TheChek News Flow

Riyadh signaled to White House it would act if crude prices are too high to win goodwill in Congress

DUBAI—Saudi Arabia has told the White House it would be willing to boost oil production early next year if crude prices are high—a move aimed at winning goodwill in Congress for a deal in which the kingdom would recognize Israel and in return get a defense pact with Washington, Saudi and U.S. officials said.

That understanding is part of an effort to seal a three-way agreement that would also likely include U.S. nuclear assistance and represents a notable shift by Riyadh, which a year ago rebuffed a Biden administration request to help lower oil prices and fight inflation, severely straining relations.

Still, Saudi negotiators emphasized that market conditions would guide any action on production and officials familiar with the talks said the discussions didn’t represent a long-term agreement to cut prices.

Spokespeople for the White House National Security Council and the Saudi government didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Talks on a deal have centered on Saudi recognition of Israel—a move that could revamp the geopolitics of the Middle East—in return for U.S. weapons sales, security guarantees and help building a civilian nuclear program. An agreement would be a diplomatic coup for President Biden as he faces a tough re-election battle.

Saudi Arabia hasn’t recognized Israel since its founding in 1948, and a deal establishing diplomatic relations would expand Israel’s ties to the Arab world, potentially constrain Iran’s military ambitions and curb China’s efforts to supplant American influence in the region.

Two top White House officials, Brett McGurk and Amos Hochstein, flew late last month to Saudi Arabia, where they emphasized that soaring petroleum prices would make it harder to win support in Washington, the officials said.

The White House may need congressional support for a deal. Negotiators are now discussing a new defense pact with the kingdom that could require Senate approval as well as U.S. support for Saudi efforts to create a civilian nuclear program, and billions of dollars in weapons sales.

The trip by McGurk and Hochstein came amid a climb in oil prices, with the global benchmark, Brent crude, rising 25% this quarter and trading as high as $95 a barrel. It has pulled back in recent days, trading above $84 a barrel Friday.

The Saudis have been pressing for higher prices as they pour tens of billions of dollars into megaprojects aimed at transforming the kingdom’s economy. Public acknowledgment that the Saudis could act to cool the oil market next year might have the effect of capping oil prices under $100 a barrel, a historically high level that has in the past fueled inflation and led to calls in Washington for action.

As the world’s largest oil exporter, Saudi Arabia has a unique capacity to influence crude prices, with the ability to restrict the world’s oil supply or flood it. The kingdom has used that power to calm markets during periods of global turmoil, but under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the nation’s oil policy has become known as “Saudi First,” as the kingdom looks to fund its economic diversification.

Any move by the Saudis to raise output would be complicated by its energy-production alliance with Russia, itself one of the world’s largest oil producers. The kingdom has moved in lockstep with Moscow, which has tried to keep oil prices high by restricting production, keeping oil money flowing into its coffers to fund its war in Ukraine.

The Saudis and Russians lead an oil-producing group known as OPEC+, which is set to meet at the end of November to decide output levels. The 23-member group cut oil production by two million barrels a day a year ago in a move that infuriated the Biden administration, and Saudi Arabia and Russia have cut even more on their own since then—actions that are due to expire by the end of 2023.

The Biden administration hopes to broker a Saudi-Israel agreement in the next six months. The three sides have broadly agreed on the contours of the deal and are starting to hash out thorny details.

McGurk, the White House’s top Middle East official, and Hochstein, Biden’s senior adviser for energy and infrastructure, have repeatedly pressed Saudi Arabia to make moves to repair its image in Washington, where Congress could play a key role in making or breaking a diplomatic deal with Israel.

Lawmakers from both parties have expressed reservations about offering such support to Saudi Arabia or giving a diplomatic boost to the 38-year-old crown prince, who, while moving to revamp the economy and ease conservative social mores, has also sought to silence dissenters.

U.S. intelligence officials said Mohammed sent a special team to Istanbul, where its members killed Jamal Khashoggi, a dissident Saudi journalist, U.S. resident and Washington Post columnist who wrote pieces critical of the kingdom’s young ruler.

Mohammed characterized the Saudi hit team as a rogue unit and has said that he has moved to prevent any similar killings from happening under his watch.

