Blockchain.com seeks $500 million IPO at $4 billion to $6 billion valuation

Blockchain.com is telling prospective investors it wants to raise about $500 million in an initial public offering at a valuation of $4 billion to $6 billion, with the aim of being public by the end of the year, Bloomberg reported, citing people familiar with the matter. CoinDesk, which reported the target, said the London-headquartered company runs exchange, wallet, trading and lending businesses and did not respond to a request for comment.

The confidential filing Blockchain.com made with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission earlier this year matters more than the target. It opens a review before the company has to publish what a listing makes permanent—revenue mix, the size of the lending book, how it values its own token holdings, what it spends to bring in users—and anyone pricing the equity before that document appears is doing so without those figures, which is the plainest available explanation for a range that spans $2 billion.

The raise itself is modest against the band: at $500 million it works out to between 8% and 12% of the proposed valuation, so most of what Blockchain.com is judged to be worth will come from the multiple the market assigns rather than the cash the listing raises.

The band also reads the market the company would sell into. After a 2025 that produced prominent listings from stablecoin issuer Circle, exchange operator Gemini Space Station, and Bullish, the group that owns CoinDesk, this year has been quiet for crypto IPOs; the report attributes the lull to a crypto market that stayed depressed through the first half of 2026 while firms waited for asset prices to turn. That turn has arrived over the past couple of months, and the bankers behind this deal appear to be moving on it.

A target set in the middle of a recovery is honestly expressed as a range, since windows that open on a token rally can close on one; the company is in discussions with prospective investors, the report says, and the pricing question stays open while those talks run.

Confidential review buys a private conversation with the regulator and delays the moment a company's numbers become public, but it does not change what has to be in them; the first full look at Blockchain.com's economics will be the document it files, arriving when the market's appetite for crypto equity has already been set by firms that listed a year earlier.

The business that would list is a bundle of a spot exchange competing against venues already public, a wallet operation that sits close to custody, a lending book that would be marked and disclosed every quarter, and a trading desk. Because the comparables the report names all listed in 2025, the category's public track record is barely a year old, and much of the pricing exercise will be run against itself.

The venue for settling crypto's business-model questions has moved, and the shift matters more to a filer than to a trader. The Clarity Act died at 49-50 on the Senate floor, leaving market-structure definitions to the SEC and the CFTC and turning agency discretion into the binding constraint, as this publication has argued. For a company going public, the registration statement does the defining instead: what must be said about custody of client assets, about lending, about how the firm's own holdings are treated. That constraint lands on the filer rather than the industry and arrives on a deadline the company sets for itself.

The agencies have not stood still on adjacent ground. A custody proposal covering both investment advisers and broker-dealers sits at the White House, and the SEC's innovation exemption put tokenized U.S. equities on a five-year clock, two fronts close enough to Blockchain.com's wallet and trading businesses that the eventual disclosure language—who holds client assets, and under which characterization—will say more about the company than the size of the raise does.

For institutions that spent the last several years arriving at digital assets through wrappers, an equity listing is the same professionalization applied one level up: a company with public financials is easier to underwrite than a private one and easier to hold in a mandate that permits public equity. The reverse is also true, because the same token market that drives trading volume also drives lending marks and the value of what a firm holds on its own books, and a public listing forces those lines into one document that has to move together when the market turns.

When the registration statement goes public, the numbers will arrive in a fixed order: revenue, expenses, and a risk-factor section that has to describe what a market turn does to a lending book. That document will be read more closely than any deck now circulating to investors, and it will show whether the range narrows once real financials sit behind it and where in the band demand actually lands.