Seven Companies Took 58% of Proptech Funding in the Third Quarter, CRETI Reports

The Center for Real Estate Technology & Innovation, known as CRETI, published its State of Proptech Venture Capital report for the third quarter of 2026 on October 5. The page shows a revision on October 8. The report puts the money raised by proptech companies in the quarter at approximately $2.21 billion and names the seven largest financings: EliseAI at $350 million, Kahua at $250 million, Invenergy at $215 million, Buildots at $130 million, TerraFirma at $115 million, ICON at approximately $114.9 million and Habitat at approximately $104.1 million. CRETI says the seven total approximately $1.28 billion, or 58 percent of the quarter. By PSV’s addition the seven come to $1.279 billion, which computes to 57.9 percent of $2.21 billion and leaves about $0.93 billion for every other company in the count.

The report says the $2.21 billion is not venture capital alone. It includes venture rounds, private equity, debt, seed capital and later growth rounds; CRETI labels the Kahua financing a private equity investment and cites a debt financing of approximately $50 million for a company called Rize. Below the top seven it lists construction companies Monumental at $32 million, Adaptive at $30 million, Gritt and CivilGrid at $26 million each and Digs at $25.3 million, and AI workflow companies Henry at $16.5 million, Sela AI at $15 million and Uniti AI at $12 million. The third quarter report gives no count of rounds and no median. CRETI’s first half report, published July 8, gave both: $4.53 billion across 231 rounds, a median round of $6.75 million, and 11 rounds of $100 million or more that totaled $2.25 billion, or 49.6 percent of disclosed capital.

The total is flat. The first half figure computes to an average of about $2.27 billion a quarter, and $2.21 billion is about 2 percent below that. What moved is the share at the top: 49.6 percent for eleven rounds across six months, then 58 percent for seven financings in three. The two figures are not built the same way. The first half number counts every round of $100 million or more. The third quarter number counts the seven largest, each above $100 million, and the report does not say whether any other round crossed that line. CRETI’s own reading is that the middle of the market may get harder for companies without early momentum or demonstrated scale. That is CRETI’s interpretation, not a PSV finding.

An owner or developer does not buy venture rounds. They buy software from these companies and from the ones that did not raise. Two things follow. A vendor with new capital widens its scope: EliseAI said in its September 29 release that it would use its $350 million to automate more of its customers’ operations, so a contract signed for leasing inquiries becomes a renewal conversation about maintenance and renewals too. And a vendor in the squeezed middle is a continuity question, which PSV’s brief on HouseCanary’s Chapter 11 filing walked through for a data vendor. CRETI places four of the seven in construction: Kahua, Buildots, TerraFirma and ICON. It says construction tools should be judged on project duration, cost predictability and margin, and it says plainly that a nine-figure financing does not establish return, readiness or fit. PSV agrees with that caution.

The work is one row per software vendor the firm pays. The inputs are the accounts payable ledger for the last twelve months, to find every vendor and what it costs; the signed contract and order forms for each; and each vendor’s most recent disclosed financing, taken from the company’s own release or a regulatory filing. The output is a register with eight columns: what the tool does and which properties use it, annual cost, contract end date, renewal notice deadline, the data export clause, the assignment or change of control clause, the last financing with its date, amount and type, and the link to the record that financing came from. A row with no financing record says so. It does not borrow a figure from an aggregator.

The reviewer is the head of operations or technology for the business columns and counsel for the two contract clauses, with the asset management lead signing the register each quarter. The approval gate: no renewal and no new multi-year software contract is signed until that vendor’s row is complete and the export clause has been read by counsel. An assistant can pull the vendor list from the ledger, extract dates and clauses from the contracts with a page reference for each, and draft the financing column from public releases. Every extracted clause is checked against the page before it is relied on. PSV built no register for any firm in this brief, tested none of the products named, and promises no saving, no vendor outcome and no return.