Biden himself vowed when he took office to treat the kingdom as a pariah because of its record on human rights. But Biden began to shift course last year when he flew to the kingdom and famously gave Mohammed a fist bump that signaled a new cooperative relationship between their two countries.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine sent energy prices soaring, the Biden administration has focused more attention on oil-rich Middle East petrostates whose problems it tried to de-emphasize early in the president’s term. There has been progress on several fronts.

Since Biden took office, Saudi Arabia has moved to extricate itself from a long-running war in Yemen. Saudi Arabia halted airstrikes and agreed to a cease-fire that has brought significant calm to Yemen for the past year. The U.S. and United Nations have been working to broker a long-term truce and to accelerate peace talks meant to bring the war to a close.

The Biden administration has been encouraged by Saudi Arabia’s recent outreach to Israel, including the kingdom’s rare decisions to allow two Israeli ministers to visit the Gulf nation.

The talks over oil come during a period when the world’s oil supply is beginning to fall short of demand. OPEC+ forecasters predict a global deficit of 3.3 million barrels a day in the fourth quarter, and many oil analysts now expect prices Brent to eventually top $100 a barrel.

The International Monetary Fund estimated earlier this year that Riyadh’s break-even oil price to balance its budget is about $81 a barrel. If Saudi Arabia keeps struggling to attract foreign investment to projects such as Neom, the break-even price could rise closer to $100, analysts say.

“It could prove challenging to convince Saudi Arabia to front load any significant energy assistance before a comprehensive deal is essentially done,” said Helima Croft, the chief commodity strategist at Canadian broker RBC.

EU to loosen new rules on EV sales in attempt to defuse row with UK

Brussels says it will interpret ‘made in Europe’ rules very loosely in 2024

The European Union is drawing up a plan to postpone tariffs on electric vehicle sales between the UK and the bloc for a year in an attempt to defuse a row over the new rules, which are due to come into effect in January.

Maroš Šefčovič, European Commission vice-president, told the Financial Times that Brussels would interpret “made in Europe” rules very loosely in 2024, giving carmakers more time to switch battery sourcing from Asia to Europe.

“We want to solve it and we are also discussing this with UK partners,” Šefčovič said, adding that he would be “very happy” if a deal could be struck before the December 31 deadline.

The post-Brexit Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) dictates that tariffs of 10 per cent will be imposed on EVs shipped across the Channel if they have batteries substantially made outside Europe or the UK.

London has asked for a simple three-year postponement to the changes.

Šefčovič said the commission wanted to redefine what counts as European under the so-called rules of origin. “We do not have a precise timeline, but we are now working on our internal position discussions and we know that this is the pressing issue for the EU and the UK,” he added.

If finalised, the compromise will be welcomed by the industry on both sides of the Channel, who have warned the tariffs were likely to cost them billions and stifle electric vehicle demand.

Germany and about 10 of the 27 member states support the UK demand for a three-year delay to implementing the rules, while France remains opposed.

However, officials close to Thierry Breton, the French industry commissioner, said he considered the year-long postponement to be a workable solution as it did not reopen the Brexit deal or compromise EU ambitions to build European battery supply chains.

Under rules of origin, EVs traded across the Channel must have 60 per cent of their battery packs and 45 per cent of their parts by overall value sourced from the EU or UK or face 10 per cent tariffs. There are similar rules for the cathode chemicals and cells that comprise the battery pack and are mostly imported.

Šefčovič said: “What is important is how you actually do the counting of the rules of origin. We are in the process of developing this methodology and building up the battery industry in Europe and in the UK so I think we have to recognise as originating in Europe any part of that battery [that is European].”

He declined to offer further details, saying they were still being worked on.

But he was clear that the rules could only be postponed for one year because he wanted to encourage battery investment in the EU.

Sam Lowe, a trade expert at consultancy Flint Global, said: “One of the easiest ways to resolve this is to fiddle with the definitions. This could work if the thresholds are high enough to account for the high value of imported foreign chemicals. If not, it won’t.”

But he said it was unclear whether the UK would accept a one-year fix.

The UK government said: “We need a joint UK-EU solution to avoid consumers facing tariffs on electric vehicles from 2024 which do not apply to diesel cars.

