Canadian Junior Public Markets Health Check: Surprising Resilience Thus Far, Some Concerns Looking Forward
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is widely recognized that Canada, along with other developed Western economies, has a significant public capital markets problem. Increasingly fewer operating companies are choosing to go public, limiting access to the most attractive growth-stage opportunities for retail investors. Thus far, analysis of the public company decline phenomenon in Canada has focused almost exclusively on the Canadian senior capital markets. Reasons for the lack of focus on the Canadian junior markets include: i) fragmented nature and inconsistent data accessibility, requiring extraction and collation of data from a variety of different underlying sources; and ii) the fact that Canadian junior capital markets are unique, primarily dealing with companies of a smaller size and earlier stage of maturity than one would encounter in other international public markets. Yet, the Canadian junior capital markets fill a critical role in the Canadian economy, in particular because of the lower level of access to institutional private capital for startup and growth-stage businesses in Canada compared to our American neighbours. This paper conducts a health check on the Canadian junior public markets. Surprisingly, the evidence demonstrates that the junior markets have proved resilient in the face of headwinds and the total number of listed operating companies on the junior stock exchanges in Canada has not followed the declining trendline of the senior markets. The makeup of issuers listed on Canadian junior public markets has evolved materially over the past 15 years; as the market has fragmented, new competitors have taken market share from the incumbent TSX Venture Exchange.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".