In a scantly ballyhooed rollout of its “updated statistics and data visualizations” on July 1, the Securities and Exchange Commission implied an ongoing uptick in capital markets.
Although the release coincided with the end of 1H 2026, the SEC based its “Key Highlights” on the end of the first quarter. In that alone, there is room for snickering, but let’s allow the SEC to have its say:
“In the first quarter of 2026, IPO and follow-on offering activity showed year-over-year growth:
- There were 99 IPOs raising over $22 billion in Q1 2026, compared to 84 IPOs raising over $11.8 billion in Q1 2025. This represents an approximately 86% increase in proceeds raised.
- There were 264 follow-on registered offerings raising over $44.2 billion in Q1 2026, compared to 250 follow-on registered offerings raising over $40.4 billion in Q1 2025.”
An 18 percent year-over-year growth in IPO volume, coupled with an 86 percent increase in value, is worthy of attention. The number of companies on major exchanges has dwindled dramatically over the last 30 years — from a high-water mark of 7,451 domestic operating companies in 1997 to 3,631 at the end of 2025, according to the IPO Initiative at the University of Florida. That’s a 51.2 percent drop. So, any uptick in new companies in the public marketplace is good news on its face.
But on closer look, this particular bump is not what it seems. According to the SEC’s underlying data, what we’re seeing is not an increase in emerging new businesses, but an uptick in SPACs. In 1Q 2025, there were 84 IPOs. Of those 63 were corporate registrants, 20 were blank-check companies — and one was a fund. In 1Q 2026, the SEC counts 99 IPOs. But the stats have flipped, with 36 corporate registrants, 62 blank-check companies and a single fund.
The money follows the same pattern. In 1Q 2025, corporate IPOs accounted for $8.8 billion of $11.9 billion in proceeds. In 1Q 2026, blank-check companies accounted for $11.8 billion of $22 billion in proceeds, while corporates raised only $9.9 billion.
The SEC didn’t break down the stats in Texas. Apparently, it was a task to “update” capital markets statistics by delivering 1Q stats at the beginning of 3Q. So, The Texas Lawbook looked at every Texas-headquartered company that filed a registration during the first two quarters of 2026. The results tracked the same.
There were12 companies that filed S-1 registrations during 1Q 2026. Of those 12 companies, 11 opened IPOs for a total of $1.66 billion. Of those 11, seven were SPACs.
One (Eagle Nuclear Energy) went public via a deSPAC merger in February with a Texas-based SPAC (Spring Valley Acquisition II).
Of the 18 Texas-based companies that filed S-1 registrations during 2Q 2026, 13 closed their IPOs, among them Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX). One was a direct registration, a one-off listing. The other, one of six 2Q SPACs (Spring Valley Acquisition V), has yet to price. And thanks to SpaceX, the proceeds were staggering, a chart-bending $89.9 billion.
Of the remaining three that filed one, Coppell-based data center provider CSquare has scheduled its IPO for Thursday: 500 million shares at $23 to $27 per share. A second, Midland-based Next Bridge Hydrocarbons has been approved for 40 million shares at $15 per share but is not yet scheduled. A third, Dallas-based software provider, RMX, formerly known as Reticulate Micro Inc., is laboring — according to its prospectus — under a warning that “Our independent registered public accounting firm has expressed substantial doubt as to our ability to continue as a going concern.”
The point here is not that SPACs are bad, but that they have apparently overtaken the capital markets. A rebirth of capital may yet be in the offing, but one would be hard-put to rest a recovery strictly on the SEC’s word.
The financial regulator was targeted in the DOGE Initiative. The agency has been short-handed and, according to Reuters, specifically directed to loosen Biden-era restrictions on SPACs.
One more thing: The SEC’s stats, like the other SEC’s football schedule, are a mirage: impressive from a distance, but up close, don’t stand up to scrutiny. These aren’t statistics produced as such by the agency, even though they try hard to appear to be.
Says its website:
“The statistics are produced from commercial data sets provided by third parties. Staff cannot guarantee the accuracy of third-party data.”
Sounds about right: the SEC’s tale of a CapM revival depends on numbers it doesn’t make and data it won’t guarantee. On the bright side, the end of the year will give the SEC a few more months to perfect the art of the footnote.