Do AI startups receive systematically higher funding than non-AI startups? An empirical analysis of efficient capital allocation versus market distortions
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.23(2).2026.08
-
Article InfoVolume 23 2026, Issue #2, pp. 97-110
- 14 Views
-
2 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Type of the article: Research Article
Abstract
This study examines the funding gap between AI and non-AI startups using a cross-sectional dataset of 2,850 global startups drawn from Kaggle Public Domain. The sample was processed in four stages: text normalization, median imputation, outlier screening, and keyword-based classification. This produced 1,156 AI startups (40.6%) and 1,694 non-AI startups (59.4%), identified through keywords such as "Artificial Intelligence," "Machine Learning," "Deep Learning," "Natural Language Processing," "Computer Vision," and "Generative AI." The dependent variable was each company's last disclosed funding amount in millions of US dollars. Independent variables included AI classification (binary), founding year, employee count, market size in billions of USD, and industry dummy variables. The analysis used multivariable OLS regression with HC3 robust standard errors and Welch's t-tests across 15 industries. The results showed remarkably similar funding levels: $115.18 million for AI startups versus $117.98 million for non-AI startups. Regression analysis found no statistically significant relationship between AI classification and funding (β = 0.89, p = .869), with the model explaining 38.7% of funding variance. Employee count was the strongest predictor (β = 0.13, p < .001), while founding year and market size had no significant effects. These findings challenge the widely held belief that AI startups attract premium investment. As AI matures from a novel technology into standard infrastructure, its signalling power in venture capital markets appears to be fading. What matters most to investors is not a technology label, but how well a business is built and run.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)G24, L26, M13, O32
-
References36
-
Tables5
-
Figures1
-
- Figure 1. Funding distributions by AI vs non-AI startups
-
- Table 1. Funding stage distribution by AI vs non-AI
- Table 2. Sum last funding & sum market size
- Table 3. Sum last funding & industry
- Table 4. AI startups profile
- Table 5. Multivariable regression results
-
- Aldrich, H. E., & Ruef, M. (2017). Unicorns, Gazelles, and Other Distractions on the Way to Understanding Real Entrepreneurship in America. Acad. Manag. Perspect., 32, 458-472.
- Backman, M., & Hans, L. (2015). The Geography of Innovation and Entrepreneurship. The Annals of Regional Science, 55(1), 1-6.
- Bernhol, L., Landemore, H., & Reich, R. (2021). Digital Technology and Democratic Theory.
- Blank, S. (2013). Why the Lean Start-up Changes Everything. Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Review, 91(5), 63-72.
- Bresnahan, T., & Yin, P. L. (2017). Adoption of New Information and Communications Technologies in the Workplace Today. Innovation Policy and the Economy, 17, 95-124.
- Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2017a). Machine, Platform, Crowd: Harnessing Our Digital Future. W.W. Norton \& Company.
- Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2017). The Business of Artificial Intelligence. Harvard Business Review, 7, 3-11.
- Brynjolfsson, E., Rock, D., & Syverson, C. (2017). Artificial Intelligence and the Modern Productivity Paradox. Harvard Business Review, 95(4), 3-11.
- Cabage, N., & Zhang, S. (2013). The Smarter Startup.
- Cacciotti, G., James, C., Hayton, J., Mitchell, R., & Giazitzoglu, A. (2016). A Reconceptualization of Fear of Failure in Entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(3), 302-25.
- Catalini, C., Fons-Rosen, C., & GaulÃ, P. (2020). How Do Travel Costs Shape Collaboration? Management Science, 66(8), 3340-3360.
- Chen, H., Gompers, P., Kovner, A., & Lerner, J. (2010). Buy Local? The Geography of Venture Capital. Journal of Urban Economics, 67(1), 90-102.
- Cockburn, I. M., Henderson, R., & Stern, S. (2018). The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Innovation.
- Crunchbase. (2025). 6 Charts That Show the Big {AI} Funding Trends of 2025.
- Cumming, D., & Johan, S. (2013). Venture Capital and Private Equity Contracting: An International Perspective (2 ed.) Elsevier.
- Dedehayir, O., & Steinert, M. (2016). The Hype Cycle Model: A Review and Future Directions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 108(C), 28-41.
- Feldman, M. P., & Kogler, D. K. (2010). Chapter 8 – Stylized Facts in the Geography of Innovation. In Hall, B. H., & Rosenbergeds, N. (Eds). Handbook of The Economics of Innovation (pp. 381-410).
- Goldfarb, A., Taska, B., & Teodoridis, F. (2023). Could Machine Learning Be a General Purpose Technology? A Comparison of Emerging Technologies Using Data from Online Job Postings. Research Policy, 52, 104653.
- Hai, Stanford. (2024). Introduction to the AI Index Report 2024. In Stanford Human-Centred Artificial Intelligence.
- Hall, B., Mairesse, J., & Mohnen, P. (2010). Measuring the Returns to R&D, MERIT Working Papers 2010-006. United Nations University – Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
- Hirshleifer, D., & Hong Teoh, S. (2003). Herd Behaviour and Cascading in Capital Markets: A Review and Synthesis. European Financial Management, 9(1), 25-66.
- Hochberg, Y. V., Ljungqvist, A., & Lu, Y. (2007). Whom You Know Matters: Venture Capital Networks and Investment Performance. Journal of Finance, 62(1), 251-301.
- Huizingh, Eelko K.R.E. (2011). Open Innovation: State of the Art and Future Perspectives. Technovation, 31(1), 2-9.
- Kahneman, D., & Knetsch, J. L. (1986). Thaler R. Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: Entitlements in the market. The American Economic Review, 76(4), 728-741.
- Lerner, J., & Nanda, Ramana (2020). Venture Capital’s Role in Financing Innovation: What We Know and How Much We Still Need to Learn. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 34(3), 237-261.
- Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2006). Path Dependency and Regional Economic Evolution. Journal of Economic Geography, 6, 395-437.
- Nanda, R., & Rhodes-Kropf, M. (2017). Financing Risk and Innovation.
- Perc, M. (2014). The Matthew Effect in Empirical Data. Journal of the Royal Society, Interface / the Royal Society, 11.
- Rios-Campos, C., Zambrano, E. O. G., Vargas, D. J. C., Merino, L. A. A., Vallejos, P. A. A., Alcantara, I.M. B., Rubio, D. E. D., Rodriguez, D. S., Tomanguilla, J. H., & Calderón, E. V. (2024). Startups and Artificial Intelligence. South Florida Journal of Development, 5, 950-69.
- Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Wilkie, C. (2019). Innovating in Less Developed Regions: What Drives Patenting in the Lagging Regions of Europe and North America. Growth and Change, 50(1), 4-37.
- Rodrik, D. (2004). Industrial Policy for the Twenty-First Century.
- Savandha, S., D., & Azzahra, A. (2024). Enhancing E-Government Implementation Through Website Management.
- Spigel, B., & Harrison, R. (2017). Towards a Process Theory of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12.
- Sudarmaji, E., Achsani, N. A., Arkeman, Y., & Fahmi, I. (2021). Alternative PSS Business Models of ESCO: Towards an Innovative New Model. Indonesian Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, 7(3), 296-306.
- Sudarmaji, E., Herlan, M., & Ismiriati, N. (2024). Hack the Business Canvas Model Based on Product-Service System: Natural Language Processing (NLP) Perspective. Studi Ilmu Manajemen dan Organisasi, 5(1), 1-17.
- Tretter, M. (2024). Opportunities and Challenges of AI-Systems in Political Decision-Making Contexts. Frontiers in Political Science, 7, 1504520.


