This article first appeared in Sifted’s Daily newsletter. Sign up here.
Recently, Rob Lacher, the founding partner of German and UK VC Visionaries Club, made a point that pricked my ears up: unlike other VC-backed areas like AI, when it comes to defence, startups shouldn’t be flashy and buzzy. Instead, they should be building quietly — and under the radar.
“Defence means there are lives at stake […] I think a lot of this happens sometimes better in stealth than if things are too public,” he said on Sifted’s podcast, adding that “the more impactful a technology really is in the battlefield, the less the companies would be interested in making that public.”
Some of the biggest defence startups in Europe are, naturally, not so quiet. German drones and AI software maker Helsing raised an eyewatering €600m yesterday, making dozens of headlines despite the company’s early attempts to be secretive about what it does. Fellow drone maker Quantum Systems, meanwhile, is very active on LinkedIn, with its founder Florian Seibel earning a reputation for being outspoken on social media.
But it brings up an interesting question: if you’re a defence tech startup, should you be building behind closed doors?
Historically some big defence companies like Helsing and US-based Palantir have been discreet, “quietly developing powerful AI solutions, then carefully customising them for their customers,” Flavia Levi, a deeptech-focused investor at German VC Join Capital, tells Sifted, suggesting this has worked well since governments appreciate confidentiality.
One European defence investor, who requested anonymity to preserve professional relationships, argued that the most impactful defence startups stay quiet — referencing the “hundreds” of Ukrainian companies that are helping to kill Russian soldiers.
But Levi says that today, “the European ecosystem is flooded with software-first defence startups, creating a crowded market where distinguishing your capabilities matters more than ever.”
She believes startups need to balance “silence with visibility.” “It’s no longer enough to be quietly competent; you must thoughtfully communicate why your solution matters, especially if you’re operating far from Europe’s central tech hubs, where visibility is naturally harder.”
It’s not just VCs who are thinking about this. “I have seen 300+ defence entrepreneurs struggling with the same problems,” Ties Klinkhamer, an analyst at defence-focused VC Keen Ventures, tells Sifted. “You see it a lot with people winning hackathons and […] getting in contact with VCs or institutions, and then, because of complexity, they lose their momentum.”
Max Gulde, cofounder and CEO of thermal intelligence spacetech Constellr, thinks that much of defence tech’s complexity and “its ambiguous public perception” comes from how we talk about the technology, not the tech itself. “There’s a dangerous trap some defence startups fall into: maintaining a public-facing narrative of ‘neutral tech’ while pursuing classified or sovereign use cases behind closed doors. That dissonance can erode trust,” he says.
Not everyone thinks it’s important for defence startups to fly under the radar. “I’ve never seen much benefit to any company staying in stealth,” Michael Jackson, a defence-focused VC based in Paris, tells me. “It’s a bit like the startups which try and insist on investors signing NDAs just to look at their deck — what any company does isn’t so unique. It comes off as not being confident.”
Jackson adds that it’s a competitive job market, and people want to show who they work for and see the company get attention. “It’s human nature,” he says.
Paul Heiden, the CEO of Optics11, a Dutch fiber optics startup aiming to protect Europe’s energy grid and subsea cables, believes that “openness, particularly with the media, builds credibility, attracts top talent and fosters public trust.”
It also helps with winning customers: “If you’re quietly tucked away in a far-flung corner of Europe, how will they even know you exist? […] How could shadowy entities be reliable partners?” Heiden says. “Silence breeds suspicion, not strength. If you can’t responsibly explain your purpose, maybe you’re building the wrong thing.”
My take is that you don’t want to be all talk and no action – particularly in an industry where, if something doesn’t work correctly, lives could be at stake. But the point about open communication fostering trust, accountability and — of course — attracting talent is really critical, especially considering many of these companies are building powerful and potentially dangerous AI-powered technology.
I’m curious to hear from you: are European defence techs being too loud and flashy? Which companies do you know are doing well building quietly? Let me know.
Read the orginal article: https://sifted.eu/articles/defence-tech-startups-stealth/
