For decades, going public gave everyday investors an opportunity to participate in the growth of some of America’s most successful companies. But the path from startup to IPO has changed.

Companies can now stay private for years while raising enormous amounts of capital and increasing substantially in value. By the time everyday investors finally get access, a significant period of growth may have already occurred.

That raises a difficult question: Are rules designed to protect everyday investors also preventing them from participating in potential wealth creation?

Companies Are Going Public Later

The shift isn’t just anecdotal. According to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s 2025 Staff Report on capital formation, the median age of an IPO issuer reached 14 years in 2024, compared with six years in 2000.

More recent data reinforces the trend. WilmerHale’s 2026 Venture Capital Report found that the median time from initial funding to IPO for venture-backed companies increased to 7.1 years in 2025. The median amount raised before an IPO more than doubled from the previous year to $167.8 million, while the median pre-IPO valuation increased 177% to $909 million.

In other words, companies can arrive on the public markets much older, better funded and more valuable than companies going public decades ago.

That can be good for the companies. But what does it mean for investors waiting on the other side?

Everyday Investors Want Earlier Access

DealMaker , an investment technology platform that helps companies raise capital from retail investors, recently commissioned a survey of more than 2,000 U.S. adults. It found that 67% of respondents believe everyday people should be able to benefit from AI’s growth as retail investors.

More tellingly, 63% expressed concern that everyday investors could eventually buy into highly valued companies such as OpenAI and Anthropic after insiders have already captured much of the upside.

Rebecca Kacaba, CEO and co-founder of DealMaker, believes the changing IPO timeline is altering where investors have opportunities to participate. “There is a huge amount of the wealth creation that’s happening while companies stay private longer,” Kacaba told me.

She argues for what she calls an “ownership economy,” where more people have opportunities to invest in companies before they reach the public markets.

Earlier Access Comes with Greater Risk

There is an obvious problem with that argument: Private companies can be extremely risky investments .

Earlier-stage businesses can fail. Private investments can be difficult to sell. Investors may also have considerably less information available to evaluate a private company than they would a publicly traded one.

Kacaba acknowledges the trade-off. “The earlier stage you go, the riskier the investment is,” she said. Her argument is that greater access doesn’t have to mean unlimited access. Smaller investment amounts, diversification and regulations that limit how much some non-accredited investors can invest can provide safeguards.

That gets to the heart of the debate.

Historically, restricting access to certain private investments has been justified partly as investor protection. But when companies remain private for much longer and accumulate significant value before an IPO, those restrictions can have another consequence: limiting who gets an opportunity to participate during those years.

The Rules May Need to Catch Up with the Market

This doesn’t mean everyone should start investing in private companies. Nor does it mean getting into a company before its IPO guarantees superior returns. Earlier access brings earlier risk, and some companies that look promising will inevitably fail.

But the market has changed.

The debate therefore shouldn’t be reduced to whether retail investors need protection or deserve access. We need to consider how to accomplish both.

Can regulations provide appropriate safeguards while giving more investors the opportunity to participate in private-company growth? Can smaller investment minimums and diversification make private investing more accessible without encouraging people to take risks they cannot afford?

Those are increasingly important questions as some of America’s most closely watched companies remain outside the public markets.

The debate over private-market access isn’t simply about getting into the next blockbuster IPO early. It’s about whether an investing system built when companies went public much earlier still works in a market where businesses can become extraordinarily valuable while remaining private.

Investor protection matters. So does access to opportunity.

As more wealth is potentially created before the IPO, finding the right balance between the two may become one of the defining investing questions of the next decade.

Melissa Houston, CPA, CEPA , is a Fractional CFO and business value advisor who helps founder-led businesses improve financial performance, build enterprise value and prepare for a future exit. She is the host of The Sellable Firm Podcast and author of Cash Confident: An Entrepreneur's Guide to Creating a Profitable Business .

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and are intended for informational purposes only. They should not be considered accounting, tax, legal, or financial advice. Readers should consult qualified professionals regarding their specific circumstances.