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

Celsius Holdings, Inc.

Celsius Holdings, Inc. looks fair 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

Celsius Holdings, Inc. operates in Other, based in BOCA RATON.

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

Celsius Holdings, Inc. has raised $583M in disclosed capital across 4 recorded rounds, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Growth/Late (a round over $400M).

Largest single filing: $550M on 2022-08-01.

Most recent recorded round closed around 2022-08-01.

Valuation (modeled)modeled

Provath models Celsius Holdings, Inc. at approximately $7.7B (range $4.3B–$11.6B). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.

Read: Fair. Modeled value is 1.06× the median modeled value of Growth/Late Other companies in 2022–2024 (25 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era. Within the normal band (106% of peer median) for its niche.

Financing rhythm & timingmixed

Historic cadence: a new round about every 42 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 114.6× from the prior — scaling.

Comparablesmixed

Capital scale ranks ahead of 100% of Other peers (25015 compared).

Modeled value ranks above 100% of those peers.

Closest niche peers: Oranje Topco, Inc., Icefall Topco, Inc., Disco Topco, Inc., Staubach Topco, Inc., Arkady HoldCo, Inc..

Peoplefiled

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

Risks & flagsmixed

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

Broad sector classification weakens peer comparison.

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