← Back to Articles
Segler Consulting

The SPAC King's Gambit: An Exhaustive Performance Analysis of Chamath Palihapitiya's Social Capital SPACs

June 22, 2025 • By symtr
The SPAC King's Gambit: An Exhaustive Performance Analysis of Chamath Palihapitiya's Social Capital SPACs

Section 1: Executive Summary

During the special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) boom of 2020-2021, venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya rose to prominence, earning the moniker "SPAC King" for his prolific use of these blank-check vehicles. Touting SPACs as a means to "democratize" access to high-growth technology companies for retail investors, Palihapitiya launched a series of investment vehicles that took six companies public and raised billions of dollars amidst a frenzy of market enthusiasm. This report provides an exhaustive analysis of the performance of this portfolio, examining the promises made against the realities that unfolded.

The findings of this investigation are stark. The portfolio of companies taken public by Palihapitiya's SPACs has, in aggregate, resulted in catastrophic value destruction for public shareholders who invested at or near the merger announcements. As of mid-2025, five of the six de-SPACed companies have seen their market capitalizations plummet, with share prices down between 70% and over 98% from their post-merger starting points. Only one company, SoFi Technologies, has generated a positive return, and even its performance remains far below the speculative peaks reached during the bubble.

A core theme emerging from this analysis is the profound and systemic disconnect between the financial projections marketed to investors during the SPAC process and the subsequent operational and financial reality of the de-SPACed entities. For companies like Virgin Galactic, Opendoor, and Akili Interactive, the actual revenue and profitability figures have fallen short of initial forecasts by orders of magnitude. These aggressive, often pre-revenue projections, permissible under the looser regulatory framework for SPACs compared to traditional IPOs, were a key driver of the initial hype but proved to be fundamentally unreliable.

Furthermore, the analysis reveals that the structure of these SPACs, particularly the sponsor "promote," created deeply misaligned incentives. The sponsor's ability to realize substantial profits by completing a merger, regardless of the target's long-term quality, stands in sharp contrast to the outcomes for retail investors who bore the brunt of the subsequent stock collapses. This misalignment was further evidenced by the sponsor's profitable reduction of personal stakes before the stocks crashed and was the subject of significant criticism from investors and lawmakers.

Ironically, the most favorable outcomes for public investors came from the SPACs that Palihapitiya failed to merge and ultimately liquidated. In these cases, investors received their initial capital back with interest, preserving their capital while the de-SPACed entities incinerated it. This outcome serves as a powerful indictment of the quality of the targets selected during the boom.

In conclusion, the legacy of Chamath Palihapitiya's SPAC gambit is not one of democratizing wealth, but rather a cautionary tale of speculative excess, promotional hype, and the structural flaws of financial instruments. For the sophisticated investor, this saga provides critical lessons in due diligence: the necessity of scrutinizing projections, understanding sponsor incentives, and, above all, prioritizing the fundamental quality of the underlying asset over the charisma of its promoter.

Section 2: The Social Capital SPAC Universe: A Complete Catalogue

To fully assess the performance of Chamath Palihapitiya's SPACs, it is essential to first catalogue the complete universe of entities he sponsored. Through his venture capital firm Social Capital, Palihapitiya launched two distinct series of SPACs, in addition to planning a much larger fleet that never materialized. These vehicles were instrumental in his rise as the "SPAC King" during the market frenzy of 2020 and 2021.1

2.1 The Social Capital Hedosophia "IPO" Series (IPOA - IPOF)

The first and most prominent wave of Palihapitiya's SPACs was launched as a joint venture with Ian Osborne's Hedosophia, a partnership that united technologists and investors to target innovative technology companies.2 These SPACs were notable for their sequential ticker symbols, from IPOA to IPOF, which Palihapitiya had reportedly reserved all the way to IPOZ.4 This series targeted high-profile, often consumer-facing companies, and was responsible for the deals that cemented Palihapitiya's public profile. Of the six SPACs in this series, four successfully completed mergers, while two were ultimately liquidated.5

2.2 The Social Capital Suvretta "DNA" Series (DNAA - DNAD)

Following the initial IPO series, Palihapitiya partnered with Suvretta Capital to launch a new set of four SPACs with ticker symbols DNAA, DNAB, DNAC, and DNAD.6 These vehicles were more narrowly focused, each targeting a specific subsector within the biotechnology industry: neurology, oncology, organs, and immunology, respectively.7 Each of these SPACs raised $250 million.7 This series had a more troubled outcome; two of the SPACs completed mergers with clinical-stage biotech companies, while the other two were liquidated without finding a target.8

2.3 The Unlaunched Fleet (IPOG - IPOZ)

At the peak of the SPAC boom in February 2021, with his first few deals trading at massive premiums, Palihapitiya's ambitions expanded significantly. The Social Capital Hedosophia group filed names with the Securities and Exchange Commission for seven additional SPACs: Social Capital Hedosophia Holdings VII through XIII.4 These were presumably intended to correspond to the ticker symbols IPOG through IPOM.4 However, no initial registration statements (S-1s) were ever filed for these vehicles, and they were never launched.4 Their existence as mere placeholders in SEC filings marks the high-water point of the SPAC frenzy, just before the market sentiment turned and the viability of launching such a large fleet evaporated.

The table below provides a comprehensive reference for all publicly launched SPACs sponsored by Chamath Palihapitiya, detailing their partnerships, targets, and ultimate status.

Table 1: The Complete Social Capital SPAC Roster

SPAC Name & Ticker Partnership Target Company (Post-Merger Ticker) Merger/Liquidation Date Status
Social Capital Hedosophia I (IPOA) Social Capital & Hedosophia Virgin Galactic (SPCE) October 2019 Merged
Social Capital Hedosophia II (IPOB) Social Capital & Hedosophia Opendoor (OPEN) December 2020 Merged
Social Capital Hedosophia III (IPOC) Social Capital & Hedosophia Clover Health (CLOV) January 2021 Merged
Social Capital Hedosophia IV (IPOD) Social Capital & Hedosophia None October 2022 Liquidated
Social Capital Hedosophia V (IPOE) Social Capital & Hedosophia SoFi Technologies (SOFI) June 2021 Merged
Social Capital Hedosophia VI (IPOF) Social Capital & Hedosophia None October 2022 Liquidated
Social Capital Suvretta I (DNAA) Social Capital & Suvretta Akili Interactive (AKLI) August 2022 Merged
Social Capital Suvretta II (DNAB) Social Capital & Suvretta None June 2023 Liquidated
Social Capital Suvretta III (DNAC) Social Capital & Suvretta ProKidney (PROK) July 2022 Merged
Social Capital Suvretta IV (DNAD) Social Capital & Suvretta None June 2023 Liquidated

Sources: 2

Section 3: De-SPAC Case Studies: Promise vs. Performance

The core of this report is a detailed, case-by-case analysis of the six companies that went public through a merger with one of Chamath Palihapitiya's SPACs. This section dissects each company's journey, from the initial promises and lofty financial projections presented to investors to the subsequent operational performance and stock market reality. By placing the initial investment thesis alongside actual reported results, a clear pattern of over-promotion and under-delivery emerges across the portfolio.

