Eliezer Avraham is the founder of Bridgei2, a Herzlian business advisory firm operating in Israel–India strategic relations, defense cooperation, enterprise innovation and energy security. He writes and advises on geopolitical and market dynamics, focusing on defense‑driven enterprise strategy and strategic partnerships.
(Oct. 13, 2026 / JNS)
Israel’s innovation engine continues to generate global impact, yet the domestic financial system has not evolved at the same pace, creating growing pressure on Israel’s ability to retain economic value.
Israel’s capital markets delivered exceptional results in 2025. Public and private transactions exceeded $111 billion, nearly quadrupling over the previous year and surpassing the country’s earlier record. Equity indexes rose sharply, foreign institutional holdings increased, and the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange (TASE) remained fully operational throughout two and a half years of conflict.
Early indicators from 2026 suggest that this momentum has continued, with elevated trading volumes, secondary offerings from leading technology firms and rising foreign participation. These achievements demonstrate a market that has earned global attention and shown remarkable resilience under pressure; yet the fundamental weaknesses that limit long‑term domestic capital formation have not materially changed. The country risk discount persists, domestic institutional allocations remain low and the outward migration of high‑growth companies continues to shape the market’s future trajectory.
Recent TASE reforms, including the transition to Monday through Friday trading and upgrades to clearing and settlement systems, have increased liquidity and strengthened foreign engagement. These improvements are meaningful, but they do not address the deeper issues that constrain Israel’s ability to retain value.
Israeli capital markets have continued to outperform global benchmarks even during periods of conflict, which highlights a level of resilience that stands in contrast to the long‑term challenges that still limit domestic capital formation. The momentum of 2026 strengthens the paradox rather than resolves it, revealing a market that is increasingly global in performance but insufficiently anchored in domestic prosperity.
Cybersecurity and artificial intelligence have become the dominant forces within Israel’s innovation landscape. These sectors attract significant global investment, and Israeli firms play critical roles in protecting infrastructure, financial systems and national security networks around the world. Artificial intelligence companies are developing tools that influence health care, logistics, defense and finance, drawing interest from investors in the United States, the United Kingdom, India and other major markets. These industries have become the primary drivers of Israel’s global reputation for technological excellence, yet their success has accelerated a trend that carries long‑term consequences.
Most Israeli cybersecurity companies are migrating from Israel to California, where founders can access deeper capital markets, larger customer bases and late‑stage financing that Israel cannot yet provide at scale. When headquarters move abroad, tax bases shift, senior talent follows and future growth increasingly occurs outside Israel. Israel is producing world‑class companies, but it is not consistently retaining the long‑term benefits of their growth. The outward migration of these firms reflects a structural imbalance between Israel’s innovation capacity and the depth of its domestic financial system.
Israel continues to generate new technology companies at a rate that far exceeds its size. Updated global rankings show that Tel Aviv University, Hebrew University and the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology are among the most productive institutions in the world for founders of U.S. unicorn companies. Tel Aviv University ranks third globally among non‑United States universities for producing founders of United States venture‑backed unicorns, ahead of institutions such as Tsinghua University, Imperial College London and INSEAD.
Israel does not have a founder problem; it has a financial‑architecture problem.
Recent research by Stanford’s Ilya Strebulaev shows that eight of the top 25 non‑American universities by unicorn founder count are Israeli, underscoring how disproportionately strong the country’s founder pipeline has become. Israel’s founder output is also exceptionally dense relative to its population size, producing far more high‑growth entrepreneurs per capita than any other advanced economy.
This university pipeline operates in parallel with the Israel Defense Forces’ intelligence units, which function as a second national institution of technical training. Unit 8200, Unit 81 and related cyber and signals intelligence programs expose young Israelis to advanced software engineering, artificial intelligence and cybersecurity challenges at an early age. The combination of elite university training and military technical experience creates a dual‑track founder engine that no other country replicates. Yet the outward migration of companies has accelerated even faster, and Israel is losing many of them to foreign markets where capital is deeper and scale is more accessible.
Israel’s technology sector has long celebrated its exit culture. High‑profile acquisitions and international listings have brought prestige and liquidity to founders and early investors. Yet the central question is no longer whether Israeli companies can exit, but where the long‑term value of those exits ultimately resides. When firms list in New York or London, or sell to multinational corporations, the strategic center of gravity often moves abroad. Intellectual property, senior leadership, and future growth increasingly occur outside Israel. In the past five years, Israel’s five largest technology acquisitions have generated more than seventy billion dollars in founder and employee liquidity, yet the long‑term corporate tax base and future revenue streams from these companies now accrue almost entirely abroad.
This pattern directly affects domestic growth. Israeli pension funds and institutional investors have steadily reduced their exposure to Israeli technology. A decade ago, approximately 40% of private institutional allocations were directed to Israeli funds. Today, that figure has fallen below twenty percent, with more than 2.5 trillion shekels rotating outward. Foreign participation in the Israeli capital markets has risen sharply since 2023, and international investors now account for a significant share of daily liquidity. This shift illustrates how global capital is increasingly replacing domestic institutional activity at the core of the market, strengthening foreign markets while weakening Israel’s ability to retain long‑term value.
Israel’s capital markets do not operate in isolation from demographic trends. In recent years, net emigration has increased, particularly among highly skilled professionals in technology, finance, and advanced research. At the same time, aliyah has continued, but the composition of new arrivals has shifted, with fewer individuals entering sectors that directly influence capital formation and market depth. These population flows affect the availability of domestic talent, the scale of entrepreneurial activity and the long‑term capacity of Israel’s financial system to support sustained growth.
The outward movement of skilled professionals mirrors the outward migration of Israeli companies. When founders relocate to California or other global hubs, senior employees often follow, and the domestic ecosystem loses both human capital and future earnings potential. This trend reduces domestic liquidity, limits institutional participation and reinforces the structural weaknesses that constrain Israel’s capital markets. Population flows therefore matter not as a social phenomenon, but as an economic factor that influences the ability of Israel’s financial system to retain value and support long‑term national prosperity.
Three structural gaps define Israel’s current capital market landscape: the country risk discount, the persistent rotation of domestic institutional capital toward foreign markets and the absence of a structured credit ecosystem capable of supporting domestic growth at scale. These gaps limit the ability of Israel’s capital markets to absorb and scale the companies that the country produces. TASE Plus, the exchange’s growth‑market platform, has not yet scaled to match Israel’s founder pipeline. Strengthening this segment would help anchor more Israeli companies domestically, deepen liquidity and reduce reliance on foreign listings.
Closing these gaps is essential if Israel wishes to retain the value created by its most successful companies. The country must expand pre‑IPO institutional pools, modernize regulatory frameworks, deepen credit markets and strengthen cross‑border capital corridors with the United States, the United Kingdom and India. Israel has already demonstrated that it can lead the world in innovation. The next test is whether it can build a financial system capable of converting that innovation into sustained domestic prosperity. Israel does not have a founder problem; it has a financial‑architecture problem. The country produces world‑class companies, but its markets are not yet built to keep them.