followed by a pipeline of private companies with high valuation: Canva, Databricks, Stripe, Midjourney, Spacex, Klarna, Revolut, ex -startups who are also preparing to take the plunge, encouraged by the success of Figma but above all The growing pressure of institutional investorswhich testify to impatience, to transform private valuations into liquidity, Show Me The Money Jerry!
And this trend is not limited to the United States, The same goes for China and AsiaShanghai and Hong Kong which strengthen their role as stock market platforms to accommodate local technological companies, while the political and regulatory tensions initiated by the Trump government, now limit Chinese IPOs on the US markets. This reorientation thus opens a new front in the global stock market competition, where Asian places also seek to capture strategic files, whether in semiconductors, biotechs or even software.
Figma, an exit scenario which is part of a real case of school
The IPO of Figma will remain as one of the most striking episodes that ends an era of tech to open another. More than a simple financial success, the operation illustrates the tensions between long -term strategies, governance arbitrations and and debates on the equity of the IPO process.
From the Péter Thiel dropout to the tool that has become a must -have of design
Born in 2012 under the leadership of Dylan Field and Evan Wallace, Figma embodies the success of the Thiel Fellowship generation. The abandonment of the initial project, from software for drones, leads to a stronger intuition: create a collaborative design tool usable directly in the browser, and capable of fluidifying teamwork. In 2016, the upload of the real -time collaborative publisher became the pivot functionality.
The COVVI-19 pandemic accelerates the adoption of the tool. Figma becomes the benchmark of teleworking or disseminated product teams in several regions or countries. The solution seduces Microsoft, Uber, Coda, and is diversified with Figjam. In 2022, Adobe announced its intention to buy Figma for $ 20 billion, seeing in the collaborative editor a direct threat to Adobe XD and a lever to speed up its transition to the cloud. The agreement, which provided for the maintenance of Dylan Field at the head of the company, quickly arouses the attention of regulators, in particular from the British CMA, which fears a reduction in competition and an obstacle to innovation. After more than a year of investigation, the operation was abandoned at the end of 2023 and Figma collected a billion dollars in rupture costs. Far from weakening society, this failure strengthens it, it retains its independence, leaves the shadow of its rival and approaches its IPO of 2025 with increased cash and the desire to bounce independently.
An introductory pop, which delights each other
From the first session, the action jumped from 250 %the highest increase never recorded for an American IPO of more than a billion dollars raised. But behind this success hides controversy. By fixing the introductory price to $ 33 per shareDylan Field and his adviser banks have chosen to favor a shareholder base made up of long -term institutional. Which suggests many commentators that a “Value has been left on the table” estimated at more than $ 3.5 billionwhich would have been captured by the funds that have been able to access the initial placement, a mechanism that should be explained to qualify the subject.
However, among the big winners, we find Index Ventures, Sequoia Capital or even Greylock Venturespresent for the first since the Seed Round, who saw the value of his multiplied participation well beyond the initial projections. The capitalization of the company, which was beyond 71 billion dollars at its peak, is now divided by two, this being the price of the action is today above that fixed during its introduction.
A disputed, but strategic arbitration.
By fixing the introductory price at 33 dollars per share, Dylan Field voluntarily favored a long -term logic and attracting the capital of institutional investors considered as “patients”, capable of stabilizing the title and supporting the company over several years. This choice, however, aroused strong reactions, notably Bill Gurley, partner of benchmark and recurring critic of the traditional IPO model, who saw it as a brilliant demonstration of the ineffectiveness of the system, believing that Figma had “left the table” more than $ 3.5 billion in favor of a limited circle of initial buyers.
Discontent was not limited to the Silicon Valley observers. On the particular side, frustration has also been palpable, so on social networks, many platform users like Robinhood have said that they had only obtained one action, despite subscription orders, causing the impression of a locked market, where small carriers find themselves excluded from the spectacular gains from the first session.
For leaders’ banks, notably Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan, the equation was based on mechanics to only put 7 % of total capital. This low floating volume created an artificial rarity, fueling the buying pressure from the opening, while reserving access to the institutional actors selected upstream. If this strategy guaranteed a spectacular and attracted start -up of reference shareholders, it has also crystallized the debate on the governance of the IPOs and the distribution of the value between founders, historical investors and new entrants.
Beyond the controversy, what must be remembered is that the‘IPO first serves to build long -term shareholdingnot to maximize 24 hours of sale product, that The primary price is constrained by firm orders today, and not by the sudden clairvoyance of the post-buttocks and that success of an IPO is not read in “pop”, but at the register and at the outfit at 6/24 months.
Figma, the IPO which gives air to investors
To conclude, yes the IPO of Figma is a strong signal, which exceeds the only case of the company. It marks a breathing expected by the entire technological sector, by offering an exit scenario which could restore confidence to investors and open the perspective of an IPO cycle after several years of atony. For capital funds risks, long faced with the growing pressure of their LP and the blocking of the secondary market, it shows that an alternative of liquidity is again possible. By succeeding in transforming an aborted redemption into a historical introduction, Figma does not only cross a new door, but it also offers the market a restart signal, capable of leading to other private companies with high valuation to take the plunge.
We offer you throughout the week to discover the startups that are about to take the plunge.
Founded in 2012 by Dylan Field and Evan Wallace, Figma has raised more than $ 330 million from investors like index Ventures, Sequoia Capital, Greylock Partners and Andreessen Horowitz and was introduced on the stock market. It achieved a total turnover of $ 749 million in 2024 (compared to 504 in 2023) Figma exceeded $ 900 million in annualized income in 2025, with growth of 48 % over one year. It displays a gross margin of 88 % and an operating margin of 17 % in the first quarter, for a net profit of $ 45 million. The company has $ 1.54 billion in cash and has no debt.