3.1 Virgin Galactic (SPCE) - CIK: 0001706946

Merger Overview and Initial Valuation

Virgin Galactic's merger with Social Capital Hedosophia I (IPOA) was the flagship deal that catapulted Chamath Palihapitiya to his "SPAC King" status.1 Announced on July 9, 2019, the transaction created the world's first publicly traded commercial human spaceflight company.18 The deal assigned Virgin Galactic a pro forma enterprise value of $1.5 billion and provided it with approximately $450 million in cash to fund its operations, which included a $100 million personal investment from Palihapitiya himself.20 The merger was completed in October 2019, and the new entity began trading under the ticker SPCE.14

Projection vs. Reality

The investment thesis for Virgin Galactic was built on a narrative of explosive future growth, a story that could be told more freely through the SPAC process, which allows for forward-looking projections that are restricted in traditional IPOs.21 The disconnect between these projections and the company's actual performance is staggering.

The investor presentation from the time of the merger was extraordinarily optimistic, forecasting that Virgin Galactic would achieve $590 million in revenue and $274 million in EBITDA by the fiscal year 2023.21 The reality has been profoundly different. The company's actual reported revenues were:

  • 2020: $0.24 million 23
  • 2021: $3.29 million 23
  • 2022: $2.31 million 20
  • 2023: $6.80 million 23
  • 2024: $7.04 million 23

The 2023 revenue of $6.8 million represents just 1.15% of the $590 million that was projected. Instead of generating $274 million in EBITDA, the company has consistently posted massive losses, including an operating loss of $377 million in 2024 and a net loss of $84 million in just the first quarter of 2025.24 This chasm between promise and performance illustrates a fundamental failure in the initial underwriting of the company's operational timeline and commercial viability.

Metric 2023 SPAC Projection 2023 Actual Result
Revenue $590 million $6.8 million
EBITDA $274 million N/A (Operating Loss of $532M)

Sources: 21

Stock Performance Analysis

The initial hype surrounding the first publicly traded space tourism company, fueled by its charismatic sponsors, led to a speculative frenzy in SPCE stock. After the merger in October 2019 at a price around $11.75 14, the stock embarked on a volatile ride, reaching a peak of over $54 per share in early 2021.26 However, as persistent operational delays and cash burn became evident, the stock began a precipitous decline. By January 2024, it had fallen to $1.74 14, and by mid-2025, it was trading around $3, representing a decline of approximately 98.5% from its launch price when benchmarked by some analyses.27 This performance has dramatically underperformed the broader market indices like the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite over the same period.28

Operational Review

Virgin Galactic's post-merger history has been defined by a series of setbacks and strategic pivots. The company has faced repeated delays in commencing and scaling its commercial flight operations.14 It has been in a perpetual state of "pre-revenue" or minimal revenue, burning through hundreds of millions of dollars annually.30 In Q1 2025 alone, the company reported a net loss of $84 million on revenue of just $0.5 million and guided for a free cash flow burn of over $100 million for the next quarter.25 The constant need for capital has led to shareholder dilution through at-the-market stock offerings.31 Amidst this turmoil and the collapsing stock price, Chamath Palihapitiya resigned as Chairman of the Board in February 2022, distancing himself from the company's struggles.32 The company has now paused commercial flights to focus on producing its next-generation "Delta Class" spaceships, with commercial service not expected to resume until 2026.25

The Virgin Galactic case serves as a stark illustration of a key structural risk within the SPAC framework: the capacity to market highly speculative, pre-revenue ventures to the public using aggressive, long-range forecasts that would likely face greater skepticism in a traditional IPO process. The performance gap is not merely a quantitative miss; it reflects a fundamentally different reality than the one sold to investors. The SPAC vehicle enabled a level of speculative promotion that was disconnected from the company's actual technological and operational readiness, a pattern that recurs throughout the Palihapitiya portfolio.

3.2 Opendoor (OPEN) - CIK: 0001801169

Merger Overview and Initial Valuation

Opendoor, a pioneer in the "iBuying" real estate model, went public by merging with Social Capital Hedosophia II (IPOB). The deal, announced in September 2020, valued Opendoor at a substantial $4.8 billion enterprise value.33 The transaction provided Opendoor with over $1 billion in cash, including $414 million from the SPAC's trust and a $600 million PIPE (Private Investment in Public Equity) financing round.34 Palihapitiya was a vocal champion of the deal, personally investing $100 million into the PIPE and comparing the opportunity to investing in Amazon or Tesla in their early days.33 The merger closed on December 18, 2020, with the stock beginning to trade under the ticker OPEN on December 21, 2020.3

Projection vs. Reality

At the time of the merger announcement, Palihapitiya and Opendoor presented a compelling growth narrative. They projected that the company's revenue would reach $9.8 billion by 2023 and that it would achieve positive adjusted EBITDA of $9 million in the same year.33

While the company did experience a revenue boom during the low-interest-rate environment of 2021 and 2022 (peaking at $15.6 billion in 2022), the subsequent housing market downturn exposed the vulnerability of these projections.37

  • Actual 2023 Revenue: $6.9 billion.37 This was a 30% miss from the $9.8 billion projection.
  • Actual 2023 Profitability: Instead of the projected $9 million in positive EBITDA, Opendoor reported a staggering net loss of $275 million and a negative adjusted EBITDA margin of 9.0% for 2023.37

The failure to anticipate the impact of a shifting macroeconomic environment on a highly cyclical business model was a critical flaw in the projections sold to public investors.

