Vertical versus horizontal application funding
Vertical AI primary-round dollars divided by coding-agent plus consumer-AI dollars, trailing four quarters, same sources. Derived metric vertical_vs_horizontal_apps.
Reason through thisThe reading
Horizontal raises by entities without a matched CIK are missing, which biases the ratio upward until their filings are added.
7 readings drawn from the derived metric vertical_vs_horizontal_apps; 22 observations in the evidence.
Derived (vertical_vs_horizontal_apps) from: SEC EDGAR Form D (private offerings). SEC EDGAR Form D data sets.
Why it matters
The brief's bet that value at the application layer accrues to domain-specific products (P1 seed indicator 11); the ratio says where investors are placing it.
What cuts against it
Coverage follows the seed list and CIK matching; one mega-round by a coding-agent company swings the ratio; dollars raised are not dollars captured.
How it is measured
- derived metric
vertical_vs_horizontal_apps(formula in the semantic layer) - source SEC EDGAR Form D (private offerings) · default tier 4 · Public domain (U.S. government work)
- proxy capital_flow · cadence quarterly
Four quarters; a move under 0.2x is round timing. Rising = capital concentrating in vertical applications.
Applied to metric:vertical_vs_horizontal_apps.
The tracker's prior expectation was dispersing; the evaluator reads unclear. The evaluator wins until a reviewed override.
Latest readings
Why this status, and its history
Vertical AI's share of application funding fell sharply at the end of 2025 and has risen in each of the two quarters since, so the last four quarterly moves split evenly between down and up. The direction rule needs most moves to agree, so the reading is unclear until the recovery holds or reverses.
- 2026-09-29dispersing to unclearconf 45 → 45 · Claude (model)
Vertical AI's share of application funding fell sharply at the end of 2025 and has risen in each of the two quarters since, so the last four quarterly moves split evenly between down and up. The direction rule needs most moves to agree, so the reading is unclear until the recovery holds or reverses.
Weighed against it: Measured end to end, the trailing ratio is still well below its mid-2025 level, which alone would read as dispersing; one large round in either group can move it by more than the dead band.
- 2026-09-10unmeasured to dispersingconf — → 45 · the evaluator (automatic)
Evaluator: 2.298 (SEC EDGAR Form D (private offerings), 2026-03-31) reads dispersing over 4 periods with a dead band of 0.2. Auto-reason; rule rationale: Four quarters; a move under 0.2x is round timing. Rising = capital concentrating in vertical applications.
Why this confidence
Rests on 22 observations from SEC EDGAR Form D (private offerings); best evidence tier 4, grade B; current.
Confidence is independent of status: 90–95 multiple strong independent sources; 70–89 good evidence, some ambiguity; 50–69 mixed or hard to operationalise; 0–49 limited or vague evidence.