Blockchain Capital Seeks $700M for Two Funds

Blockchain Capital has confidentially targeted $700 million for two new investment vehicles, according to a Bloomberg report cited by The Block on April 23, 2026. The report, which cited a person familiar with the plans, said the fundraising process could complete in five to six months — a relatively compressed timeline for multi-hundred‑million dollar funds. The announcement is noteworthy given the constrained institutional appetite for large, sector‑specialist pools since the crypto market cycle peak in 2021–22. For limited partners (LPs) and allocators watching allocations to digital assets, the move signals either renewed confidence in the growth stage and secondary opportunities of the crypto ecosystem or a strategic push by managers to seize perceived dislocations in token and equity prices. This piece unpacks the data, implications for the venture and token markets, and risks to LPs and asset prices.

Context

Blockchain Capital is a long‑standing venture firm focused on blockchain infrastructure and digital assets; the firm has been active through multiple crypto cycles and is known for both primary venture deals and participation in secondary transactions. The April 23, 2026 report in The Block relays Bloomberg's sourcing and places the $700 million target into a fundraising environment that remains selective: many LPs have tightened allocations to sector specialists after notable drawdowns in 2022 and heightened regulatory scrutiny in the U.S. The timeline of five to six months cited by Bloomberg is materially faster than the 6–12 month fundraising windows commonly observed for funds of this size, suggesting either a robust LP pipeline or pre‑commitments among cornerstone investors.

The identity of the two vehicles — whether a traditional VC fund, an opportunity/secondaries vehicle, or a token‑focused balance — was not specified in the Bloomberg/The Block dispatch. That ambiguity matters: allocations to tokens (native digital assets) versus equity stakes in startups carry different liquidity profiles, fee structures and regulatory exposures. Institutional LPs evaluating a $700 million target will scrutinize proposed GP commitments, fee and carry structures, and the split between primary, secondary and token allocations. For context, the fundraising announcement arrived on April 23, 2026, the same week when institutional conversations about custody, tokenization, and regulatory clarity in key markets have intensified, adding a policy dimension to allocation decisions.

Finally, the decision to pursue two funds in parallel follows a broader pattern among crypto‑focused managers to segregate risk profiles and offer LPs choice: vintage‑style venture commitments for long‑dated equity exposures, and opportunity pools for concentrated secondary purchases or token allocations with potentially shorter holding periods. That bifurcation has precedent across the industry and has been a vehicle to attract LPs who want targeted exposure without mixing illiquid venture stakes with tradable tokens in the same fund.

Data Deep Dive

The core datapoint driving market attention is the $700 million target figure reported by Bloomberg and cited in The Block article (The Block, Apr 23, 2026; Bloomberg source). Bloomberg's claim that the raise could close in five to six months provides a precise timeline: a successful close on such a timetable implies either substantial existing LP commitments or an aggressive marketing program that has already secured mark‑ups on allocation schedules. Five to six months compares with the private equity and VC norm where multi‑hundred‑million raises often take between six and twelve months from first pitch to final close, according to industry fundraising surveys and placement agent standards.

Beyond the headline, several ancillary datapoints are relevant. First, the split into two funds implies an average vehicle size of roughly $350 million if the target is evenly divided — though GPs frequently structure a primary venture fund larger than a secondary or token pool. Second, the public timeline (April 23, 2026) gives market participants a reference for measuring fundraising velocity and gauging the pipeline: a close by September–October 2026 would fall within Bloomberg's five to six month window. Third, historical cycles matter: the crypto VC boom of 2021 saw some managers raise multi‑billion dollar pools, while 2022–2024 saw capital contraction; a $700 million target represents a material but measured scaling relative to the largest crossover managers.

Source provenance is also a datapoint: Bloomberg and The Block are credible outlets for fundraising scoops, but neither report includes LP lists or fund documentation. That absence increases the premium on subsequent regulatory filings (e.g., SEC Form D submissions in the U.S.) and placement agent disclosures, which institutional LPs will monitor for confirmation of size, fund structure and key terms. For allocators, the distinction between reported target and final closed amount is material; headline targets are frequently revised by GPs during the marketing process based on LP demand, as evidenced repeatedly in private capital markets.

Sector Implications

A successful $700 million raise would reinforce a continuing institutionalization of crypto venture capital, indicating that LPs remain willing to allocate meaningful capital to specialist managers despite recent market dislocations. That said, the macro backdrop and regulatory environment will shape the ultimate investor mix. If significant allocations come from family offices and high‑net‑worth investors rather than sovereign or large public pension funds, the permanence and strategic signalling effects will differ materially. For service providers — custody firms, compliance platforms and secondary marketplaces — a $700 million raise that includes token allocations would translate into increased demand for regulated custody and trade settlement services.