Metric 2023 SPAC Projection 2023 Actual Result
Revenue $9.8 billion $6.9 billion
Adjusted EBITDA $9 million N/A (Net Loss of $275M)

Sources: 33

Stock Performance Analysis

Opendoor's stock debuted with significant enthusiasm, opening at $31.47 per share and quickly rallying to an all-time high of $39.24 in February 2021.14 At its peak, the company commanded a market capitalization of over $20 billion.37 However, as interest rates began to rise and the housing market cooled, the stock entered a catastrophic decline. It has since fallen over 97% from its peak, at times trading for less than $1 per share.37 By mid-2025, an analysis by MarketWatch showed the stock was down approximately 94.6% since its launch.27 Its market capitalization shrank from $18 billion at IPO to under $1 billion, wiping out nearly all of its initial public value.14

Operational Review

Opendoor's business model, which involves using immense amounts of capital to buy homes, make minor repairs, and resell them for a fee, proved to be acutely sensitive to macroeconomic conditions. The surge in mortgage rates that began in 2022 froze the housing market, leaving Opendoor with a vast inventory of homes that were rapidly depreciating in value.5 This led to massive losses and forced the company into significant restructuring, including multiple rounds of layoffs that affected a large portion of its workforce.14 While competitors like Zillow and Redfin shut down their iBuying operations entirely, Opendoor has persisted, focusing on improving unit economics and operational efficiency.37 However, it has been a painful process, with the company only recently guiding for a potential small quarterly profit after years of substantial losses.40 The company's struggles also led to legal challenges, including a settlement with investors over allegedly misleading claims about its pricing technology.41

The case of Opendoor demonstrates the acute risk of taking a capital-intensive, cyclically-vulnerable business public via a SPAC at the peak of a market cycle. The sponsor and the company effectively sold a growth story to the public that was entirely contingent on the continuation of a specific and highly favorable economic regime—low interest rates and a booming housing market. The projections presented to investors lacked robust stress-testing for a rising-rate environment, representing a critical failure in underwriting the fundamental business model risk. This highlights how the SPAC vehicle can be used to fast-track companies to public markets without fully pricing in, or disclosing, their inherent cyclical vulnerabilities.

3.3 Clover Health (CLOV) - CIK: 0001801170

Merger Overview and Initial Valuation

Clover Health, a Medicare Advantage insurer leveraging a proprietary software platform called Clover Assistant, merged with Social Capital Hedosophia III (IPOC). The deal, announced in October 2020, valued Clover at an enterprise value of $3.7 billion.42 The transaction was expected to deliver up to $1.2 billion in cash proceeds, including a $400 million PIPE, to fuel the company's expansion.42 Palihapitiya was a fervent promoter of the company, calling it his "next 10x idea".45 The merger officially closed on January 7, 2021, and the company began trading on the Nasdaq under the ticker CLOV the following day.46

Projection vs. Reality

Clover Health's financial projections focused on rapid membership growth and a path to profitability by 2023.43 In an unusual turn for this portfolio, Clover actually beat its revenue projections.

  • 2021 Projection: Revenue of $880 million.49
    Actual 2021 Revenue: $1.47 billion.51
  • 2023 Projection: Revenue of $1.723 billion.49
    Actual 2023 Revenue: $2.03 billion.52

However, the story of profitability was entirely different. The company had projected achieving profitability by 2023.43 Instead, it has been a long and arduous journey, marked by significant losses.

  • Actual 2022 Net Loss: $339.6 million.52
  • Actual 2023 Net Loss: $213.4 million.52

While the company has recently shown progress, improving its Medical Care Ratio (MCR) and guiding for adjusted EBITDA profitability in 2025, it has yet to achieve the financial stability suggested in the initial SPAC presentations.53

Metric 2023 SPAC Projection 2023 Actual Result
Revenue $1.723 billion $2.033 billion
Profitability Profitable Net Loss of $213.4 million

Sources: 43

Stock Performance Analysis

Despite exceeding revenue targets, Clover Health's stock performance has been disastrous for investors. After beginning trading around $13.95 in January 2021 55, the stock briefly became a "meme stock," surging to a high of $28.85 in June 2021 before collapsing.55 The fall was swift and brutal. By January 2024, the stock was trading under $1 14, and as of mid-2025, it was down approximately 71% since its launch.27 The company's market cap, which was $7 billion on its first day of trading, fell to under $500 million within two years.14

Operational Review and Controversy

Clover Health's post-merger life has been dominated by controversy that strikes at the heart of the SPAC due diligence process. In February 2021, just one month after the merger closed, short-seller Hindenburg Research published a scathing report alleging that Clover Health was under an active, undisclosed investigation by the Department of Justice (DOJ).56 The investigation reportedly focused on at least 12 different issues, including misleading marketing practices and potential upcoding—the practice of overbilling Medicare by making patients seem sicker than they are.56

This revelation was particularly damaging because Palihapitiya had, in a CNBC interview, specifically and unpromptedly praised Clover for its transparency and for not motivating doctors to upcode.56 The Hindenburg report created an immediate and severe credibility crisis, raising two possibilities, neither of them favorable to the sponsor: either Palihapitiya knew about the DOJ investigation and concealed this material risk from investors, or his firm's due diligence, for which it was handsomely compensated, was so inadequate that it missed an existential threat to a company almost entirely dependent on government payments.56 The company has since focused on improving its financial discipline and its technology platform, Clover Assistant, but the initial damage to its reputation and the questions surrounding its business practices have lingered.53

The Clover Health case moves beyond a simple story of missed financial projections. It represents a significant failure of governance and due diligence. The direct contradiction between the sponsor's public narrative and the undisclosed regulatory realities demonstrates a potential breakdown in the fiduciary-like responsibility a sponsor has to public investors. This episode validates the concerns of lawmakers and critics about the misaligned incentives inherent in the SPAC structure, where the sponsor's primary goal is to complete a deal, potentially overshadowing the need for exhaustive and transparent disclosure of risks.58

3.4 SoFi Technologies (SOFI) - CIK: 0001818874

Merger Overview and Initial Valuation

SoFi Technologies, a digital personal finance company, stands as the notable outlier in Palihapitiya's SPAC portfolio. The company merged with Social Capital Hedosophia V (IPOE) in a transaction that valued SoFi at an $8.65 billion pro forma enterprise value.59 The deal, which included a $1.2 billion PIPE, was announced in January 2021 and completed on May 28, 2021, with the new entity trading as SOFI on the Nasdaq starting June 1, 2021.60

Projection vs. Reality

SoFi is unique among its peers in this portfolio for having largely met or exceeded the ambitious financial projections it laid out during the SPAC process. This execution is a primary driver of its relative success.

