Modal Raises $750M Series D at $15.75B Valuation, Says Run Rate Passed $1B

Modal said on 14 October 2026 that it raised a $750 million Series D at a $15.75 billion post-money valuation, led by Accel. In the same announcement, the New York-based company said it had recently crossed $1 billion in annualized run rate. The round size and the revenue claim are separate facts.

How much did Modal raise in its Series D?

Modal raised $750 million in a single Series D round at a $15.75 billion post-money valuation, according to the company's post. Pillsbury, which advised Modal on the financing, gives the same amount and valuation in a release dated 15 October 2026. Neither source states a cumulative funding total, so the $750 million is the size of this round only.

The two sources agree on the two numbers that define the round: the amount and the valuation. They differ only on the date of the release. Modal's post is dated 14 October 2026, and Pillsbury's release is dated 15 October 2026. For a reader checking the figures, the company's post is the document to cite, because it is the primary account and the law firm's release repeats its terms.

Who led Modal's Series D?

Accel led the round, and Kleiner Perkins joined, according to Modal's post. Modal also said all of its existing investors participated, naming Menlo Ventures, General Catalyst, Redpoint, Lux Capital, Amplify Partners and Bain Capital Ventures. Pillsbury's release names the same investors except Amplify Partners.

The lead is the one point on which every source agrees. Modal's post, Pillsbury's release and The Next Web each name Accel as the lead. In each account, Kleiner Perkins is described as joining or following the round, not leading it. The investor list beyond those two firms comes from the company's own post, so it should be read as company-reported.

What did Modal say about its revenue?

Modal says it "recently crossed $1B in annualized run rate." The Next Web reported the same claim as more than $1 billion in revenue a year. The company says usage has tripled since its Series C, which it announced five months earlier. These are company statements. The sources reviewed do not include audited accounts, a profit figure or a revenue breakdown by product.

The term matters. Annualized run rate projects a recent period forward. It is not the same thing as a year of booked revenue, and The Next Web's looser wording blurs that difference. This article therefore quotes the company's own phrase and does not restate the run rate as revenue. The sources do not explain how the figure is calculated.

How much did the valuation rise since May?

The Next Web reported that the valuation has more than tripled since May 2026, when Modal raised $355 million at a $4.65 billion valuation. The new $15.75 billion valuation is about 3.4 times the earlier figure. The Series C numbers come from The Next Web alone, so treat them as reported rather than confirmed by a company filing.

The step-up figure is The Next Web's arithmetic from its two numbers, not a company disclosure. The valuation comparison is only as strong as the May figure it rests on.

What does Modal do?

The Next Web describes Modal as a cloud company that runs AI models and code for developers. Pillsbury's release headline calls Modal Labs a leading AI infrastructure company. Both descriptions are general. The public record does not give customer counts or product-level revenue.

A reader who wants more detail on the product will not find it in these sources, so this article makes no product claims beyond them. Calling Modal a cloud company, an AI infrastructure company, or a provider of AI models and code is a description of the business category, not a measure of its size or reach.

What is the announcement not saying?

The company post does not state a profit figure, and it does not state a cumulative funding total. It also does not break down the run-rate number by product. Investor participation beyond the named firms is not independently confirmed in the sources reviewed. Each point is a gap in what is published, not a contradiction. Readers should treat the absence of these items as a limit of the public record, not as evidence either way. A missing profit figure does not mean the company is unprofitable, and a missing breakdown does not mean the run rate is concentrated in one product.

What's still unclear?

Three points are open. First, the investor list differs between sources: Modal's post names Amplify Partners among existing investors, and Pillsbury's release does not. Second, the date differs slightly: Modal's post is dated 14 October 2026, and Pillsbury's release is dated 15 October 2026. Third, the wording of the revenue claim differs. Modal uses "annualized run rate," while The Next Web writes "revenue a year." Annualized run rate is a forward projection from a recent period, so the company's own term is the accurate one to quote.

None of these three open points changes the round size or the valuation. Those two figures match across the company's post and the law firm's release, so the disagreements concern who else invested, when the release was dated and how the revenue claim is worded.

The weakest point in the argument is the revenue figure. The valuation step-up depends on growth that the company reports itself. Until audited accounts or a filing confirm the run rate, the $15.75 billion valuation rests on company statements and on the investors who agreed to the price.

What would settle it?

Two things would move this story from reported to confirmed. The first is audited accounts or a filing that confirms the annualized run rate. The second is a published investor list that resolves the Amplify Partners difference between Modal's post and Pillsbury's release. Until either appears, the round size and the valuation are the facts to rely on, and the run-rate figure should be read as the company's claim.