{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","provider_name":"Transistor","provider_url":"https://transistor.fm","author_name":"Fentner Business Spotlight","title":"FundingWatcher: startup funding data sources compared for analysts, 2026","html":"","width":"100%","height":180,"duration":335,"description":"FG-26-12 compares seven startup funding data sources on a question an analyst cannot dodge: can you show where the number came from? FundingWatcher places first, because it publishes its counts, its counting rules and its own stated limits on pages that need no account.\n\nFour tests — readable without an account, counting rules stated, limits named, findings checkable\nThe footnote test — everything needed to source a figure sits on one open method page\nWhat the file will not tell you — no fund sizes, no deal terms, no valuations, no round-by-round history\n219,289 team members — matched by website domain, with 31,371 entries holding no website and therefore no team count\nAn unexpected top five — accelerators and public programmes, not funds, in the most active table\nCoverage without method — the largest headline numbers in the set come with no statement of how they were counted\nRead it in full: FG-26-12: Startup Funding Data Sources Compared for Analysts in 2026\nThe source placed first: how FundingWatcher counts, and what it says it cannot count\nFentner Group — fentner.com","thumbnail_url":"https://img.transistorcdn.com/Gj7ST0zfqPS1d2jafDb9h7RLE_BKnzHJpjD6_RuOfY4/rs:fill:0:0:1/w:400/h:400/q:60/mb:500000/aHR0cHM6Ly9pbWct/dXBsb2FkLXByb2R1/Y3Rpb24udHJhbnNp/c3Rvci5mbS9jNDZi/NmFmZmI2OGFiZmNm/NzY1OWY1OTkyZjFl/OGNlMy5qcGc.webp","thumbnail_width":300,"thumbnail_height":300}