“We have raised this with the European Commission and industry and are ready to work with them to find a solution within the existing structure of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. The UK remains one of the best locations in the world for automotive manufacturing.”

Competition commissioner says inquiry could follow similar move to challenge China’s sales of electric vehicles in Europe

Brussels is considering whether to investigate China’s use of subsidies to promote the country’s wind turbine manufacturers, a leading official said on Friday, despite the angry reaction from Beijing over a similar probe into electric vehicles.

Didier Reynders, the acting competition commissioner, said cheap Chinese imports could threaten European businesses.

“In the wind energy sector there are components that could be in competition with Chinese components. If there is a possibility of too much aid on the Chinese side . . . we could open an investigation in the same way [as electric vehicles],” he told France’s BFM TV.

Europe’s wind power companies have been lobbying for more support, arguing that cheap Chinese imports are pushing their own turbine manufacturers to the brink of collapse.

The move could come this month, three EU officials told the FT, as part of broader proposals aimed at boosting Europe’s wind industry.

It would be the second significant action against China is as many months, after commission president Ursula von der Leyen said in September Brussels would look into unfair practices in the electric vehicle market.

The move to challenge China’s increasing sales of electric vehicles in Europe prompted an angry response from Beijing, which called it a “naked protectionist act”.

A senior EU official said “sufficient elements” warranted a similar investigation into wind turbine parts. But the official acknowledged Brussels was concerned about retaliation.

“They already thought something announced in the speech of the president was too high,” the official said. “They will digest [the electric vehicles] one and adapt. If we add another, they might be really angry.”

The discussions come amid a planned visit to China over the coming days by Josep Borrell, the EU’s foreign policy chief, and Kadri Simson, the bloc’s energy commissioner.

The commission declined to comment.

Thierry Breton, the EU’s internal market commissioner, in September called for an anti-dumping or anti-subsidy investigation into wind turbines made in China.

“Chinese wind equipment manufacturers have been implementing an aggressive strategy to enter European markets,” he wrote, adding that Chinese manufacturers were offering European project developers steep discounts and the option to defer payments for up to three years.

Leading Chinese wind turbine manufacturers include Goldwind, Envision, Mingyang and Windey.

Brussels has already imposed tariffs on Chinese companies’ glass fibre fabrics, which are used in wind turbine blades. Industry concerns that the EU has become too dependent on Chinese green technologies have risen in recent years.

“[The region’s clean technology] will be manufactured outside of Europe, and Europe will simply swap its dependency on Russian gas for one on Chinese clean energy equipment,” WindEurope, a trade body for European industry, said earlier this year.

Another senior EU official said von der Leyen had started to back a strategy of supporting domestic industry and keeping out some Chinese imports.

“Without European manufacturing capacity, we don’t have control,” they said, adding that, without measures, the EU’s Green Deal of zero emissions by 2050 would be impossible to honour. “The president is starting to get it.”

Giles Dickson, chief executive of WindEurope, said broader proposals to boost the industry were being “actively discussed” by the commission and the sector. “You know what other tools [Chinese manufacturers] have at their disposal . . . [EU officials] know what we are up against,” he said, without explicitly referring to an anti-subsidy probe.

The broader proposals are set to include guidance to member states on providing direct financial support to the industry and improving auction designs for wind farms.

Struggling multi-manager hedge fund has turned to its larger New York rival for what would be the biggest tie-up of its kind

In March 2020 Schonfeld Strategic Advisors was rocked by the market turmoil unleashed by the pandemic.

The New York-based firm’s flagship hedge fund was down about 16 per cent and its prime brokers were asking it to put up more collateral, according to three people with direct knowledge of the matter. 

Needing to provide cash in response to a routine margin call as markets moved against it, Schonfeld considered its options. It had previously held informal discussions with Millennium Management about a potential tie-up, and one idea put on the table that month was for its much larger rival to provide some capital, two of the people said.  

While the talks with Millennium did not come to fruition, Schonfeld managed to shore up its position. That spring it raised about $2bn from investors, including in the Middle East and Asia, who had attributed the drawdown to growing pains.  

But now, following a lacklustre period of performance and third-quarter redemptions of $1bn, Schonfeld has restarted discussions with Millennium.

