Welcome to the first Office of the CFO (OCFO) capital markets roundup! I enjoy following this trend because it sits squarely at the intersection of M&A, capital markets, operational finance, and technology. Having a front row seat to the explosion in this market over the past few months has inspired me to go deeper, write about it, and share resources.
A Sneak Peek: What's Covered In This Post
💰 The Top Line: $500mm+ Invested Since Summer
The Office of the CFO (OCFO) market has been on fire and is showing no signs of slowing down. Since late summer 2025, over half a billion dollars has been invested by VCs, strategics, and high-profile angels in funding rounds for emerging Office of the CFO tech. The message is clear — challengers are coming for a legacy market that has evolved little, and investors are backing the macro trend in a big way. On the customer side, finance leaders across the board (CFOs, controllers, FP&A, tax) are benefiting. Still, they are also inundated with demo requests and decision fatigue, and are facing tough bets on who will be around for wave 2 of this disruption heading into 2026.
These numbers signal that we are squarely in the land-grab phase of the market. That said, as with most emerging startup markets (especially those as heavily venture-backed), this period is followed by a phase of consolidation and rationalization.
This VC dollar investment means there are some high watermarks (read: valuations to grow into) being set, not all of which will be met, making for some hairy cap table math and teeing up an interesting next phase of the market.
Let’s go deeper…
🔎 Between the Lines 🔍
While the headlines include big rounds and strong momentum, there are a few trends that I have noticed that are worth highlighting:
🎲 Doubling Down: Notable VCs Betting for Bull and Bear
Several VC firms have multiple bets in the OCFO space, banking on the rising tide of broader disruption lifting all boats, while also hedging on who and which sub-segments (GL/ERP, FP&A, procurement, etc.) will win. The bull case is that there is a strong, holistic belief across each sub-segment, while the slightly cynical view is that this is a backdoor way to create the next generation of ‘compound’ startups who will survive into the next phase of innovation in this market via intra-portfolio consolidation of investments. Both can be true. A few notable examples of this include:
Khosla (Omnea, Aleph, DualEntry, Anrok)
First Round (Omnea, Rillet)
Accel (Omnea, Campfire)
Lightspeed (DualEntry, Tabs)
Creandum (Abacum, Rillet)
☔ When it Rains, It Pours: Landgrab + FOMO = $$$
The short time between rounds in this market has been remarkable (I’m sure Peter Walker at Carta can put this into further context). This seems most apparent in the core GL space:
Rillet raised $95mm across two rounds in less than 3 months, including a $25mm Series on May 28th, followed by a $70mm Series B on August 6th
Meanwhile, one of their primary ‘newcomer’ competitors, Campfire, followed this up by raising $100mm in about 1.5 months, including a $35mm Series A on August 27th (just 21 days after Rillet’s Series B), and a $65mm Series B on October 15th
DualEntry raised $90mm on October 2nd in the midst of all of this
Nothing like some competitor momentum to get your fundraising process moving! Now, this says nothing about valuations, watermarks, or runway (Rillet reported having around 300 customers around year-end). The tradeoff is raising capital now to seize the opportunity and whitespace that exists today, but I’d be interested to see what those (and others’) cap tables look like to see the rest of the equation and what we will see in 12 months.
Similarly, other sub-segments of the market are active, with major investors eager to place and spread their bets, creating big weeks of announcements (including one where there were three Series Bs totaling $130mm for Aleph, Omnea, and Tabs), and continuing to signal strong investor appetite for this macro trend.
Of note, as of this writing, Omnea’s cap table includes backers of each of the GL players above, including Accel (shared with Campfire), First Round (shared with Rillet), and Khosla (shared with DualEntry). The cap table overlap in this market, highlighted a few times in this post, should not be underestimated.
Angels from the Incumbents
Companies are filling out their rounds with KOLs and former executives from large incumbents and related vendors. That peer/SME credibility is definitely being placed at a premium. One example is NetSuite, the primary incumbent in the GL/ERP space. We have seen two GL challengers add former executives to their cap tables:
Ron Gill (former NetSuite CFO) is an investor in Rillet
Tim Dilly (former NetSuite Chief Customer Officer) is an investor in DualEntry
Check out our database linked below for the full list.
M&A is Coming, and Sooner Than You Think
What naturally follows the rapid capital investment is market consolidation. There is a lot to get into, but when you see market maps this large, there is bound to be M&A (good and bad). Generally speaking, at this time in the market, many have fresh capital and are shooting their shot at going it alone. They have valuations to grow into and customers to win, but in my opinion, there are a few dynamics that I have seen play out and will impact here:
The hard truth is that the IPO path is not viable for the vast majority of these companies (or most companies generally), especially on a standalone basis. The history of point solutions going public and doing well is not great. That means that M&A is the primary exit path for most of these companies.