  • 2021 Projection: The company projected adjusted net revenue of $980 million and adjusted EBITDA of $27 million for 2021.59
  • 2021 Actual Results: SoFi delivered $1.01 billion in adjusted net revenue and $30.2 million in adjusted EBITDA, beating both of its key targets.63

While its 2023 revenue came in below the long-range forecast from the SPAC presentation ($2.1 billion actual adjusted vs. $2.9 billion projected), the company has demonstrated consistent, strong growth and, critically, achieved GAAP profitability in late 2023, a milestone none of the other companies in this portfolio have reached.64

Metric 2021 SPAC Projection 2021 Actual Result
Adjusted Net Revenue $980 million $1.01 billion
Adjusted EBITDA $27 million $30.2 million

Sources: 59

Stock Performance Analysis

Although SoFi is the best-performing stock in the group, its journey has still been highly volatile for investors. After merging at a price of $20.15 14, the stock was caught in the speculative SPAC bubble, reaching an all-time high of approximately $27.64 It subsequently fell with the rest of the market, dropping to the single digits. However, unlike its peers, its strong operational performance has allowed for a partial recovery. As of a June 2025 report, SoFi was the only SPAC in Palihapitiya's portfolio to show a positive return since its launch, up 46.6%.27 Despite this, it remains significantly below its post-merger price and bubble-era peak, highlighting the valuation reset that has occurred across the growth-stock landscape.

Operational Review

SoFi's post-merger execution has been strong. The company has successfully grown its member base more than threefold since 2021 and has expanded its suite of products across lending, investing, and banking services.64 A pivotal achievement was obtaining a national bank charter, which has allowed SoFi to fund its loans with low-cost member deposits, significantly improving its net interest margin and overall profitability.70 The company has consistently posted double-digit year-over-year revenue growth and delivered its first full year of GAAP profitability in 2024, with guidance for continued earnings growth.64

The relative success of SoFi underscores a critical lesson: the quality and maturity of the underlying target company are the ultimate determinants of long-term success. While Palihapitiya's promotion may have contributed to the initial speculative stock price, SoFi's ability to weather the post-SPAC market collapse is attributable to its own sound business fundamentals and strong execution. Unlike the more speculative, pre-revenue, or cyclically fragile companies in the rest of the portfolio, SoFi was a more established business with a clear, achievable path to profitability. This suggests that for investors, rigorous analysis of the target company's business model, competitive position, and financial health is far more critical than focusing on the reputation or narrative of the SPAC sponsor.

3.5 Akili Interactive (AKLI) - CIK: 0001850266

Merger Overview and Initial Valuation

Akili Interactive, a digital medicine company developing video game-based treatments for cognitive impairments, merged with Social Capital Suvretta Holdings I (DNAA). The deal, announced in January 2022, assigned Akili a staggering post-money equity value of approximately $1 billion.72 The transaction closed on August 19, 2022, providing Akili with over $163 million in gross proceeds to fund the commercial launch of its lead product, EndeavorRx, an FDA-cleared treatment for pediatric ADHD.16

Projection vs. Reality

The $1 billion valuation was predicated entirely on future potential, as Akili was a pre-revenue company at the time of the merger.73 Investor presentations highlighted a massive $10 billion U.S. ADHD market and projected a revenue potential of over $500 million per year from this indication alone.72

The actual results were a commercial catastrophe. The company failed to gain meaningful traction with physicians or, more importantly, reimbursement from payers.

  • Actual FY 2022 Revenue: $0.32 million.77
  • Actual FY 2023 Revenue: $1.68 million.78

These revenue figures are not just a miss; they represent a complete failure of the business model to scale in a way that could ever justify a billion-dollar valuation. The initial SPAC deal was also met with extreme skepticism from public investors, as indicated by the fact that over 99% of the SPAC's public shares were redeemed for cash before the merger closed, leaving the company with far less capital than initially anticipated.80

Metric SPAC Presentation Projection Actual Result (2022-2023)
Annual Revenue Potential (US ADHD) $500M+ $1.68M (FY 2023)

Sources: 79

Stock Performance Analysis

The performance of Akili's stock post-merger was an unmitigated disaster, reflecting the failure of its business model. From the nominal $10 SPAC price, the stock entered a freefall. Within two years, the company's value had been almost entirely erased. In May 2024, Akili announced it would be acquired and taken private by Virtual Therapeutics for a price of $0.434 per share, a total deal value of just $34 million.81 This represents a staggering 96.6% destruction of the $1 billion valuation assigned at the time of the SPAC merger.

Operational Review

Akili's story is one of a company unable to bridge the gap between regulatory approval and commercial viability. Despite having an FDA-cleared product, it struggled immensely to convince doctors to prescribe it and insurers to pay for it.81 This led to a desperate series of strategic pivots. The company first laid off 40% of its staff and shifted from a prescription-based model to a direct-to-consumer, over-the-counter (OTC) subscription model.81 When that also failed to generate meaningful revenue, it announced further layoffs of nearly half its remaining staff and a wind-down of its commercial operations before ultimately agreeing to the fire sale to Virtual Therapeutics.81

Akili stands as the quintessential example of a "venture capital bet" being inappropriately funded by the public markets through a SPAC. The $1 billion valuation was based on a highly speculative, unproven business model with immense commercialization and reimbursement hurdles. This is a risk profile typically underwritten by specialized venture capital funds, not the general public. The SPAC structure allowed this high-risk venture to be sold to public investors under the guise of a public company, bypassing the more rigorous vetting of both late-stage VCs and traditional IPO gatekeepers. The result was the near-total incineration of the capital invested by the public, demonstrating how the SPAC vehicle can be used to transfer extreme venture-stage risk directly to public shareholders.

3.6 ProKidney (PROK) - CIK: 0001850270

Merger Overview and Initial Valuation

ProKidney, a clinical-stage biotechnology company developing a cell therapy for chronic kidney disease (CKD), merged with Social Capital Suvretta Holdings III (DNAC). The deal, announced in January 2022, gave ProKidney a combined equity value of $2.64 billion.7 The transaction, which included a large $575 million PIPE, closed on July 11, 2022, and the company began trading under the ticker PROK.17

Projection vs. Reality

Like Akili, ProKidney was a pre-revenue, clinical-stage company. Its valuation was not based on existing financials but on the projected future success of its lead product candidate, rilparencel (REACT). The SPAC presentation materials targeted a commercial launch for the product in late 2025 to mid-2026, contingent on successful Phase 3 trials and subsequent regulatory approval.84

As of early 2025, the company remains in the clinical development stage and is pre-revenue, having reported just $76,000 in revenue for fiscal year 2024.85 Its progress continues to be measured by clinical trial milestones and interactions with the FDA, not by financial metrics.87 The company's future remains entirely dependent on a binary clinical outcome.