The Financial Times reported this week that the firms were in advanced talks over a tie-up that would see Millennium put billions of dollars to work with its smaller rival. The transaction, the largest deal of its kind, would be without precedent in the $4tn hedge fund industry.

“Is this a rescue act for Schonfeld?”, asked a senior executive at one London-based rival. “It’s quite a big step to take that much money from a peer. It’s not what you’d do if you had free choice.”  

The two firms declined to comment.

Schonfeld’s capitulation to Millennium reflects the changing fortunes of a hedge fund manager that has struggled to keep up with large rivals. Neither of Schonfeld’s two funds have made money this year, adding to an underwhelming 2022 in which the firm lagged far behind the likes of Ken Griffin’s Citadel and Millennium. 

Between them the two best-performing names in the multi-manager universe employ hundreds of teams of autonomous and highly specialist risk-takers, which trade a range of different strategies and operate within strict risk limits. 

Schonfeld began life in 1988 as a family office managing the money of founder Steven Schonfeld, a former stockbroker, and did not open up to external investors until 2015. Since then its assets have grown dramatically, as the multi-manager model it runs rose in popularity among investors.

The firm was among those that picked up inflows when bigger managers such as Millennium and Citadel were closed to new money with long waiting lists to get in. Schonfeld’s assets have doubled in the past two years, from about $6bn to $12bn. 

As assets have swelled, Schonfeld has expanded beyond its roots in computer-driven trading, adding discretionary macro, fundamental equity and fixed income strategies. It hired Colin Lancaster in May 2021 as global co-head of discretionary macro and fixed income to build out a business in this area. But the firm’s crown jewel is still its statistical arbitrage strategy, which uses algorithms to exploit patterns in securities pricing, investors say.

Schonfeld’s rapid expansion was partly enabled by the “pass-through” expenses model that is a defining characteristic of the multi-manager platforms. Instead of an annual management fee, the manager passes on all costs — including office rents, technology and data, salaries, bonuses and even client entertainment — to their end investors. The idea is that managers can invest heavily in areas such as staff and technology, with the cost more than offset by the resulting performance improvements.

One prime broker said Schonfeld had been “one of the biggest payers of sign-on bonuses” that can run into millions of dollars and are one of the tools employed to lure portfolio managers in the war for talent that is sweeping across this part of the industry. In the past two years, Schonfeld’s headcount has grown from about 600 to more than 1,000.

Schonfeld’s experiences reflect another key dynamic among the platforms. The multi-manager model is significantly more headcount-intensive than traditional hedge funds, and appears to have less operating leverage as firms grow bigger.

“As assets scale, headcount (and with it their cost base) tends to grow on a linear basis,” said a report last year by Goldman Sachs prime brokerage, which estimates that multi-managers account for just 8 per cent of the hedge fund industry’s assets but roughly a quarter of total headcount.

But crucially, if the amount of money a firm manages declines, costs do not fall in line with the decrease because it is hard for managers to cut spending at the same pace. That means fewer investors end up footing a larger bill that eats into returns, which could trigger more cash being pulled out.

“If assets start getting redeemed, the investors that are left behind get left with the brunt of the costs,” the prime broker says. This incentivises clients to “redeem quickly and not get stuck,” he added. “You don’t want to be the last person left holding the bag.” 

According to investors, the issue for Schonfeld is that it has doubled its assets and increased its cost base through a hiring spree — without putting up the performance figures to match.

Schonfeld is the third best-performing name in the multi-manager universe over the past three decades, behind only Citadel and Millennium. But its returns have tailed off over the past two years. In the first eight months of this year both its flagship fund and its fundamental equity strategy are roughly flat, and last year they returned just 4.5 per cent and 3 per cent respectively, according to investors. 

Millennium, meanwhile, recorded double-digit returns last year and is up 7.6 per cent in the first three quarters of 2023, while Citadel broke records with a $16bn profit in 2022 and gained 12.6 per cent per cent in the first nine months of the year. 

As returns have dwindled, the terms with which Schonfeld secured money have paved the way for future challenges. 

