CoreWeave Lowers Valuation to $23B, Potential Setback for Crypto
CoreWeave Lowers Valuation to $23B, Potential Setback for Crypto

Another report indicates that the AI-focused company is reducing its IPO size to only $1.5 billion.
Key Points:
-
CoreWeave is reportedly scaling back its IPO valuation and offering size, per Semafor.
-
The AI infrastructure firm, which has strong ties to bitcoin miner Core Scientific, generated $1.9 billion in revenue last year.
-
Market hesitation over AI investments and recent struggles in tech stocks may be influencing the reduced IPO expectations.
CoreWeave is set to reduce the size of its IPO just a day before its market debut, Semafor reported.
Initially projected to raise $3 billion at a $30 billion valuation, the AI infrastructure firm has now scaled back its offering, lowering its valuation to $23 billion.
According to a separate report from Bloomberg, CoreWeave is now aiming to raise just $1.5 billion in its IPO.
The firm has a close partnership with bitcoin miner Core Scientific (CORZ), which was expected to benefit from the IPO if it performed well and continued strong revenue growth in the coming years.
In early U.S. trading, CORZ saw a slight increase but remains significantly down over the past month and for the year 2025 so far. Meanwhile, AI-related tokens like NEAR, ICP, and RENDER have experienced slight losses following earlier declines.
CoreWeave generated $1.9 billion in revenue in 2024, driven by the rising demand for AI services. However, some analysts suggest that CoreWeave’s new $12 billion deal with AI giant OpenAI might have more significant long-term implications for the company than its IPO plans.
The company's decision to scale back its IPO comes as tech stocks have underperformed compared to other sectors this year. Contributing factors include the impact of tariffs imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump and concerns over AI companies' spending habits.
CoreWeave is set to debut on the Nasdaq on Friday, becoming the first AI-focused company to go public. A representative from the company was unavailable for comment at the time of publication.
What's Your Reaction?






