Mea culpa

Wednesday, October 7, 2026

Why Oura delayed its IPO

Allie Garfinkle

Term Sheet Editor

Profile

Tom Hale, the CEO of $11 billion smart ring company Oura, says the job is more “kibble” than “champagne” and comes with nerve-wracking responsibilities.

Sam Barnes / Contributor / Getty Images

I was wrong.

A few weeks ago, on my merry way to vacation, I wrote about Oura’s pending IPO and how, amazingly, in the AI era it was a smart ring maker we could rely on to take the go-public plunge. Not anymore: On Sept. 29, after a much-anticipated roadshow, Oura CEO Tom Hale delayed the plan, citing “uncertainty in the IPO market.”

The obvious question: why get so close, then back off at the last minute? My colleague Morgan Chittum, who just joined Fortune and who Term Sheet readers will be hearing a lot more from soon, dug into this question in a recent piece. For one, she found, valuation proved tricky. As she writes, breaking down the numbers:

Oura had proposed selling 50 million shares at $40 to $44 apiece. At the $42 midpoint, the deal would have raised roughly $2.1 billion in gross proceeds. At the top end of the range, Oura would have had a fully diluted valuation of $15.6 billion. That might be too pricey for a company whose core product is an electronic ring.

But the argument for Oura’s valuation depends on whether or not investors are seeing it as a single-product hardware maker or something bigger and with more expansion potential.

“If you are viewing Oura as an AI-enabled digital-health platform … then whatever multiple they are looking for can kind of be justified,” [Kat Siu, vice president of financial services firm IPOX,] added. “But if you are just looking at them as a pure ring manufacturer, just consumer hardware, then that valuation is pretty hefty.” The distinction matters because Oura’s sales still lean heavily toward hardware, according to Siu.

Oura has, of course, tried to sell itself as more than a smart ring, leveraging its massive data set and AI tie-ins as part of a more sweeping narrative. (I, for one, am an ardent Oura ring-wearer, but I don’t use too many of its AI-branded features). And, as Morgan writes, there were concerns about the IPO’s financial structure:

The offering’s structure may also have given investors pause. Of the 50 million shares proposed, only 13.5 million, or 27%, were to be newly issued by Oura.

The other 36.5 million shares, or 73% of the deal, were to be sold by existing shareholders, meaning the bulk of the cash raised would have gone to early investors and insiders rather than to the company. At the $42 midpoint, that works out to roughly $567 million in gross proceeds for Oura and approximately $1.53 billion for selling shareholders.

This means there could be a ton of initial selling, which can make an IPO look less like a fundraise and more like a liquidity event for existing investors. “That’s a flag for the market,” Siu said. “It’s signaling that this IPO is not meant for growth.”

Oura, naturally, also faces competition from giants like Apple. All in, though, I sincerely thought they would dive into the IPO waters, and was wrong. So, mea culpa.

It’s possible (maybe even likely) Oura could try again at some point. The company said it was “postponing” the offering (although it gave no indication of when it was postponing the IPO to). This IPO market is quizzical in that it’s been perennially on the edge of something happening for months—and it looks like we may be in suspended animation for a while still.

A programming note… Please welcome Morgan to Term Sheet! From here on out, she will be writing the newsletter with me, taking up a few days a week, bringing us all her Wall Street expertise. You’ll see her first newsletter over the coming week.

See you tomorrow,

Allie Garfinkle
X: @agarfinks
Email: alexandra.garfinkle@fortune.com

Submit a deal for the Term Sheet newsletter here.

Joey Abrams curated the deals section of today’s newsletter.

Were you forwarded Term Sheet? Sign up here.

VENTURE CAPITAL

- Vinci, a Palo Alto, Calif.-based developer of AI-powered simulation software for hardware engineers, raised $250 million in Series B funding. Advent, Temasek, and Xora led the round and were joined by AMD Ventures, Eclipse, Khosla Ventures, and Madrona.

- Type One Energy, a Knoxville, Tenn.-based developer of stellarator fusion technology, raised $200 million in Series B funding. Breakthrough Energy Ventures and Clutterbuck Capital led the round and were joined by Lowercarbon Capital, Siemens Energy Ventures, and SiteGround Capital.

- General Medicine, a San Francisco-based healthcare marketplace that shows patients prices upfront, raised $120 million in Series B funding. a16z led the round and was joined by Matrix, VXI Capital, Eli Lilly, and Mercy Health.

- Stuut, a New York-based developer of AI software that automates billing and payment collection, raised $52.5 million in Series B funding. Insight Partners led the round and was joined by Andreessen Horowitz and M12, Microsoft’s Venture Fund.

- Vitalize, a San Francisco-based developer of AI software that helps hospitals manage staffing and capacity, raised $31 million in Series A funding. Oak HC/FT led the round and was joined by Norwest, .406 Ventures, Constellation Ventures, Y Combinator, Rock Health Capital, and MemorialCare Innovation Fund.

- Furientis, a Los Angeles, Calif.-based defense tech company, raised $25 million in seed funding. Benchmark led the round.

- Melius, a New York City-based developer of AI software for producing images, video, and audio, raised $25 million in funding across seed and Series A funding. General Catalyst led the seed round and CRV led the Series A round.

- Santé, a New York-based provider of software and payment services for wine and liquor retailers, raised $15 million in Series A funding. FINTOP led the round and was joined by Bonfire Ventures, Operator Collective, Y Combinator, and Veridical Ventures.

- Authors First, a New York-based book-to-screen studio and distribution platform, raised more than $10 million in seed funding. Brand Foundry and founder Robert Hamwee led the round and were joined by Bolt Ventures, Andy Mills, Mike Duggal, and John Kline.

- UpSmith, a Dallas, Texas-based developer of AI software for home-services contractors, raised $10 million in funding. SemperVirens led the round and was joined by Asymmetric, Hannah Grey VC, CIV, and angel investors.

- Outer Spaces, an El Segundo, Calif.-based developer of solar-powered outdoor living structures with integrated battery storage, raised $8 million in pre-seed funding. Upfront Ventures led the round and was joined by Unlock Venture Partners, Mucker Capital, and Genius Ventures.

- Polygrade, a Toronto-based developer of AI software for managing warranty claims, raised $6.3 million in funding from Construct Capital, American Family Ventures, and Nine Four Ventures.

- Zeroset, a San Francisco-based developer of AI models that track companies’ operations and workflows, raised $5.2 million in pre-seed funding. Gradient and 2048 Ventures led the round and were joined by Leblon Capital.