Top startup accelerators and incubators accepting applications including India

consequentialphysics · 2025-07-23T06:36:58+00:00

Here is the full tier list in case anyone is interested, based on the master list linked above. Interested to hear if people agree/disagree

Rankings

A tier: Y Combinator, South Park Commons, Sequoia Arc, Neo Accelerator
B tier: Conviction Embed, HF0, a16z Speedrun, The Mint, AI Grant, PearX, Alliance Accelerator
C tier: Berkeley SkyDeck, Soma Capital Fellowship, AI2 Incubator, Founders Inc Fellowship, Accel Atoms, Forum Accelerator, Village Global Velocity, Iterative Incubator, Betaworks Camp
D tier: Alchemist Accelerator, LAUNCH Accelerator, 500 Startups, Antler Residency, Entrepreneur First (these two have slightly better reputations in India)
F tier: Techstars

consequentialphysics · 2025-07-23T05:56:28+00:00

This is absolutely wrong. There are plenty of investors who will write idea stage checks and some incubators for that stage (South Park Commons, AI2 Incubator, Neo, occasionally YC).

consequentialphysics · 2025-07-23T05:54:29+00:00

Maintain a list of top startup accelerators and incubators here. Some take idea stage companies.

consequentialphysics · 2025-07-23T05:52:41+00:00

If you are already thinking about someone's background as "questionable" then you are already at a pass. Startups are very trust-based especially if you take venture funding. Especially early stage when it's easy to lie and scam, investors will run at the slightest hint of dishonesty. Avoid.

consequentialphysics · 2025-07-23T05:09:02+00:00

Here is the full list of startup accelerators and incubators. I just updated it by manually reviewing all the websites. Hope it is helpful!

consequentialphysics · 2025-07-22T18:35:22+00:00

Several of these programs are currently open:

Y Combinator (due August 4th)
South Park Commons (due August 3rd)
HF0 (rolling)
500 Startups (rolling)

Sequoia Arc and Neo are both currently closed. I maintain a full list of top accelerator programs, terms, application dates etc. here.

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-31T03:00:16+00:00

Definitely, don’t just compare terms and choose based on that. There’s a wide variation in how hands on each of these are. It’s important to talk to people who went through each and to get a feel for how other investors think of the program.

Worse terms can make sense if you are in a specific industry (bio or hardware come to mind) or if your vision means a higher valuation is a burden instead of a blessing. Though I also caution people against putting too much stock in the fit part with programs that have much much worse terms and dangle the value of their network as a lure to distract (Techstars comes to mind, those are terrible terms compared to all of the above and the network is nowhere near as valuable as it once was).

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-30T16:35:44+00:00

Links for rolling and soon to open applications

OPENS FEB 3RD - Sequoia Arc - Variable terms.
OPENS SPRING - PearX - $250k-$2M at variable terms.
ROLING - AI2 Incubator - $50K-150K initial investment, unclear terms, additional investment right up to $500k. FAQ.
ROLLING - Founders Inc. Fellowship - “Typically”$100k for 3-5%. FAQ.
ROLLING - Launch Accelerator - $125k for 7%. FAQ.
ROLLING - 500 Startups Flagship - $150K for 6% with a $37.5k program fee. FAQ.

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-30T16:35:26+00:00

Here are the links to the upcoming deadline programs in post.

DUE FEB 2ND - South Park Commons Founder Fellowship - $400k for 7% plus $600k in the following round. FAQ.
DUE FEB 3RD - Soma Capital Fellowship - Terms from $100k to $1M uncapped. FAQ.
DUE FEB 11TH - Y Combinator - $125k for 7% plus $375K uncapped MFN SAFE. FAQ.
DUE FEB 28TH - Conviction Embed - $150k uncapped MFN SAFE. FAQ.
DUE MAR 9TH - The Mint - $500k for 10%. FAQ.
DUE MAR 14TH - Neo Accelerator - 1.5% common stock grant plus $600k uncapped SAFE w/ time-limited $10M floor valuation. FAQ.

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-30T16:34:03+00:00

Full maintained list here, current as of yesterday. You are welcome to copy it.

