Key takeaways
- Top pick: Commonwealth Fusion Systems, best for: Utilities and data centre operators planning firm clean power. Google agreed in June 2025 to buy 200 MW of power from CFS's first ARC plant.
- Also near the top: Helion Energy, best for: Large power buyers interested in early fusion electricity; and TAE Technologies, best for: Investors and partners following long-running fusion programmes.
- How it was ranked: 10 deep tech companies compared. Each verdict is below.
Best Fusion Energy Companies: Top 10 Ranked. Commonwealth Fusion Systems ranks first, with a Lister Score of 97.0.
Commonwealth Fusion Systems leads for tokamak fusion, with close to $3 billion raised and a Google power deal, and
Helion Energy is furthest along on a commercial plant, building Orion to supply Microsoft.
Pacific Fusion is the best-funded newcomer, and
Proxima Fusion leads Europe with its stellarator designs.
Best Fusion Energy Companies in 2026, compared| RANK | ENTRY | BEST FOR | SCORE | FROM |
|---|
| 1 |  Commonwealth Fusion SystemsGoogle agreed in June 2025 to buy 200 MW of power from CFS's first ARC plant. | Utilities and data centre operators planning firm clean power | 97.0 | Custom |
|---|
|
| 2 |  Helion EnergyHelion signed a power purchase agreement with Microsoft in May 2023 to deliver at least 50 MW of fusion electricity, starting in 2028. | Large power buyers interested in early fusion electricity | 95.8 | Custom |
|---|
|
| 3 |  TAE TechnologiesTrump Media says it is targeting closing the TAE merger in the fourth quarter of 2026. | Investors and partners following long-running fusion programmes | 94.5 | Custom |
|---|
|
| 4 |  Pacific FusionPacific Fusion launched in October 2024 with more than $900 million in Series A funding led by General Catalyst. | Partners following inertial fusion outside national labs | 93.2 | Custom |
|---|
|
| 5 |  Proxima FusionGoogle and RWE joined Proxima Fusion's €411 million round in July 2026 as strategic investors. | Utilities and investors tracking fusion power | 92.0 | Custom |
|---|
|
| 6 |  Type One EnergyTVA issued a letter of intent to Type One Energy in September 2025 for potential deployment of its stellarator at Bull Run. | Utilities looking at fusion on retired fossil plant sites | 90.7 | Custom |
|---|
|
| 7 |  Tokamak EnergyUK Fusion Energy awarded Tokamak Energy a £70 million contract in 2026 to act as magnet systems partner for the UK's STEP fusion programme. | Fusion programmes that need superconducting magnet systems | 89.4 | Custom |
|---|
|
| 8 |  General FusionGeneral Fusion says it is the first publicly listed fusion company. | Investors who want public-market exposure to fusion | 88.1 | Custom |
|---|
|
| 9 |  Zap EnergyZap Energy was selected for the US Department of Energy's Milestone-Based Fusion Development Program. | Partners interested in compact, magnet-free fusion designs | 86.8 | Custom |
|---|
|
| 10 |  Thea EnergyThea Energy says its Series B will fund magnet manufacturing and the siting and construction of Eos. | Partners following simplified stellarator designs | 85.4 | Custom |
|---|
|
|
How to choose
Start from what you need it for. Where each entry fits best:
- Commonwealth Fusion Systems (#1): Utilities and data centre operators planning firm clean power
- Helion Energy (#2): Large power buyers interested in early fusion electricity
- TAE Technologies (#3): Investors and partners following long-running fusion programmes
- Pacific Fusion (#4): Partners following inertial fusion outside national labs
- Proxima Fusion (#5): Utilities and investors tracking fusion power
- Type One Energy (#6): Utilities looking at fusion on retired fossil plant sites
- Tokamak Energy (#7): Fusion programmes that need superconducting magnet systems
- General Fusion (#8): Investors who want public-market exposure to fusion
- Zap Energy (#9): Partners interested in compact, magnet-free fusion designs
- Thea Energy (#10): Partners following simplified stellarator designs
Each entry's full verdict is below.
The ranking, in detail
01
Compact tokamak fusion power
Commonwealth Fusion Systems, spun out of MIT and based in Devens, Massachusetts, is building SPARC, a compact tokamak designed to show net fusion energy, and plans its first ARC power plant in Chesterfield County, Virginia. It said in August 2025 it had raised close to $3 billion.
PROS- Large funding base for a fusion company
- Backed by Google and Eni
CONS- No net energy result yet
- Commercial power still years away
- Best for
- Utilities and data centre operators planning firm clean power
- Where it falls short
- It has not yet produced net energy and commercial power is still years away.
- Pick something else if
- you need immediate clean power generation.
97.0
02
Pulsed fusion plant under construction for Microsoft
Helion Energy, based in Everett, Washington, uses a pulsed, field-reversed configuration approach and began building Orion, its first commercial fusion plant, in Malaga, Washington, in 2025.
PROS- First fusion power purchase agreement
- Commercial plant site under construction
CONS- Ambitious timeline still unproven
- Approach differs from mainstream tokamak research
- Best for
- Large power buyers interested in early fusion electricity
- Where it falls short
- Its ambitious timeline remains unproven for buyers needing guaranteed delivery.
- Pick something else if
- you need a proven track record.
95.8
03
Beam-driven field-reversed configuration fusion
TAE Technologies, based in Foothill Ranch, California, has pursued field-reversed configuration fusion since 1998 and has spun out businesses in power electronics and cancer therapy. In December 2025 it agreed an all-stock merger with Trump Media & Technology Group valued at more than $6 billion.
