Reflection raises $2B to be America’s open frontier AI lab, challenging DeepSeek


Reflection, a startup founded just last year by two former Google DeepMind researchers, has raised $2 billion at an $8 billion valuation, a whopping 15x leap from its $545 million valuation just seven months ago. The company, which originally focused on autonomous coding agents, is now positioning itself as both an open-source alternative to closed frontier labs like OpenAI and Anthropic, and a Western equivalent to Chinese AI firms like DeepSeek.

The startup was launched in March 2024 by Misha Laskin, who led reward modeling for DeepMind’s Gemini project, and Ioannis Antonoglou, who co-created AlphaGo, the AI system that famously beat the world champion in the board game Go in 2016. Their background developing these very advanced AI systems is central to their pitch, which is that the right AI talent can build frontier models outside established tech giants.

Along with its new round, Reflection announced that it has recruited a team of top talent from DeepMind and OpenAI, and built an advanced AI training stack that it promises will be open for all. Perhaps most importantly, Reflection says it has “identified a scalable commercial model that aligns with our open intelligence strategy.”

Reflection’s team currently numbers about 60 people — mostly AI researchers and engineers across infrastructure, data training, and algorithm development, per Laskin, the company’s CEO. Reflection has secured a compute cluster and hopes to release a frontier language model next year that’s trained on “tens of trillions of tokens,” he told TechCrunch.

“We built something once thought possible only inside the world’s top labs: a large-scale LLM and reinforcement learning platform capable of training massive Mixture-of-Experts (MoEs) models at frontier scale,” Reflection wrote in a post on X. “We saw the effectiveness of our approach first-hand when we applied it to the critical domain of autonomous coding. With this milestone unlocked, we’re now bringing these methods to general agentic reasoning.”

MoE refers to a specific architecture that powers frontier LLMs — systems that, previously, only large, closed AI labs were capable of training at scale. DeepSeek had a breakthrough moment when it figured out how to train these models at scale in an open way, followed by Qwen, Kimi, and other models in China.

“DeepSeek and Qwen and all these models are our wake up call because if we don’t do anything about it, then effectively, the global standard of intelligence will be built by someone else,” Laskin said. “It won’t be built by America.”

Techcrunch event

San Francisco
|
October 27-29, 2025

Laskin added that this puts the U.S. and its allies at a disadvantage because enterprises and sovereign states often won’t use Chinese models due to potential legal repercussions.

“So you can either choose to live at a competitive disadvantage or rise to the occasion,” Laskin said.

American technologists have largely celebrated Reflection’s new mission. David Sacks, the White House AI and Crypto Czar, posted on X: “It’s great to see more American open source AI models. A meaningful segment of the global market will prefer the cost, customizability, and control that open source offers. We want the U.S. to win this category too.”

Clem Delangue, co-founder and CEO of Hugging Face, an open and collaborative platform for AI builders, told TechCrunch of the round, “This is indeed great news for American open-source AI. Added Delangue, “Now the challenge will be to show high velocity of sharing of open AI models and datasets (similar to what we’re seeing from the labs dominating in open-source AI).”

Reflection’s definition of being “open” seems to center on access rather than development, similar to strategies from Meta with Llama or Mistral. Laskin said Reflection would release model weights — the core parameters that determine how an AI system works — for public use while largely keeping datasets and full training pipelines proprietary.

“In reality, the most impactful thing is the model weights, because the model weights anyone can use and start tinkering with them,” Laskin said. “The infrastructure stack, only a select handful of companies can actually use that.”

That balance also underpins Reflection’s business model. Researchers will be able to use the models freely, Laskin said, but revenue will come from large enterprises building products on top of Reflection’s models and from governments developing “sovereign AI” systems, meaning AI models developed and controlled by individual nations.

“Once you get into that territory where you’re a large enterprise, by default you want an open model,” Laskin said. “You want something you will have ownership over. You can run it on your infrastructure. You can control its costs. You can customize it for various workloads. Because you’re paying some ungodly amount of money for AI, you want to be able to optimize it as much as much as possible, and really that’s the market that we’re serving.”