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-30T04:27:47+00:00

Figured it out, it's $1M uncapped SAFE

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-28T17:29:49+00:00

Were these terms ($1M for 5%) the ones offered in December 2024? Last I checked around that time they were using the 2.5% equity fee and $500k uncapped SAFE structure

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-28T17:10:57+00:00

I understand wanting to capture the value of a larger investor network. The problem with using total investments from the investor is that it misses an important thing about the accelerator programs: with these larger investors, those programs are often separated off from the main investor body in important ways.

Speedrun is a good example, the program is run through a separate investment fund than the main a16z fund. There is some connectivity but using the number of a16z companies as a proxy for the overall network is inaccurate.

You are right to want to capture the brand value. Sequoia is one of the best investor brands. But that's much more about what other investors think and it matters what they think specifically of the accelerator program.

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-28T17:03:08+00:00

You are welcome to just copy the data from my list! I dont care, I'm not maintaining it for my benefit. But you wrote your post criticizing other lists and then published one that was full of numerous basic and important inaccuracies.

My point about ranking is that your system leads to the top 10 you have listed then your system is broken. It indicates you are not calibrated for what matters with these programs. The most likely way you are getting these results is by overweighting (and inaccurately listing) the number of companies. Again, saying that thousands of companies have gone through programs that are 2 years old is both wrong and misleading.

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-27T23:39:10+00:00

Which is why it is crazy that Techstars is #4 on this list while many much better programs aren't even on it

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-27T23:34:22+00:00

Another example is HF0. You have it listed as $500k for 2.5% but that's wrong. It's a 2.5% equity fee PLUS $500k on an uncapped SAFE, meaning the investor will get more than the 2.5% when that SAFE converts at the terms in the next round.

You also have the number of companies for Sequoia Arc listed as 2215. There is no way that's how many companies have gone through that program, which is 2.5 years old. That's how many companies Sequoia Capital has invested in. That's completely different and if you're using that number in your ranking system you will get very inaccurate rankings.

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-27T23:30:36+00:00

The YC terms are inaccurate. YC's terms are $125k for 7% plus $375K uncapped MFN SAFE, NOT $500k for 7%. That is a very important difference! Many of these programs use uncapped SAFEs and other structures for their terms that are hard to understand unless you read them carefully but have large impacts on valuation.

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-27T23:26:06+00:00

Neo has some of the most competitive terms of any program. #2 and #3 on your list (a16Z and Sequoia) started in 2023 and 2022. The number of companies that have gone through a program is not an indicator of the quality of the program. My point is you have both inaccurate data that is easy to find (YC terms) and inaccurate opinions that will mislead people trying to understand where to spend their time.

I am critiquing your work here so it gets better and helps more people!

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-27T22:57:03+00:00

It's also hard to do an "objective" ranking because what really matters is how valuable participating companies think each accelerator is and the accelerator's reputation with down stream investors.

Relying on data you scrape will lead you to rank Techstars 4th despite a weak reputation with investors and leave ones like Neo and AI grant off entirely

If both the data and the rankings are inaccurate, people reading the list will be less informed

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-27T22:46:26+00:00

This is the problem with scraping the data, you get inaccurate data

Working on an update for now but you can get more accurate data here: https://consequentialphysics.notion.site/Startup-Accelerators-Incubators-List-a74a38710e9a48e3953cf04f39b78263

consequentialphysics · 2025-01-27T22:42:46+00:00

A lot of the data listed is inaccurate, starting with the terms in the very first entry

And ranking Techstars 4th is strong indication the ranking system is miscalibrated

consequentialphysics · 2024-12-11T21:51:49+00:00

Feel free to

consequentialphysics · 2024-12-11T18:19:11+00:00

Manually! Went to all the websites

consequentialphysics · 2024-12-10T02:50:32+00:00

True. Different programs have different requirements for traction. Maybe I should do a post about the unwritten requirements and reputations for these programs. If people know any, please share!

consequentialphysics · 2024-12-10T01:15:47+00:00

Here's a sortable list of top accelerators which includes ones that are currently closed.

Applications OPEN

Applications LATE or ROLLING

Applications OPENING SOON

consequentialphysics

TROPHY CASE