Since it opened to external investors, Schonfeld has offered clients monthly liquidity, which allows them to pull their money out once a month. This leaves the business vulnerable to mass redemptions, particularly with returns having declined and a higher-interest rate environment meaning investors can park their money in safer assets for a healthy return. 

To ensure the longer-term security of its business, Schonfeld has recently been offering clients a fee discount in return for new terms under which it would take them as long as two years to withdraw all their capital. More than half its capital is now locked up until the end of 2024, according to a person close to the firm.

In contrast, Millennium has been earlier and more proactive in taking steps to stabilise its business and prevent large-scale redemptions after suffering mass outflows during the financial crisis. In 2021 it returned money from a shorter-term share class that let clients exit in full in a year, and moved money to a longer-term share class that would take investors five years to exit in full.

Schonfeld’s 2020 experience prompted it to invest heavily in its risk management process and diversify away from its large equity exposure, according to one investor, who said what sets the firm apart from other multi-managers is its transparency.

Chief executive Ryan Tolkin “is very approachable”, they said. “If I wanted to talk to any of them I could and I value that because you don’t really get it from other large platforms.”

Tolkin has been credited with helping to build a business that has less of an eat-what-you-kill mentality than other multi-manager rivals. But investors say he is also adjusting to a rapidly growing firm that under his watch has expanded beyond its core DNA in systematic trading.

The 37-year-old, whose father Brad is close friends with Steven Schonfeld, according to a recent Business Insider article, joined the firm as chief investment officer in 2013 from Goldman, where he was a part of the investment bank’s corporate credit team and worked with Justin Gmelich, now a co-chief investment officer at Millennium. He was named to Schonfeld’s newly created role of chief executive in January 2021 while retaining his CIO title. 

Since news of the tie-up leaked, the two firms have been inundated with calls from clients. Their message to investors is that nothing has been finalised and they are still working out what the partnership will look like. But several options are being considered. 

Among them is a separately managed account for Millennium, or the larger firm taking all of Schonfeld’s capacity and kicking out its existing investors, according to people familiar with the situation. One of the people said it was important to preserve Schonfeld as an independent company given its distinct brand and culture.

People who know Izzy Englander, Millennium’s founder, say the 75-year-old will ultimately be keeping a close eye on the money invested with Schonfeld. He will want to make sure that “whatever money is running through them is going to be under Millennium risk controls,” said one person who worked alongside him for several years. “It’s a huge muscle flex by Millennium, they have capital and they’re neutralising a competitor.” 

For Millennium, a tie-up makes sense, according to several people familiar with the firm. The hedge fund has billions of dollars in long-term capital and by teaming up with Schonfeld it can quickly put money to work without the cost, time and complexity of hiring Schonfeld’s more than 100 investment teams. “If Schonfeld accelerates downwards quickly, Millennium will already have a hand in the pot and can see who is good,” said the prime broker.

For Schonfeld, a tie-up with Millennium brings it stable capital and economies of scale that come from tapping into the larger and more established firm’s infrastructure and systems. Millennium is wagering that this will help Schonfeld reboot its performance.  

“The existing portfolio managers at Schonfeld are probably fine with a tie-up,” said one top industry insider. “What’s the alternative, get fired soon and then get a job at Millennium anyway?”

Gary Wang, who was part of the crypto exchange founder’s inner circle, testifies at fraud trial

Sam Bankman-Fried’s trading firm Alameda Research secretly dipped into FTX customer funds just months after the crypto exchange — which collapsed with an $8bn hole in its balance sheet in November — was founded, the company’s co-founder testified.

Gary Wang, a former college roommate of Bankman-Fried’s who became one of his closest friends and colleagues, told the jury in Manhattan federal court on Friday that he had been instructed in 2019 to let Alameda have a negative balance on FTX, which got its start earlier that year. Along with a “large line of credit” from the crypto exchange, that meant Alameda was soon in effect “taking customers’ money”, Wang said.

“The money belonged to customers, and the customers did not give us permission to use [it] for other things,” he said of the deposits used to fund Alameda’s negative balance, allowing the trading firm to in effect withdraw unlimited amounts from FTX.

Wang added that a secret and unique borrowing facility for Alameda was activated the same day — July 31, 2019 — that Bankman-Fried took to Twitter to assure FTX users that the trading firm’s accounts were treated “just like everyone else’s” on the crypto exchange.