Reflection hasn’t yet released its first model, which will be largely text-based, with multimodal capabilities in the future, according to Laskin. It will use the funds from this latest round to get the compute resources needed to train the new models, the first of which the company is aiming to release early next year.

Investors in Reflection’s latest round include Nvidia, Disruptive, DST, 1789, B Capital, Lightspeed, GIC, Eric Yuan, Eric Schmidt, Citi, Sequoia, CRV, and others.

Manus probably isn’t China’s second ‘DeepSeek moment’


Manus, an “agentic” AI platform that launched in preview last week, is generating more hype than a Taylor Swift concert.

The head of product at Hugging Face called Manus “the most impressive AI tool I’ve ever tried.” AI policy researcher Dean Ball described Manus as the “most sophisticated computer using AI.” The official Discord server for Manus grew to over 138,000 members in just a few days, and invite codes for Manus are reportedly selling for thousands of dollars on Chinese reseller app Xianyu.

But it’s not clear the hype is justified.

Manus wasn’t developed entirely from scratch. According to reports on social media, the platform uses a combination of existing and fine-tuned AI models, including Anthropic’s Claude and Alibaba’s Qwen, to perform tasks such as drafting research reports and analyzing financial filings.

Yet on its website, The Butterfly Effect — the Chinese company behind Manus — gives a few wild examples of what the platform supposedly can accomplish, from buying real estate to programming video games.

In a viral video on X, Yichao “Peak” Ji, a research lead for Manus, implied that the platform was superior to agentic tools such as OpenAI’s deep research and Operator. Manus outperforms deep research on a popular benchmark for general AI assistants called GAIA, Ji claimed, which probes an AI’s ability to carry out work by browsing the web, using software, and more.

“[Manus] isn’t just another chatbot or workflow,” Ji said in the video. “It’s a completely autonomous agent that bridges the gap between conception and execution […] We see it as the next paradigm of human-machine collaboration.”

But some early users say that Manus is no panacea.

Alexander Doria, the co-founder of AI startup Pleias, said in a post on X that he encountered error messages and endless loops while testing Manus. Other X users pointed out that Manus makes mistakes on factual questions and doesn’t consistently cite its work — and often misses information that’s easily found online.

My own experience with Manus hasn’t been incredibly positive.

I asked the platform to handle what seemed to me like a pretty straightforward request: order a fried chicken sandwich from a top-rated fast food joint in my delivery range. After about ten minutes, Manus crashed. On the second attempt, it found a menu item that met my criteria, but Manus couldn’t complete the ordering process — or provide a checkout link, even.

Manus
Trying to order fried chicken sandwiches with Manus is a frustrating experience.Image Credits:Manus

Manus similarly whiffed when I asked it to book a flight from NYC to Japan. Given instructions that I thought didn’t leave much room for ambiguity (e.g. “look for a business-class flight, prioritizing price and flexible dates”), the best Manus could do was serve up links to fares across several airline websites and airfare search engines like Kayak, some of which were broken.

Manus
Manus can’t book flights to Tokyo for you just yet.Image Credits:Manus

Hoping the next few tasks might be the charm, I told Manus to reserve a table for one at a restaurant within walking distance. It failed after a few minutes. Then I asked the platform to build a Naruto-inspired fighting game. It errored out half an hour in, which is when I decided to throw in the towel.

A spokesperson for Manus sent TechCrunch the following statement via DM:

“As a small team, our focus is to keep improving Manus and make AI agents that actually help users solve problems […] The primary goal of the current closed beta is to stress-test various parts of the system and identify issues. We deeply appreciate the valuable insights shared by everyone.”

So if Manusis is falling short of its technical promises, why did it blow up? A few factors contributed, such as the exclusivity created by a scarcity of invites.