Metric SPAC Presentation Projection Current Status
Commercial Launch Late 2025 - Mid 2026 Remains in Phase 3 trials
Revenue N/A (Implied billions post-launch) Pre-revenue ($76k in FY2024)

Sources: 84

Stock Performance Analysis

As a clinical-stage biotech, ProKidney's stock has been extremely volatile, trading on clinical news flow rather than financial fundamentals. After the merger, the stock saw periods of strength, trading as high as $11.00 in February 2023.88 However, the long development timelines and inherent risks of drug development have weighed on the shares, which have fallen significantly from those highs, trading below $1 at times in 2025.1 The performance illustrates the high-risk nature of the investment.

Operational Review

ProKidney's operations are exclusively focused on research and development. The company is a pure-play on the success of its clinical trials for rilparencel. Its financial statements reflect this reality, showing no significant revenue but substantial and growing expenses. For the year ended December 31, 2024, the company spent $127.7 million on R&D and $56.1 million on G&A, resulting in a net loss of $163.3 million.85 For investors, the most critical operational metric is the company's cash runway—the amount of time it can fund its operations before needing to raise additional capital. As of late 2024, the company stated its cash position would fund operations into mid-2027.87

The ProKidney merger, much like the Akili deal, represents the public funding of a high-risk, binary-outcome venture capital investment. The company's value is entirely untethered from current financial performance and is instead a market proxy for sentiment on its long-dated and uncertain clinical prospects. This type of security is fundamentally inappropriate for most public market investors, who lack the specialized scientific and clinical expertise to properly underwrite the risks. Yet, it was brought to market under the same "democratization of finance" narrative. This case further reinforces the conclusion that the SPAC vehicle was used to offload venture-stage risk onto the public markets, packaging an illiquid, venture-style bet into a publicly traded security.

Section 4: The Liquidations: A Tale of Failed Hunts and Superior Returns

While the de-SPACed companies in Chamath Palihapitiya's portfolio largely resulted in significant losses for public investors, a different story unfolded for the SPACs that failed to find a merger partner. In an ironic twist, the absence of a deal from the "SPAC King" proved to be the most profitable outcome for shareholders, a fact that casts a long shadow over the quality of the deals that were consummated.

In September 2022, as market conditions continued to sour and the speculative fervor of the previous year evaporated, Palihapitiya announced that he was giving up on two of his blank-check companies, Social Capital Hedosophia IV (IPOD) and Social Capital Hedosophia VI (IPOF).5 He cited the difficulty of finding quality targets at reasonable valuations in the deteriorating market.15 Following this, the two remaining biotech-focused SPACs, Social Capital Suvretta II (DNAB) and IV (DNAD), were also liquidated in mid-2023 after failing to complete mergers within their allotted timeframes.11

For public shareholders who had invested in these SPACs at the typical $10 IPO price, this was the best possible result. Upon liquidation, the cash held in the SPAC's trust account was returned to them. This meant they received their principal back, plus any accrued interest. For example, shareholders of IPOD received approximately $10.01 per share, while shareholders of DNAB and DNAD received approximately $10.35 per share.11 As noted by a MarketWatch analysis, this capital preservation made the liquidated SPACs the "best-performing" of Palihapitiya's ventures, as they provided a modest positive return while the completed mergers were destroying capital.27

However, this positive outcome was not shared by all investors. A key feature of the SPAC structure is the issuance of warrants alongside shares, which give the holder the right to buy shares at a fixed price in the future. These warrants are highly speculative instruments that derive their value from the prospect of a successful merger. Upon liquidation, all outstanding warrants for IPOD, IPOF, DNAB, and DNAD expired worthless, resulting in a total and complete loss for anyone who had invested in them.15

The liquidation of four of Palihapitiya's ten launched SPACs serves as a powerful counter-narrative to the idea that his expertise provided a unique advantage in deal selection. The data clearly shows that during the post-bubble period, the most financially prudent strategy for an investor in his SPACs would have been to redeem their shares upon the announcement of any deal. The fact that the absence of a deal from the "SPAC King" was the superior financial outcome is a damning indictment of the selection process during the boom. It suggests that the value for public investors was not in the sponsor's supposed curation ability, but simply in the capital-preservation feature of the blank-check company itself—a feature that was abandoned the moment a merger, the very event the sponsor was paid to orchestrate, was completed.

Section 5: A Thematic Dissection of the "SPAC King's" Record

The individual performance of Chamath Palihapitiya's SPACs, when viewed collectively, reveals several overarching themes that define his tenure as the "SPAC King." These themes encompass the masterful use of marketing and media, the structural flaws of the SPAC vehicle that benefit sponsors, and the stark quantitative reality of the portfolio's performance.

5.1 The Anatomy of Hype

A crucial element of the Palihapitiya SPAC phenomenon was the cultivation of a powerful public persona. He positioned himself as a maverick investor, a champion of the retail trader, and a visionary who was democratizing access to the kind of high-growth technology companies previously reserved for elite Silicon Valley venture capitalists.1 This narrative was amplified through his massive social media following, which stands at 1.8 million on X (formerly Twitter), and his regular, high-profile appearances on CNBC and the popular "All-In" podcast.1

This platform was used to generate enormous hype around his deals. He was not merely a sponsor; he was the lead promoter. He famously compared himself to a modern-day Warren Buffett and framed his investments in superlative terms.14 For instance, he described the Opendoor deal as having the feel of "Bitcoin in 2012, Amazon in 2015, [or] Tesla in 2016," tapping directly into the retail investor's fear of missing out on the next generational wealth-creating opportunity.33 He pitched Clover Health as his "next 10x idea," a powerful and simple message that resonated with his audience.45 This direct-to-retail marketing strategy was highly effective in fueling the initial speculative frenzy that drove the share prices of his SPACs to unsustainable heights.93

