Where to fundraise in 2025: the real city-by-sector map
For decades, "where to fundraise" had a single answer: the Bay Area. That answer is still mostly right, but less right than it was. The secondary hubs have grown enough that the right city for your raise now depends on your sector and your stage.
Growth List's US startup hubs database tracks raw funding volume: NYC, SF, Boston, and LA lead. By growth rate, Austin, Miami, and Atlanta have seen the fastest increases over the past three years. AlleyWatch's March venture report breaks the share map down further: NYC now captures 20.7% of national capital, San Diego 11.3%, Palo Alto 10.5%, Austin 10.4%, San Francisco 10.1%. Combined Bay Area is still the largest concentration, but NYC has emerged as a near-equal force, and Austin punches well above weight.
What follows is the sector-by-city breakdown we give founders when they ask where to spend their raise cycle.
Bay Area: still the default for AI and infra
The Bay Area remains the deepest VC concentration globally. Sand Hill Road is still the densest VC corridor. If you're building AI infrastructure or frontier models, Hayes Valley and SoMa are the epicenter. Most successful exits happen here, so most operator angels live here. The engineering talent depth is unmatched, especially senior engineers from FAANG.
The downsides are obvious. SF rent and salaries are highest in the US. If your business isn't in the dominant theses right now—AI, B2B SaaS, infrastructure—you'll get less attention. You're also hiring against OpenAI, Anthropic, and every other well-funded AI lab.
We see founders in fintech or consumer struggle here. The investor attention goes to what's hot, and if you're not in that bucket, you'll spend twice as long getting meetings. If you're building AI-native applications, dev tools, or anything that touches LLMs, this is still the right place. For everything else, consider the alternatives.
New York: the largest single-city share
NYC captured the largest single-city share of US VC capital this year. The fintech ecosystem is strong—Union Square Ventures, Lerer Hippeau, Insight Partners, Boldstart all have deep sector expertise. Consumer, marketplace, media, and fashion startups have adjacent industries (finance, advertising, media) that provide customer concentration and domain expertise.
The technical talent depth is lower than the Bay Area for senior engineers, and the operator angel network for AI and infra specifically is thinner. But if you're building fintech, consumer, marketplace, media-tech, or B2B SaaS targeting financial services, NYC is often the better primary hub. We've seen fintech founders raise faster in NYC than SF because the sector investors are denser and the customer conversations happen in the same city.
Austin: fastest-growing, tax-advantaged
Austin is the fastest-growing major US tech hub by deal volume. No state income tax. The tech migration from the Bay Area in 2021-2024 created a meaningful operator network. Strong consumer and SaaS investor presence.
The VC ecosystem is smaller and less mature than SF or NYC. Most national VCs serving Austin still travel from SF; fewer dedicated Austin teams. But if you're building consumer brands, SaaS, fintech, or defense tech, and you care about tax and lifestyle, Austin is worth considering as a primary hub. We see founders who prioritize burn efficiency do well here—the cost base is lower, and the investors expect leaner operations.
Miami: crypto, fintech, and family offices
Miami has a heavy crypto, fintech, and Latin America-bridge ecosystem. No state income tax. Strong family office concentration. Mayor Suarez actively recruited tech in 2021-2023; the ecosystem is still growing from that push.
The talent pool is smaller, especially for senior engineers. Most institutional VCs require Bay Area or NYC presence. But if you're building crypto, fintech, or anything focused on Latin America, Miami gives you access to family offices and sector-specific angels that are harder to reach elsewhere. The institutional VC presence is thin, so plan to travel for Series A.
Boston: biotech and deep tech
Boston has the strongest US biotech ecosystem. MIT and Harvard feed a robust deep tech and robotics ecosystem. Specialized investors like Polaris Partners, Atlas Venture, and Flagship Pioneering dominate biotech. If you're building biotech, deep tech, robotics, or AI research-backed startups, Boston is the right primary hub. The sector expertise is unmatched. For software outside those categories, Boston is a weak choice—most VCs here are sector-specialized, and if you're not in their sector, they won't take the meeting.
Los Angeles: consumer and creator economy
LA has a strong consumer brands ecosystem. Entertainment-tech and creator economy concentration. Upfront Ventures, Crosscut Ventures, and Mucker Capital are the core funds. If you're building consumer brands, entertainment-tech, creator economy tools, or gaming, LA gives you proximity to the industries you're serving. For B2B SaaS or infrastructure, LA is a weak choice—the investor base skews consumer.
Does location matter if you're remote?
It matters less than it used to, more than founders think.
For initial pre-seed angels, AngelList syndicates, and many seed funds, location doesn't matter. Zoom works. For Series A, most institutional VCs prefer founders within a one-hour flight of their HQ. They won't say it explicitly, but board meeting logistics matter. For AI infrastructure deals, SF concentration is real—most of the sector-specialized partners are based there, and they meet in person.
The pragmatic move for non-US-based founders: spend 2-4 weeks in SF or NYC during the active raise. Many founders we work with fly in for the cycle and fly home after close. You don't need to relocate permanently, but you do need to be in the room during the decision window.
Sector-by-city decision map
If you're building AI infrastructure or frontier models, SF is the primary hub, NYC is a strong secondary. The investor density and operator network in SF are unmatched. NYC has growing AI expertise but still lags SF for infra specifically.
If you're building AI applications, SF and NYC are roughly equal primaries. NYC has more consumer and enterprise AI investors; SF has more infra-adjacent investors who also fund applications.
For B2B SaaS, SF and NYC are co-primaries. Austin is a strong secondary. The investor base is distributed enough that location matters less here than in other categories.
For fintech, NYC is the primary hub, SF and Miami are strong secondaries. The sector expertise in NYC is deeper, and the customer concentration (financial services) is higher.
For consumer brands, NYC and LA are co-primaries, Austin is a strong secondary. The investor base and the industries you're serving are concentrated in these three cities.
For marketplaces, NYC and SF are co-primaries, LA is a strong secondary. The two-sided network expertise is deepest in NYC and SF.
For biotech and deep tech, Boston is the primary hub, SF is a strong secondary. The sector specialization in Boston is unmatched.
For crypto and web3, Miami and SF are co-primaries, NYC is a strong secondary. Miami has the family office and crypto-native investor concentration; SF has the technical talent and infrastructure investors.
For defense and hardware, SF and Austin are co-primaries, Boston is a strong secondary. The defense-tech investor base has grown in Austin; SF still has the hardware and deep tech expertise.
For climate, SF is the primary hub, NYC and Boston are strong secondaries. The climate-tech investor base is most concentrated in SF.
Where to start
Match your sector to the cities above. If your current city isn't on the list for your sector, plan a 2-4 week trip during your active raise. Identify 5-8 sector-specialized funds in the right city for your business. If you want a second opinion on which city makes sense for your specific raise, book a discovery call.