Chinese media was quick to tout Manus as an AI breakthrough; publication QQ News called it “the pride of domestic products.” Meanwhile, AI influencers on social media spread misinformation about Manus’ capabilities. A widely-shared video showed a desktop program, ostensibly Manus, taking action across multiple smartphone apps. Ji confirmed that the video wasn’t, in fact, a demo of Manus.

Other influential AI accounts on X sought to draw comparisons between Manus and Chinese AI company DeepSeek — comparisons not necessarily rooted in fact. The Butterfly Effect didn’t develop any in-house models, unlike DeepSeek. And while DeepSeek made many of its technologies openly available, Monica hasn’t — at least not quite yet.

To be fair to The Butterfly Effect, Manus is in very early access. The company claims it’s working to scale computing capacity and fix issues as they’re reported. But as the platform currently exists, Manus appears to be a case of hype running ahead of technological innovation.

Updated 6:02 p.m. Pacific: Added a statement from a Manus spokesperson and corrected a misidentification of the company behind Manus.



DeepSeek: Everything you need to know about the AI chatbot app


DeepSeek has gone viral.

Chinese AI lab DeepSeek broke into the mainstream consciousness this week after its chatbot app rose to the top of the Apple App Store charts. DeepSeek’s AI models, which were trained using compute-efficient techniques, have led Wall Street analysts — and technologists — to question whether the U.S. can maintain its lead in the AI race and whether the demand for AI chips will sustain.

But where did DeepSeek come from, and how did it rise to international fame so quickly?

DeepSeek’s trader origins

DeepSeek is backed by High-Flyer Capital Management, a Chinese quantitative hedge fund that uses AI to inform its trading decisions.

AI enthusiast Liang Wenfeng co-founded High-Flyer in 2015. Wenfeng, who reportedly began dabbling in trading while a student at Zhejiang University, launched High-Flyer Capital Management as a hedge fund in 2019 focused on developing and deploying AI algorithms.

In 2023, High-Flyer started DeepSeek as a lab dedicated to researching AI tools separate from its financial business. With High-Flyer as one of its investors, the lab spun off into its own company, also called DeepSeek.

From day one, DeepSeek built its own datacenter clusters for model training. But like other AI companies in China, DeepSeek has been affected by U.S. export bans on hardware. To train one of its more recent models, the company was forced to use Nvidia H800 chips, a less-powerful version of a chip, the H100, available to U.S. companies.

DeepSeek’s technical team is said to skew young. The company reportedly aggressively recruits doctorate AI researchers from top Chinese universities. DeepSeek also hires people without any computer science background to help its tech better understand a wide range of subjects, per The New York Times.

DeepSeek’s strong models

DeepSeek unveiled its first set of models — DeepSeek Coder, DeepSeek LLM, and DeepSeek Chat — in November 2023. But it wasn’t until last spring, when the startup released its next-gen DeepSeek-V2 family of models, that the AI industry started to take notice.

DeepSeek-V2, a general-purpose text- and image-analyzing system, performed well in various AI benchmarks — and was far cheaper to run than comparable models at the time. It forced DeepSeek’s domestic competition, including ByteDance and Alibaba, to cut the usage prices for some of their models, and make others completely free.

DeepSeek-V3, launched in December 2024, only added to DeepSeek’s notoriety.

According to DeepSeek’s internal benchmark testing, DeepSeek V3 outperforms both downloadable, openly available models like Meta’s Llama and “closed” models that can only be accessed through an API, like OpenAI’s GPT-4o.

Equally impressive is DeepSeek’s R1 “reasoning” model. Released in January, DeepSeek claims R1 performs as well as OpenAI’s o1 model on key benchmarks.

Being a reasoning model, R1 effectively fact-checks itself, which helps it to avoid some of the pitfalls that normally trip up models. Reasoning models take a little longer — usually seconds to minutes longer — to arrive at solutions compared to a typical non-reasoning model. The upside is that they tend to be more reliable in domains such as physics, science, and math.