5.2 Structural Flaws and Misaligned Incentives

The performance of Palihapitiya's SPACs casts a harsh light on the structural flaws inherent in the SPAC model, particularly the misaligned incentives between sponsors and public shareholders. The most significant of these is the sponsor "promote," whereby the sponsor typically receives a 20% equity stake in the post-merger company for a relatively small, at-risk capital investment.95 This structure creates an immense incentive for the sponsor to complete a deal—any deal—before the SPAC's two-year deadline expires, as this is the only way to monetize their "promote" shares. The quality of the deal and its long-term performance are secondary considerations to the immediate financial windfall a merger provides to the sponsor.58

This misalignment was a focal point of criticism from lawmakers like Senator Elizabeth Warren, whose investigation into the SPAC market found that sponsors received average returns of 958% from 2019 to 2021, even as the companies they took public consistently underperformed and retail investors suffered heavy losses.95 The Palihapitiya portfolio is a case study in this phenomenon. The situation was further exacerbated by reports that Palihapitiya had profitably sold personal shares in several of his sponsored companies before their stock prices collapsed, locking in gains while the retail investors who had followed his public pronouncements were left holding depreciating assets.1 These issues of self-dealing and misaligned incentives ultimately led to increased scrutiny and new rules from the SEC aimed at enhancing investor protections in the SPAC market.14

5.3 A Quantitative Reckoning

When stripped of the hype and narrative, the quantitative performance of the Palihapitiya de-SPAC portfolio is unequivocally poor. With the exception of SoFi, every company taken public has generated massive losses for investors who held from the time of the merger. The portfolio is littered with companies whose share prices are down 80-90% or more from their peaks and, more importantly, from their initial $10 offering price.5 As a whole, the portfolio has dramatically underperformed the broader market, failing to deliver on the promise of providing superior access to high-growth returns.

The following scorecard consolidates the performance of all six de-SPACed entities, providing a clear, comparative view of their market performance from the date of their merger through mid-June 2025. This table serves as the quantitative centerpiece of the report, crystallizing the widespread value destruction across the portfolio.

Table 2: Aggregate De-SPAC Performance Scorecard (Data as of June 17, 2025)

Company (Ticker) Merger Date Post-Merger Day 1 Close All-Time High Current Price % Change from Day 1 % Change from ATH S&P 500 Since Merger Nasdaq Comp. Since Merger
Virgin Galactic (SPCE) Oct 28, 2019 $11.75 $62.80 $2.99 -74.55% -95.24% +111.9% +173.8%
Opendoor (OPEN) Dec 21, 2020 $31.25 $39.24 $0.58 -98.14% -98.52% +60.9% +59.6%
Clover Health (CLOV) Jan 8, 2021 $15.90 $28.85 $2.89 -81.82% -89.98% +56.9% +51.9%
SoFi Tech. (SOFI) Jun 1, 2021 $22.65 $28.26 $15.36 -32.19% -45.65% +42.1% +40.1%
Akili Interactive (AKLI) Aug 22, 2022 $4.01 $8.70 $0.43 -89.28% -95.06% +43.0% +59.8%
ProKidney (PROK) Jul 12, 2022 $8.15 $16.71 $0.86 -89.45% -94.85% +53.9% +75.3%

Notes: Prices are adjusted for any corporate actions. Post-Merger Day 1 Close is the closing price on the first day of trading under the new ticker. All-Time High reflects the highest intraday price reached post-merger. Current Price is as of market close on June 17, 2025. S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite performance is calculated from the respective merger date to June 17, 2025. Sources: 14 and historical price lookups.

Section 6: Conclusion: Legacy, Lessons, and the Path Forward

The rise and fall of Chamath Palihapitiya as the "SPAC King" offers a defining chapter in the history of modern financial markets, encapsulating the speculative mania of 2020-2021 and providing enduring lessons for investors. The exhaustive analysis of his SPAC portfolio reveals a legacy not of democratizing wealth for the masses, but of profound value destruction for the retail investors who followed his lead.

The Verdict on the Palihapitiya SPAC Legacy

The evidence overwhelmingly indicates that the Palihapitiya SPAC phenomenon was, first and foremost, a masterclass in marketing and narrative-crafting, wrapped around a flawed financial structure that primarily benefited its sponsor. The promise to provide Main Street with access to Wall Street's best deals was a compelling story, but the results show the opposite occurred. Highly speculative, often pre-revenue companies with unproven business models were brought to the public market at inflated valuations, fueled by aggressive and ultimately unreliable financial projections.

The subsequent collapse of these stocks, juxtaposed with the sponsor's ability to secure guaranteed profits through the "promote" structure and sell personal holdings before the crash, validates the most severe criticisms leveled against the SPAC model.58 The Palihapitiya SPAC saga serves as a poster child for the misaligned incentives that can lead to poor outcomes for public shareholders. The ultimate verdict is that these ventures were less about democratizing access to sound investments and more about capitalizing on a bubble, a classic story of insiders profiting at the expense of the public.91

Actionable Recommendations for the Sophisticated Investor

The failures of this portfolio provide a valuable set of lessons and a due diligence framework for evaluating future investment opportunities, particularly those led by high-profile, charismatic sponsors.

  1. Discount the Promoter, Diligence the Asset: The single most important lesson is that the quality of the underlying business is paramount. The SoFi case demonstrates that a fundamentally sound, well-run company can execute its plan and create value, while the other cases show that no amount of sponsor charisma can save a flawed business model. An investor's time is better spent analyzing the target company's financial statements, competitive positioning, and management team than it is listening to the sponsor's narrative.
  2. Treat Projections as Marketing, Not Analysis: The vast chasm between the projections made by companies like Virgin Galactic and Opendoor and their actual results underscores that SPAC investor presentations should be viewed as marketing documents, not as credible financial forecasts. Investors must conduct their own stress tests and scenario analyses, particularly for companies that are pre-revenue, capital-intensive, or highly sensitive to macroeconomic cycles.
  3. Understand the Structure and Incentives: Investors must fully comprehend the economics of the SPAC structure. The sponsor's "promote" creates a powerful incentive to complete a transaction, which may not align with the public shareholders' interest in a high-quality, fairly valued deal. The question an investor must ask is not just "Is this a good company?" but also "Is this a good deal at this valuation, given the dilution from sponsor shares and warrants?"