I view the M&A market in this space as a bit like musical chairs. Strategic acquirers and peer merger candidates will have a similar dynamic. Buyers won’t want more than one target in each space (one FP&A company, one GL player, one procurement, and so on). Some of these businesses will be private equity targets, but their investment committees will also be weighing the strategic buyer universe as they map out their own eventual exit strategies.
Founders should never forget that high watermark risk and cap table math are very real. The first sign of this in this market was when HiBob acquired Mosaic for a reported $35mm (where Mosaic had reportedly raised ~$70mm). While the outcome hasn’t dissuaded early Mosaic investors like XYZ Venture (Taxwire) or General Catalyst (Tabs) from jumping back into the market, it’s a broader caution, especially in a crowded market.
My take: Go early, or risk not going at all. A happy home at a solid outcome is better than no home, but that isn’t how VC math and return expectations work, which is what makes the future of this market so interesting.
Other than distressed situations, I see M&A generally coming in two forms:
Horizontal
Incumbent strategic product line expansion
Much like the HiBob / Mosaic deal above, which was an HR platform adding an FP&A / headcount planning tool to expand its offering rather than building one. This can be HR platforms, PEOs, etc.
HubSpot has recently executed on this in the CRM side of things, with M&A powering their product development engine
Net new company creation
Formation of a new wave of compound startups (read: startups merging)
Vertical
Acquirers upstream or downstream expanding their value capture with current and prospective customers
👀 M&A Food for Thought 👀
Here are a couple of scenarios I’ve been thinking about:
[Vertical] Airwallex acquiring Campfire
Why it could make sense
Airwallex recently raised a $300mm Series G to double down on its U.S. expansion strategy
Capital49 (backed by Airwallex’s founders, including Jack Zhang) is already an investor in Campfire.
Stripe’s tooling, while strong for many things, isn’t great on the accounting side for rev rec, multi-entity, etc., so it would create an angle for a better product.
For Campfire, Rillet (their primary ‘challenger’ competitor), hangs their hat on their Stripe integration (which seems strong), so it is them further differentiating within payments in a competitive market with a well-capitalized strategic backer.
Editor’s note: I have a post coming on payments enablement, but it is an area that any startup ERP/GL player should be thinking about, especially for those whose customers will continue to focus on SaaS, vertical SaaS, marketplaces, and/or AI. Many of those same players I’m sure have international expansion on their minds.
Why it wouldn’t make sense
Like with many deals involving non-distressed, VC-backed busineses in their growth phase, the cap table math is tough to make work. Campfire has raised $100mm since August, with valuations that I’m sure it needs to grow into, so the timelines are not really aligned currently.
Like with many vertical acquisitions, there is likely cannibalization of existing customers who are on Stripe, Adyen, or others, and be a potential headwind in winning new logos in the U.S. startup market where Airwallex isn’t as well known.
[Horizontal] Rippling and Deel each picking a horse and making an acquisition in the FP&A space
Why it could make sense
Strong ability to pay, and in cash.
If one moves, the other will too. They are locked by the horns at the moment between intense competition and their juicy ongoing lawsuit and this could be a way for them to further differentiate.
Similar to the HiBob / Mosaic deal, compound companies primarily focused on personnel are great strategic acquirers in this space as they continue to round out their back-office product suite.
Why it wouldn’t make sense
Time. Waiting may get them a better deal, as players will be more willing to exit if they are unable to meet lofty growth expectations.
[Horizontal] Numeric Merging with Someone
Why it could make sense
They were clear on their desire to create a compound startup in their Series B announcement.
They (and the GL providers) are the right ‘platform’ where you are starting from core system of record and building out from there.
The build/buy/partner thought exercise I think will have them arrive at buy to optimize for speed in a competitive market. There are quality tools out there, even the ones not as good at distribution.
Why it wouldn’t make sense
Other than smaller tuck-ins, a larger private stock deal is one of the, if not the, hardest deal structures out there to get done. This is due to stale, biased price discovery due to funding market-driven, rather than performance-driven, watermarks.
At current valuations, I don’t think many deals will happen in the next 6-12 months, and the amount they raised is not enough to buy in cash (I said ‘merging’ intentionally). So this is even less likely, but still should be a conversation
📋 Line Item Details: Who, What, When, How Much?
Introducing the Live Office of the CFO Capital Markets Tracker
The tracker includes raises, acquisitions, and active investors in the space, all aggregated to see the crossover of investors, capital raised, and companies to watch. It is an evolving resource, but let me know what you think and who else should be included.
The Bottom Line
Challengers are here to stay, and we are in for an exciting next 12 months. VCs are voting with their wallets on the winners, but while they are betting big, they are also hedging and setting the stage for future combinations and the creation of a new wave of compound finance companies that will be the true disruptors.
Finance professionals who are looking for who will survive the next wave when the tide rolls out, which will make selling to them even harder, as they don’t want to scramble to find a replacement.
It will be a fun watch, and I’d expect some M&A.
Thank you for reading, and see you in 2026!
