Diligence memo · auto-generated · as of July 2, 2026

4Front Ventures Corp.

4Front Ventures Corp. looks over-valued against its niche peers and is at-risk on financing cadence.

WatchOverdue for a raise versus sector cadence — could be a bridge, a down round, or distress. Watch for the next filing.

Businessfiled

4Front Ventures Corp. operates in Other, based in Phoenix.

Sector still resolves to a broad 'Other' bucket, so operating comparables below are weaker than for a tightly-classified peer.

No verified homepage on file yet — operating evidence is limited to the public record.

Capital & rounds (filed)filed

4Front Ventures Corp. has raised $3.6M in disclosed capital across 2 recorded rounds, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Seed (a $1.0M–$4.0M round).

Largest single filing: $2.1M on 2022-08-19.

Most recent recorded round closed around 2022-08-19.

Valuation (modeled)modeled

Provath models 4Front Ventures Corp. at approximately $18M (range $1.9M–$79M). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.

Read: Over-valued. Modeled value is 1.60× the median modeled value of Seed Other companies in 2022–2024 (1231 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era.

Financing rhythm & timingmixed

Historic cadence: a new round about every 21 months.

Last raise 3.9 yr ago; this sector typically re-raises about every 11 months.

Past due for a raise versus sector cadence — watch for distress or a bridge.

The last round stepped up 1.4× from the prior — scaling.

Comparablesmixed

Capital scale ranks ahead of 60% of Other peers (25015 compared).

Modeled value ranks above 50% of those peers.

Closest niche peers: Dropee Inc., NFH Northern Project Development, LLC, FactorFund-Note-2022 LLC, Immersion Elements LLC, Possip, Inc..

Peoplefiled

15 named people on file across officers, directors and signatories.

Risks & flagsmixed

Overdue for a raise versus sector norm — distress or bridge risk.

Modeled above niche peers — valuation risk on entry.

Broad sector classification weakens peer comparison.

No clearly named CEO/founder/principal in the surfaced records — key-person evidence is thin.