The Post-Bubble SPAC Landscape

The spectacular collapse of the SPAC bubble, for which the Palihapitiya portfolio was a leading indicator, has fundamentally reshaped the landscape. The market has shifted from a state of euphoria to one of extreme skepticism. This has led to a wave of SPAC liquidations, a more discerning investor base, and increased regulatory oversight from the SEC, which has implemented new rules to enhance disclosures and align the responsibilities of SPACs more closely with those of traditional IPOs.14

Chamath Palihapitiya's recent public musings about launching a new SPAC, despite acknowledging that "the last time wasn't a success by any means," will serve as a crucial test for the market.27 Whether he can attract capital and investor trust for a new venture will reveal if the market has a short memory or if the painful lessons from his first dozen SPACs have been truly learned. For the foreseeable future, any SPAC, particularly one led by a high-profile promoter, will be met with a level of scrutiny and skepticism that was entirely absent during the mania of 2021—a direct and lasting legacy of the SPAC King's reign.

Works cited

  1. Chamath Palihapitiya: Billionaire Investor, Entrepreneur | The Motley Fool, accessed on June 20, 2025
  2. Palihapitiya and Osborne's fifth SPAC Social Capital Hedosophia Holdings V files for a $650 million IPO, accessed on June 20, 2025
  3. Social Capital Hedosophia II Shareholders Approve Business Combination With Opendoor, accessed on June 20, 2025
  4. Chamath Palihapitiya Just Filed for 7 More SPACs - Nasdaq, accessed on June 20, 2025
  5. Chamath Palihapitiya's Crumbling SPAC Empire: Where His Top 5 Deals Are Today, accessed on June 20, 2025
  6. Social Capital Hedosophia: Stocks, background & IPOs | finder.com, accessed on June 20, 2025
  7. Chamath Palihapitiya's SPAC to merge with ProKidney in $2.6 billion deal, accessed on June 20, 2025
  8. Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp II (DNAB) $10.35 (NASDAQ) Share Price Today - Value Research, accessed on June 20, 2025
  9. DNAC - Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp III - Class A (NASDAQ) - Share Price and News - Fintel, accessed on June 20, 2025
  10. Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp IV (DNAD) $10.35 (NASDAQ) Share Price Today - Value Research, accessed on June 20, 2025
  11. Equity Corporate Actions Alert #2023 - 309 (UPDATED: Final rate) Information regarding the redemption of Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp. II (DNAB) - Nasdaq Trader, accessed on June 20, 2025
  12. Equity Corporate Actions Alert #2023 - 308 (UPDATED: Final rate) Information regarding the redemption of Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp. IV (DNAD) - Nasdaq Trader, accessed on June 20, 2025
  13. Chamath Palihapitiya Just Filed for 7 More SPACs | The Motley Fool, accessed on June 20, 2025
  14. The legacy of "SPAC king" Chamath Palihapitiya - VIP Graphics, accessed on June 20, 2025
  15. SPAC Daily: Chamath's IPOD & IPOF Call it Quits - Boardroom Alpha, accessed on June 20, 2025
  16. Akili Completes Business Combination With Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp. I (DNAA) - Pulse 2.0, accessed on June 20, 2025
  17. 0001193125-22-191769 | 8-K | iXBRL Viewer | Prokidney Corp, accessed on June 20, 2025
  18. Virgin Galactic and Social Capital Hedosophia announce merger to create the world's first and only publicly traded commercial human spaceflight company., accessed on June 20, 2025
  19. www.sec.gov, accessed on June 20, 2025
  20. Virgin Galactic - Wikipedia, accessed on June 20, 2025
  21. The Space SPAC: Everything You Need to Know about Virgin Galactic - Nasdaq, accessed on June 20, 2025
  22. The Great SPAC Experiment: How Digital Health Bet Big and Lost Bigger - Halle Tecco, accessed on June 20, 2025
  23. Virgin Galactic Holdings (SPCE) Revenue 2017-2025 - Stock Analysis, accessed on June 20, 2025
  24. Virgin Galactic Announces Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2024 Financial Results and Provides Business Update, accessed on June 20, 2025
  25. Virgin Galactic Announces First Quarter 2025 Financial Results and Provides Business Update, accessed on June 20, 2025
  26. Virgin Galactic Holdings, Inc. (SPCE) Stock Price History & Analysis - Stocklytics, accessed on June 20, 2025
  27. The so-called SPAC king prepares to launch another: 'The last time wasn't a success by any means' | Morningstar, accessed on June 20, 2025
  28. S&P 500 (SPX) Historical Data - Nasdaq, accessed on June 20, 2025
  29. NASDAQ Composite Historical Data - Investing.com India, accessed on June 20, 2025
  30. Virgin Galactic Shock: Financial Projections Fall Short - Timothy Sykes, accessed on June 20, 2025
  31. Virgin Galactic Announces First Quarter 2025 Financial Results and Provides Business Update, accessed on June 20, 2025
  32. Chamath Palihapitiya - Forbes, accessed on June 20, 2025
  33. Opendoor IPO SPAC $4.7B Revenue - The Real Deal, accessed on June 20, 2025
  34. Opendoor Digital Real Estate Platform to Go Public by SPAC - Carpenter Wellington PLLC, accessed on June 20, 2025
  35. Opendoor Technologies to Trade on Nasdaq as “OPEN”, accessed on June 20, 2025
  36. Social Capital Hedosophia II Shareholders Approve Business Combination With Opendoor, accessed on June 20, 2025
  37. Opendoor Stock Is Beaten Down Now, but It Could 10X | The Motley Fool, accessed on June 20, 2025
  38. Opendoor Technologies (OPEN) Revenue 2017-2025 - Stock Analysis, accessed on June 20, 2025
  39. Opendoor Technologies - 5 Year Stock Price History | OPEN - Macrotrends, accessed on June 20, 2025
  40. Opendoor is the next Carvana : r/wallstreetbets - Reddit, accessed on June 20, 2025
  41. Opendoor Settles With Investors Over "Misleading" Claims About Its Pricing Tech, accessed on June 20, 2025
  42. Clover Health Pitch Deck, accessed on June 20, 2025
  43. 0001104659-20-112783.rtf - Investor Relations | Clover Health, accessed on June 20, 2025
  44. MA startup Clover Health goes public in blank check deal valuing it at $3.7B, accessed on June 20, 2025