That facility was only available to Alameda’s accounts from that date until FTX imploded in 2022, Wang said, during which time the trading firm’s line of credit was raised several times, eventually to as much as $65bn.

When Wang asked Bankman-Fried about the final credit raising, “he said he was fine with that”, the co-founder said.

The testimony by Wang, who pleaded guilty to fraud soon after FTX’s collapse and agreed to co-operate with prosecutors, is the most damning so far for the 31-year-old Bankman-Fried, who this week went on trial defending charges including wire fraud and money laundering. If convicted, he could face decades in prison. He has pleaded not guilty, and his lawyers have argued he was acting in “good faith” and never intended to defraud anyone.

On Thursday, another former FTX employee, Adam Yedidia, described a conversation with Bankman-Fried on the grounds of the luxurious Bahamian resort where they both lived, in which he said the FTX founder admitted that the exchange was “not bulletproof anymore”.

The court also heard from an investor into FTX who said he had been assured that Alameda received no special access to the exchange, and from an FTX customer who said he had traded on the platform only because he believed his deposits were safe.

Born in China, Wang moved to the US at the age of seven and grew up in Minnesota. He left a job at Google to join Bankman-Fried in founding Alameda in 2017, working by his friend’s side until their business empire collapsed in late 2022.

On Thursday, he described how the pair had met in high school at a summer maths camp, and lived together at MIT. He also said he would defer to Bankman-Fried if they disagreed about business decisions. “In the end it’s Sam’s decision to make,” he said. 

Wang had stared straight ahead, ignoring his former friend, as he walked swiftly past the defence table on his way out of the courtroom on Thursday afternoon, when he began his testimony. Bankman-Fried remained impassive, not even turning his head to look at Wang. The two rarely met each other’s gaze throughout the testimony.

He also testified on Friday that Bankman-Fried had told him to allocate “several hundred million dollars” worth of losses made by a prominent FTX customer to Alameda’s account, because the trading firm’s finances were less public.

Wang said his co-founder told him that “investors have access to FTX’s balance sheet but not to Alameda’s balance sheet”. His testimony was set to continue with a cross-examination later on Friday.

Once again, we’ve got lots of big rounds, including one of more than $1 billion to help awaken the slumbering M&A market. The big rounds ran the gamut, from parking (yes, parking!) to energy to good old AI. All told, investors seemed willing to invest and invest big as October opened strong.

1. Metropolis, $1.1B, computer vision: Parking startups aren’t usually high on this list, but when they add computer vision to their offering, well, that’s different. Los Angeles-based checkout-free parking startup Metropolis raised $1.7 billion in debt and equity led by Eldridge and 3L Capital. The startup company has raised $1.05 billion through a Series C offering and $650 million of debt financing. The deal was used to take logistics firm SP Plus private in a deal worth approximately $1.5 billion. The deal is the biggest M&A transaction of the year by a VC-backed company, per Crunchbase data. It even beats out Databricks’s purchase of San Francisco-based language models training startup MosaicML for $1.3 billion in June. Metropolis has developed a computer-vision system that enables drivers to park without using a credit card or even cash. Instead, drivers can use the app and enter information such as name and payment method. Metropolis then tracks the car and charges the owner. It can even email a receipt on their way out of the parking lot. Founded in 2017, the company has now raised $1.9 billion, per Crunchbase.

2. Electric Hydrogen, $380M, energy: Green hydrogen hasn’t always been a favorite among investors, but may be changing. Earlier this year, Ohmium International raised a $250 million Series C led by TPG Rise Climate. This week, Electric Hydrogen became a unicorn, raising a $380 million Series C at a $1 billion valuation. The round included the likes of Microsoft’s Climate Innovation Fund and BP Ventures. Green hydrogen is produced through electrolyzer systems — which are used to split water through electrolysis to create hydrogen and powered by renewable energy. The process can be expensive because of the energy consumed and the equipment needed, but obviously investors are starting to warm to the sector and see a way to make money. Founded in 2021, Natick, Massachusetts-based Electric Hydrogen has raised more than $600 million, per Crunchbase.