PROS- One of the longest-running private fusion efforts
- Spin-off businesses in power and medicine
CONS- Pending merger adds uncertainty
- Power plant timeline not proven
- Best for
- Investors and partners following long-running fusion programmes
- Where it falls short
- The pending merger with Trump Media adds uncertainty to its future.
- Pick something else if
- you need a stable corporate structure without merger risks.
94.5
04
Pulser-driven inertial fusion
Pacific Fusion, based in Fremont, California, develops pulser-driven inertial fusion. In August 2026 it broke ground on a $1 billion research and manufacturing campus in Albuquerque, New Mexico, for its demonstration system.
PROS- Very large early funding
- Funding released against technical milestones
CONS- Young company
- Demonstration system not yet built
- Best for
- Partners following inertial fusion outside national labs
- Where it falls short
- It lacks a built demonstration system.
- Pick something else if
- you need an operational demo now.
93.2
05
Stellarator fusion power plants
Proxima Fusion, based in Munich with offices in Oxford and Zurich, designs stellarator power plants and plans Alpha, a net-energy demonstrator near Munich. In July 2026 it raised €411 million, which it describes as the largest private investment in European fusion.
PROS- Strategic backing from Google and RWE
- Builds on decades of stellarator research
CONS- Pre-revenue
- No power plant built yet
- Best for
- Utilities and investors tracking fusion power
- Where it falls short
- It is pre-revenue and has not built a power plant yet.
- Pick something else if
- you need a commercial fusion provider today.
92.0
06
Stellarator pilot plant with the Tennessee Valley Authority
Type One Energy, based in Knoxville, Tennessee, is designing Infinity Two, a 350 MWe stellarator pilot plant planned with the Tennessee Valley Authority at the former Bull Run Fossil Plant site.
PROS- Utility partner and an existing site
- Reuses retired power plant infrastructure
CONS- Pilot plant still years away
- Less funding than the largest rivals
- Best for
- Utilities looking at fusion on retired fossil plant sites
- Where it falls short
- Its pilot plant is still years away from completion.
- Pick something else if
- you need immediate fusion power generation.
90.7
07
Spherical tokamaks and superconducting magnets
Tokamak Energy, based near Oxford, UK, develops spherical tokamaks and high-temperature superconducting magnet systems, and supplies magnet technology to fusion and other industries.
PROS- Sells magnet technology today
- Partner to a national fusion programme
CONS- Smaller funding than US leaders
- No power plant date set
- Best for
- Fusion programmes that need superconducting magnet systems
- Where it falls short
- It has not set a date for its power plant.
- Pick something else if
- you need a confirmed commercial power plant launch date.
89.4
08
Magnetized target fusion
General Fusion, based in Richmond, British Columbia, develops magnetized target fusion and operates its LM26 test machine. It began trading on Nasdaq under the ticker GFUZ on July 13, 2026, after a merger with Spring Valley Acquisition Corp. III.
PROS- Public company with regular disclosure
- Large-scale test machine running
CONS- Recovered from a recent funding shortfall
- Smaller cash position than top rivals
- Best for
- Investors who want public-market exposure to fusion
- Where it falls short
- It has a smaller cash position than top rivals.
- Pick something else if
- you need more financial stability than it offers.
88.1
09
Sheared-flow-stabilized Z-pinch fusion
Zap Energy, based in Everett, Washington, develops sheared-flow-stabilized Z-pinch fusion, which confines plasma without large external magnets. It raised a $130 million Series D in October 2024.
PROS- No superconducting magnets needed
- Part of the DOE milestone programme
CONS- Plasma performance still short of power plant needs
- Early stage
- Best for
- Partners interested in compact, magnet-free fusion designs
- Where it falls short
- Plasma performance remains insufficient for commercial power plant requirements.
- Pick something else if
- you require a commercially viable fusion reactor today.
86.8
10
Stellarators built from simple planar magnets
Thea Energy, based in Kearny, New Jersey, designs stellarators made from arrays of simpler planar magnets and plans Eos, a large integrated stellarator. It raised an oversubscribed $100 million Series B in 2026, bringing private investment to $130 million.
PROS- Simpler magnets than classic stellarators
- Recently funded
CONS- Eos not yet built
- Smaller team and budget than the top rivals
- Best for
- Partners following simplified stellarator designs
- Where it falls short
- The Eos reactor is not yet built.
- Pick something else if
- you need a commercially deployed fusion device.
85.4
Put your company on this ranking
Ask us for a quote for one, two or three years. Nothing recurring.
Positions #4 to #10 are available on request. Contact us.
Not on this ranking?Tell us about your company and we will reply by email.
Frequently asked questions
What are the best Fusion Energy Companies?
Commonwealth Fusion Systems ranks first on Lister. Commonwealth Fusion Systems, spun out of MIT and based in Devens, Massachusetts, is building SPARC, a compact tokamak designed to show net fusion energy, and plans its first ARC power plant in Chesterfield County, Virginia. It said in August 2025 it had raised close to $3 billion.
What are the top 10 Fusion Energy Companies?
1. Commonwealth Fusion Systems; 2. Helion Energy; 3. TAE Technologies; 4. Pacific Fusion; 5. Proxima Fusion; 6. Type One Energy; 7. Tokamak Energy; 8. General Fusion; 9. Zap Energy; 10. Thea Energy.
Some links on Lister are affiliate links. Rankings are not affected.
Related rankings
