← All companies

Redwood Materials

Battery recycling and materials company recovering lithium, cobalt, nickel, and copper from end-of-life EV batteries and electronics to re-manufacture cathode and anode materials.

ClimateUnited States·Founded 2017·ISO/NSO equity·redwoodmaterials.com ↗
Compare ⇄Calculate →
Source review Jun 2026 — source URL pending
Reference estimate only
4 methods · Source review Jun 2026 — source URL pendingLow confidence (34%)

The four valuation methods disagree significantly (7.2× spread). Treat this as a wide reference range only — not a reliable point estimate.

$6B
wide range · ~$5B – ~$7B
Implied per-share: $24.8 · vs last primary +8%

No verified public secondary-market signal available for Redwood Materials. The estimate relies on last confirmed financing, peer multiples, sector momentum, and time decay.

Valuation basis:Last primary roundSource review Jun 2026 — source URL pending
Last primary round
$6B
Series E · 9mo ago
Secondary signal
—
No verified secondary signal

No verified public secondary signal is available. Hiive/Forge links are monitoring links only, not evidence of a current executable price.

Headcount
1,200
employees · LinkedIn+33%

LinkedIn count — directional proxy only. Historical figure sourced via Wayback Machine; treat ±15% as normal variance.

Revenue (est.)
$250M
annual run rate · est.

Complete company data

Every input we use, where we got it from, and how much we trust it.

⚠

Source review: key primary-round source URL still pending. Figures are retained as historical reference and marked low-confidence where applicable.

FieldValueConfidence
Company fundamentals
SectorClimatehigh
HeadquartersUnited Stateshigh
Founded2017high
Websiteredwoodmaterials.comhigh
Last primary round
Post-money valuation$6Bmedium
Round nameSeries Ehigh
Date2025-10-01 (9 months ago)high
Lead investorEclipsehigh
Amount raisedNot disclosedmedium
Capitalization
Total fully-diluted shares260Mlow
Implied share price (illustrative only)~$25low
Primary equity type grantedISO/NSOhigh
Financials
Annual revenue (est.)$250Mmedium
EV / Revenue (implied)24.0xmedium
Headcount
Employees (now)1,200medium
Employees (12 months ago)900medium
12-month headcount growth+33%medium
Methodology inputs
Sector ETF proxyICLNmedium
ETF annual return (trailing 3-yr)4%medium

Funding history

Primary rounds reported in Bloomberg, WSJ, TechCrunch, Reuters, or SEC Form D filings (efts.sec.gov). Linked per round below.

Valuation progression (equity rounds)
Valuation progression · equity rounds
$6.0Blatest · Series E
Total growth
9×
Our estimate
$6.5B
$0.0B$1.9B$3.8B$5.7B$7.6BSeries A$3.7BSeries B$5.0BSeries ClatestSeries Eest.Est.
Primary round
Down round
Our estimate
Series E+20%2025-10-01
$6.0B
Led by Eclipse
Source: Redwood Materials news · confirmed by Bloomberg Oct 2025(source URL pending)
Series C+35%2022-08-09
$5.0B
Led by Goldman Sachs Asset Management · raised $692M
Source: Bloomberg Aug 2022(historical ref.)
Series B+429%2021-07-28
$3.7B
Led by T. Rowe Price · raised $700M
Source: TechCrunch Jul 2021(historical ref.)
Series A2020-09-15
$0.7B
Led by Breakthrough Energy Ventures · raised $40M
Source: TechCrunch Sep 2020(historical ref.)

Secondary market signals

Secondary market signals: bid/ask/trade indications from Hiive (hiive.com), Forge Global, Caplight Index, and tender prices reported in the press.

No active listings found

We monitor Hiive, Forge Global, and EquityZen for Redwood Materials listings. As of July 2026, no verified secondary market activity has been recorded.

Secondary listings for private companies appear without announcement and typically close within days. When a listing appears, it often signals an upcoming tender offer or funding round.

Primary round history as valuation signal

In the absence of secondary market data, the funding history below is the primary valuation anchor. Method C (time-decay) uses this data to estimate current value.

Series E · 2025-10$6B
Series C · 2022-08$5B
Series B · 2021-07$3.7B

Get notified when a listing appears

Pro subscribers get notified within 2 hours when a secondary listing for Redwood Materials is detected. Most employees first hear about tender offers days after the market already knows.

Get listing alerts →

Check directly: Hiive ↗ · Forge Global ↗ · SEC Form D ↗

Public peer comparables

Public peer comparables: editorial selection of public companies with the closest business model. EV/Revenue and growth from public 10-Q filings and Bloomberg, refreshed quarterly.