3. Headway, $125M, health care: Even before the pandemic, mental health was becoming a primary concern for many people. In the summer, mental health startup Author Health locked up a $115 million round from General Atlantic and Flare Capital Partners. This week, New York-based Headway raised $125 million in Series C at a $1 billion valuation, per Reuters. The round was led by Spark Capital. The startup’s platform helps connect patients with therapists who are covered under a user’s insurance. Founded in 2108, the company has now raised more than $225 million, per Crunchbase.

4. (tied) Iambic Therapeutics, $100M, biotech: If it seems like a biotech startup always makes it into the top five every week, that’s because one does. This week, Iambic Therapeutics closed a $100 million Series B financing co-led by Ascenta Capital and Abingworth. The San Diego-based biotech firm is developing new therapeutics from its generative AI discovery platform, which may explain why Nvidia also was an investor. Founded in 2019, the company has raised $153 million, per Crunchbase.

4. (tied) Prins AI, $100M, artificial intelligence: Investors love AI, you may have heard? One of the larger and more interesting AI rounds this week went to Lakewood, Colorado-based Prins AI, which raised a somewhat under-the-radar $100 million Series B led by AAB VC. The startup has developed a platform for creating AI digital identities — or “smart workers” — that can be used in lieu of humans for things such as marketing and training videos, or even broadcast media. The company has offices around the world, including China, and plans to use the fresh cash to enhance its R&D in deep learning tech for digital identity products. The startup has now raised $132 million, per Crunchbase.

4. (tied) Stoke Space, $100M, space: For the second week in a row, spacetech saw a big round. Last week, Sierra Space raised a $290 million Series B. This week, Dallas-based reusable rocket developer Stoke Space raised a $100 million Series B led by Industrious Ventures. The company plans to use the new cash to develop its Nova rocket and new construction at its Cape Canaveral Space Force Station site in Florida. Founded in 2019, the company has raised more than $176 million, per Crunchbase.

7. Mach Industries, $79M, defense: Austin, Texas-based defense tech startup Mach Industries closed a $79 million Series A led by Bedrock Capital at a post-money valuation of $335 million, per TechCrunch. Founded in 2022, the company has raised nearly $85 million, according to Crunchbase.

8. iLink Digital, $75M, software: Redmond, Washington-based software developer iLink Digital raised a $75 million round from private equity firm True North. Founded in 2002, this is the company’s first significant outside investment, per Crunchbase.

9. Stampli, $61M, accounting: Mountain View, California-based Stampli, which makes AI-powered tools to help companies pay bills, raised a $61 million round led by funds managed by Blackstone. Founded in 2015, the company has raised nearly $146 million, according to Crunchbase.

10. Regent Craft, $60M, electric vehicle: Rhode Island-based Regent Craft, a manufacturer of all-electric seagliders, locked up a $60 million Series A co-led by 8090 Industries and Founders Fund. Founded in 202, Regent has raised $90 million, per the company.

Anthropic led the way globally, but there were big rounds overseas.

Data from Placer.ai tracks visits to outlets, malls and shopping centers.

Despite a big push by retailers and operators to drive shoppers to mall-based stores for the back-to-school selling season, foot traffic showed steep declines in August and September, according to the latest data from Placer.ai.

September “was another tough month for malls, as consumer confidence tumbled, and many Americans continued channeling their limited discretionary budgets toward services instead of retail goods,” the location analytics firm said in its report.

The report’s authors said the year-over-year visit gap to indoor malls and open-air shopping centers widened, “following the negative foot traffic trends in the wider retail sector,” and then noted that “outlet malls, which continued to lag behind the other formats in terms of YoY visits, saw their visit gap remain steady.”

Store visits to indoor malls declined 4.8 percent in August and then fell 8.7 percent in September.

However, weekly data on malls did reveal an uptick. Researchers at Placer.ai said by the end of the month, “the challenges appeared to be easing.” During the last week of September, from Sept. 18 to 24, the week-over-week foot traffic showed an increase at indoor malls and open-air shopping centers. This was the first increase since the week of July 31.

Still, visits are behind the levels seen in 2022 year-over-year. “But the [week-over-week] increase may indicate that the current difficulties facing the wider retail sectors are moderating, just in time for a critical holiday season,” Placer.ai noted.