For portfolio companies and token projects, new dry powder at established managers tends to raise follow‑on capacity and can compress late‑stage valuations if the capital is deployed aggressively. Conversely, if one of the two funds is targeted at secondaries, it could provide a bid for shareholder liquidity in private rounds and reduce forced selling from constrained token holders. Compared to the 2021‑22 peak in crypto fundraising when some managers targeted multi‑billion dollar pools, a $700 million raise is modest on an absolute basis but significant in a market where concentrated, high‑quality capital is scarcer.

Benchmark and peer comparisons will shape market perception. Funds of this size that are managed by top‑tier teams can materially influence deal terms in growth and late‑stage rounds; they also compete with crossover investors and corporates for deal flow. The reported five to six month timeline, if achieved, would give Blockchain Capital an earlier deployment advantage over peers that are still fundraising and could alter negotiation dynamics in up rounds and token allocations over the coming two to three quarters.

Risk Assessment

Several risk vectors are salient for LPs considering exposure to these new vehicles. First, valuation risk: if the funds pursue primary investments in overvalued token projects or late‑stage startups with market‑dependent revenues, LP returns could be impaired if public crypto markets remain volatile. Second, liquidity mismatch: tokens can be tradable but subject to lockups, vesting and market depth constraints; venture stakes are inherently illiquid and often tied to long exit windows. Without clear disclosure of allocation percentages and liquidity mechanisms, LPs face uncertain cash flow timelines.

Regulatory risk remains prominent. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's posture toward token securities and platform arrangements has evolved since 2022; any fund with material token exposure will face ongoing compliance and legal interpretation risk. Additionally, geopolitical fragmentation of crypto rules across jurisdictions can complicate cross‑border investments and the transferability of token assets. From an operational standpoint, custody, auditability and valuation methodologies for tokens differ from standard practice in venture capital, requiring enhanced reporting and third‑party verification.

Finally, fundraising execution risk is non‑trivial. A headline target of $700 million can be revised downward if LPs demand tighter terms or if market conditions deteriorate. Conversely, an oversubscribed raise could pressure GPs to deploy capital quickly, increasing the risk of diminished underwriting standards. Institutional LPs will want to see fund documentation and side‑letter frameworks before committing meaningful capital.

Fazen Markets Perspective

Fazen Markets views the reported $700 million target as a calibrated signal rather than an aggressive re‑entry into binge fundraising. From a contrarian vantage, the decision to pursue two distinct vehicles simultaneously suggests the firm is positioning to arbitrage the post‑2022 market structure: concentrated secondary pools can buy stakes at discounts while primary venture investments capture upside as the innovation cycle resumes. If Blockchain Capital secures cornerstone commitments early, a five to six month close is feasible and would give the firm deployment optionality during a period when many successors to 2021 vintage funds are still reshaping strategies.

A non‑obvious implication is that sizable, successful closes by established crypto GPs can accelerate consolidation in the venture ecosystem. Funds with scale can provide longer‑term support for portfolio companies, potentially outbidding smaller managers in follow‑on rounds and pushing weaker funds into early exits or consolidation. That dynamic can enhance survivorship bias in the sector and concentrate future returns among fewer, larger managers.

Finally, Fazen Markets notes that headline fundraising targets should be interpreted with an eye toward fund composition. A $700 million raise skewed toward token allocation will have different market effects than one focused on equity and secondaries. LPs and market participants should monitor Form D filings, LP panels, and any placement agent involvement as proximate confirmation signals. For more background on the interplay between institutional allocation behavior and digital assets, see our pieces on venture capital and the institutionalization of crypto markets on the Fazen portal.

FAQ

Q: If Blockchain Capital closes $700M, how might that change deal terms for startups? A: Practically, an increase in available late‑stage capital from established GPs tends to compress liquidation preferences and can increase pre‑money valuations in growth rounds. Startups may receive more attractive follow‑on financing which reduces the need for dilutive financing but could raise expectations for execution and growth milestones.

Q: What should LPs look for in the funds' documentation that is not in the Bloomberg/The Block report? A: LPs should prioritize the split between primary vs secondary vs token allocations, GP commitment size, management fee and carry structures, NAV and valuation policies for tokens, liquidity terms for token holdings, and any side‑letter preferential allocation language. These elements materially affect risk, return timing and governance.

Bottom Line

Blockchain Capital's reported $700 million target for two funds — with a five to six month close window reported by Bloomberg/The Block on April 23, 2026 — is a significant, measured signal of continued institutional interest in crypto‑focused VC and secondary opportunities. Institutional investors should watch fund composition, regulatory disclosures and closing momentum as leading indicators of the broader market impact.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.