TickerCompanyEV / Revenue
CWENClearway Energy, Inc.5.4x
ENPHEnphase Energy, Inc.4.23x
FSLRFirst Solar, Inc.4.53x
NEENextEra Energy, Inc.6.52x

Confidence breakdown

How much we trust each of the four valuation methods for this specific company, and why.

Method A — Peer-multiple
weight 25%suppressed23% confidence
↳ Effectively excluded from the blend — this method is structurally unreliable for this company.
Growth-weighted peer EV/Revenue: 5.8x → 30% private-company discount → 4.1x on $250M revenue. Output implies less than half the recent market anchor ($6B) — this company is likely valued on optionality / non-revenue factors and Method A is structurally less reliable here.
Method B — Secondary-implied
weight 45%suppressed25% confidence
↳ Effectively excluded from the blend — this method is structurally unreliable for this company.
No verified secondary market data available — estimate relies on primary round, peer multiples, and sector momentum.
Method C — Primary time-decay
weight 20%→ $7.3B70% confidence
$6B round (2025-10-01) × 1.26× growth × 0.96× multiple decay over 0.8 years
Method D — Sector momentum
weight 10%→ $6.2B48% confidence
$6B × (1 + 4% p.j.)^0.8yr = $6.2B via ICLN ETF-proxy
Overall confidence
34%
Weighted average of the four methods. Above 60% is high, 35–60% medium, below 35% low.
Low

Worked example for an employee

Illustrative mechanics only — this shows how the equity model works, not a reliable value estimate.

Illustrative mechanics only

This example shows equity mechanics only. It is not a reliable estimate of current value because model support is weak (confidence 34%, spread 7.2×).

Show illustrative values (not a reliable estimate) ▸
Profile: a hypothetical employee who joined Redwood Materials 24 months ago (2024-07-10) with 2,000 options, on the standard 4-year vesting schedule with a 1-year cliff.
Vesting
1,000 of 2,000
50% vested at month 24
Implied share price (mid)
$25
weighted average of 4 methods — low confidence
Gross vested value
$24,809
vested shares × implied price
Net value
$24,809
no strike, gross = net
Tax (rough)
$2,745
US federal only · AMT risk: low
What if the next round is…
Up round +30%
$28,045
New round at +30% valuation, 15% new shares issued
Down round −30%
$14,472
New round at −30% valuation, 20% new shares (higher dilution in distress)
Secondary today
$21,087
Sale on the secondary market at the typical 15% discount to the mid estimate
These illustrative values use the same calculation engine as the live calculator, but the underlying model is low-confidence for Redwood Materials. Use your own numbers as a starting point only. Try the calculator →

Transparent assumptions

What we assumed where exact data isn't available. If any of these don't match your situation, the numbers above will be off.

Fully-diluted share count
260M shares
We don't have authoritative cap-table access for private companies. The number above is reconstructed from SEC Form D filings, secondary-market price-vs-valuation math, and leaked share-class summaries. Actual fully-diluted count (including unvested option pool and SAFEs) may differ by 5–15%.
Common-stock waterfall
1.0× to common
We assume a clean common-stock outcome — i.e. preferred-share liquidation preferences and ratchets do not extract value before common. In a down-exit, this assumption can be very wrong: preferred stack can take 30–70% of proceeds.
Private-company illiquidity discount
30% off public peers
Applied to Method A (peer-multiple). Per-company because category leaders with deep secondary markets and a clear IPO path warrant a smaller discount than early-stage names. The literature range is 10–35%; for Redwood Materials we use 30% based on secondary-market depth, valuation history, and proximity to liquidity.
Revenue growth assumption (Method C)
35% YoY
Compounded forward from the last primary date to today to estimate the company's value drift. Set per-company based on disclosed or reported ARR trajectory. Method C is further capped at 1.3× the most recent secondary trade (if any) to stop runaway extrapolation when revenue growth outpaces what the market is actually paying.
Sector ETF momentum (Method D)
ICLN @ 4%/year
Method D applies the trailing return of ICLN as a market-proxy adjustment to the primary valuation. Crude — meant as a tiebreaker when peer and secondary data conflict, not as a primary signal.
Outlier auto-downweight
Methods >50% from median get ½ weight
Robust-statistics safety net: any method whose output strays more than 50% from the median of the other three methods has its confidence weight halved when computing the blended mid-point. Prevents a single bad extrapolation from dragging the headline.
Recency decay for secondary trades
180-day half-life (e⁻ᵈ/¹⁸⁰)
A trade from 30 days ago counts ~5× more than one from 180 days ago. Tunable; some platforms use shorter half-lives.
Tax estimate
US federal only, single filer
Uses 2024 US federal brackets, ignoring state tax, NIIT, AMT credit recovery, and any other deductions. Treat as a directional sanity check, not a tax bill.
All data from public sources. Not investment, tax, or legal advice. Not affiliated with Redwood Materials. Last refreshed manually — see methodology for our update cadence.