There is a downside to R1, DeepSeek V3, and DeepSeek’s other models, however. Being Chinese-developed AI, they’re subject to benchmarking by China’s internet regulator to ensure that its responses “embody core socialist values.” In DeepSeek’s chatbot app, for example, R1 won’t answer questions about Tiananmen Square or Taiwan’s autonomy.

A disruptive approach

If DeepSeek has a business model, it’s not clear what that model is, exactly. The company prices its products and services well below market value — and gives others away for free.

The way DeepSeek tells it, efficiency breakthroughs have enabled it to maintain extreme cost competitiveness. Some experts dispute the figures the company has supplied, however.

Whatever the case may be, developers have taken to DeepSeek’s models, which aren’t open source as the phrase is commonly understood but are available under permissive licenses that allow for commercial use. According to Clem Delangue, the CEO of Hugging Face, one of the platforms hosting DeepSeek’s models, developers on Hugging Face have created over 500 “derivative” models of R1 that have racked up 2.5 million downloads combined.

DeepSeek’s success against larger and more established rivals has been described as “upending AI” and ushering in “a new era of AI brinkmanship.” The company’s success was at least in part responsible for causing Nvidia’s stock price to drop by 18% on Monday, and for eliciting a public response from OpenAI CEO Sam Altman.

As for what DeepSeek’s future might hold, it’s not clear. Improved models are a given. But the U.S. government appears to be growing wary of what it perceives as harmful foreign influence.

TechCrunch has an AI-focused newsletter! Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Wednesday.

DeepSeek gets Silicon Valley talking


Since Chinese AI company DeepSeek released an open version of its reasoning model R1 at the beginning of this week, many in the tech industry have been making grand pronouncements about what the company achieved, and what it means for the state of AI.

Venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, for example, posted that DeepSeek is “one of the most amazing and impressive breakthroughs I’ve ever seen.”

R1 seemingly matches or beats OpenAI’s o1 model on certain AI benchmarks. And the company claims one of its models only cost $5.6 million to train, compared to the hundreds of millions of dollars that leading American companies pay to train theirs.

It also seems to have achieved that in the face of U.S. sanctions that prohibit the sale of advanced chips to Chinese companies. The MIT Technology Review writes that the company’s success illustrates how sanctions are “driving startups like DeepSeek to innovate in ways that prioritize efficiency, resource-pooling, and collaboration.” (On the other hand, the Wall Street Journal reports that DeepSeek’s Liang Wenfeng recently told China’s premier that American export restrictions still pose a bottleneck.)

Curai CEO Neal Khosla offered a simpler explanation, claiming that the company is a “ccp state psyop” that’s “faking the cost was low to justify setting price low and hoping everyone switches to it [to] damage AI competitiveness in the us.” (A Community Note has been attached to his post pointing out that Khosla offers no evidence for this, and that his father Vinod is an OpenAI investor.)

Meanwhile, journalist Holger Zschaepitz suggested DeepSeek could “could represent the biggest threat to US equity markets” — if a Chinese company can build a cutting-edge model at low cost, without access to advanced chips, it would call into question “the utility of the hundreds of billions worth of capex being poured into this industry.”

In response, Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan argued DeepSeek’s success would actually be good for its American competitors: “If training models get cheaper faster and easier, the demand for inference (actual real world use of AI) will grow and accelerate even faster, which assures the supply of compute will be used.”

And Meta’s Chief AI Scientist Yann LeCun argued against looking at DeepSeek’s announcement through the lens of China vs. the United States. Instead, he suggested the real lesson is that “open source models are surpassing proprietary ones.”

“DeepSeek has profited from open research and open source (e.g. PyTorch and Llama from Meta),” LeCun wrote. “They came up with new ideas and built them on top of other people’s work. Because their work is published and open source, everyone can profit from it.”

All of the debate seems to be driving consumers to try the product — as of Sunday afternoon, DeepSeek’s AI assistant is the top free app in the Apple App Store, just ahead of ChatGPT.