  45. Chamath Palihapitiya on why he's taking Clover Health public through a SPAC - YouTube, accessed on June 20, 2025
  46. Social Capital Hedosophia III Shareholders Approve Business Combination with Clover Health | Nasdaq, accessed on June 20, 2025
  47. Clover Health and Social Capital Hedosophia Holdings Corp. III Announce Closing of Business Combination, accessed on June 20, 2025
  48. Social Capital Hedosophia III Shareholders Approve Business Combination with Clover Health, accessed on June 20, 2025
  49. IPOC - Clover Health, accessed on June 20, 2025
  50. Clover Health goes public in $3.7B SPAC deal - MedCity News, accessed on June 20, 2025
  51. Clover Health Investments (CLOV) - Revenue - Companies Market Cap, accessed on June 20, 2025
  52. Clover Health Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2023 Financial Results, accessed on June 20, 2025
  53. Clover Health nets $70M adjusted EBITDA but misses revenue goals - Fierce Healthcare, accessed on June 20, 2025
  54. Clover Health Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2024 Results; Provides Full Year 2025 Guidance, accessed on June 20, 2025
  55. Clover Health Investments, Corp. Stock Price: Quote, Forecast, Splits & News (CLOV) - Perplexity, accessed on June 20, 2025
  56. Clover Health: How the “King of SPACs” Lured Retail Investors Into a Broken Business Facing an Active, Undisclosed DOJ Investigation - Hindenburg Research, accessed on June 20, 2025
  57. Clover Health January 2025 Investor Presentation vF, accessed on June 20, 2025
  58. Chamath Palihapitiya - Wikipedia, accessed on June 20, 2025
  59. SoFi aims to become the Amazon of fintech through its Spac deal - Euromoney, accessed on June 20, 2025
  60. SoFi SPAC Merger Completed; New Stock Begins Trading on Tuesday - Nasdaq, accessed on June 20, 2025
  61. Social Finance Technologies to Trade on Nasdaq as “SOFI” - Business Wire, accessed on June 20, 2025
  62. ipoe-20210422 - SEC.gov, accessed on June 20, 2025
  63. SOFI vs. LCID: One SPAC Stock is Actually Promising - Nasdaq, accessed on June 20, 2025
  64. Will SoFi Reach a New All-Time High Before the End of 2025? | The Motley Fool, accessed on June 20, 2025
  65. SoFi Stock's Next Test: Can It Justify Its Premium Valuation? - TradingView, accessed on June 20, 2025
  66. SoFi Technologies Revenue 2020-2025 - Macrotrends, accessed on June 20, 2025
  67. SoFi Technologies, Inc. Reports Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year 2023 Results, accessed on June 20, 2025
  68. Will SoFi Reach a New All-Time High Before the End of 2025? - Nasdaq, accessed on June 20, 2025
  69. SoFi Investor Relations Material - Quartr, accessed on June 20, 2025
  70. 2025 Q1 Investor Presentation, accessed on June 20, 2025
  71. 4Q24 SoFi Investor Presentation, accessed on June 20, 2025
  72. Akili Interactive, a Leader in Digital Medicine, to Become Publicly Traded Through Combination with Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp. I, accessed on June 20, 2025
  73. Akili inks $1B SPAC deal to take prescription video game tech public | Fierce Biotech, accessed on June 20, 2025
  74. Digital Medicine Leader Akili to List on Nasdaq Following Successful Business Combination with Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp. I, accessed on June 20, 2025
  75. Akili Interactive Goes Public in $1B SPAC Merger - Digital Health Wire, accessed on June 20, 2025
  76. Akili Interactive to go public via merger with Social Capital SPAC, accessed on June 20, 2025
  77. companiesmarketcap.com, accessed on June 20, 2025
  78. Akili (AKLI) Stock Price & Overview, accessed on June 20, 2025
  79. Akili Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2023 Financial Results and Provides Business Update, accessed on June 20, 2025
  80. SPAC Daily: Chamath's DNAA Closes with Over 99% Redemptions - Boardroom Alpha, accessed on June 20, 2025
  81. Akili Merges with Virtual Therapeutics to Form a Leading Digital Mental Health Company, accessed on June 20, 2025
  82. ADHD game developer Akili Interactive to be taken private, after $34M sale - Fierce Biotech, accessed on June 20, 2025
  83. SEC Filing | ProKidney, accessed on June 20, 2025
  84. Revolutionary Chronic Kidney Disease Therapeutics Company ProKidney to Become Publicly Traded via Business Combination with Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp. III - IPO Edge, accessed on June 20, 2025
  85. ProKidney Reports Full Year 2024 Financial Results and Business Highlights - Stock Titan, accessed on June 20, 2025
  86. ProKidney Corp. Class A Ordinary Shares (PROK) Financials - Nasdaq, accessed on June 20, 2025
  87. ProKidney Reports Full Year 2024 Financial Results and Business Highlights, accessed on June 20, 2025
  88. SEC Filing | ProKidney, accessed on June 20, 2025
  89. Stock Quote & Chart - Investor Relations | ProKidney, accessed on June 20, 2025
  90. NYSE to Suspend Trading Immediately in Warrants of Social Capital Hedosophia Holdings Corp. VI (IPOF WS) and Commence Delisting Proceedings - ICE, accessed on June 20, 2025
  91. The Scam in the Arena - by Eric Newcomer, accessed on June 20, 2025
  92. Beginners Guide to SPAC Stocks - Warrior Trading, accessed on June 20, 2025
  93. Here's how Chamath Palihapitiya's SPAC deals have performed so far - YouTube, accessed on June 20, 2025
  94. Chamath Palihapitiya's Blockbuster SPAC Mergers Dropped 32% in 2021 - Markets Insider, accessed on June 20, 2025
  95. The SPAC Hack - Elizabeth Warren, accessed on June 20, 2025
  96. SPCE - Virgin Galactic Holdings Inc Stock Price and Quote - FINVIZ.com, accessed on June 20, 2025
  97. Opendoor Technologies Inc. Stock Price: Quote, Forecast, Splits & News (OPEN) - Perplexity, accessed on June 20, 2025
  98. Clover Health Investments - 5 Year Stock Price History | CLOV - Macrotrends, accessed on June 20, 2025
  99. Akili: AKLI Stock Price Quote & News - Robinhood, accessed on June 20, 2025
  100. S&P 500 Historical Data - Investing.com India, accessed on June 20, 2025
  101. History for NDX - Nasdaq Global Index Watch, accessed on June 20, 2025
  102. I'm always somewhat amazed that Chamath Palihapitiya doesn't have a much worse r... | Hacker News, accessed on June 20, 2025