EIC Fund marks €1 billion of approved deep tech investments in its first year, but approvals are not the same as cash deployed
- ›The European Innovation Council Fund approved roughly €1 billion of equity investments in deep tech companies in its first year of operation.
- ›159 start-ups and SMEs selected via the EIC Accelerator had investments approved, while 71 have already secured co‑investments worth about three times the EIC amounts.
- ›The EIC combines grant support up to €2.5 million with equity from the EIC Fund ranging from roughly €0.5 million up to €15 million under the Accelerator and €10–30 million under STEP Scale Up.
- ›Approvals are distinct from disbursements and selected companies still need to attract follow‑on private capital to complete rounds and scale.
- ›The EIC Fund sits inside a broader EU innovation ecosystem with the EIB as investment adviser, an independent fund manager, the Trusted Investor Network, and new initiatives such as the Scaleup Europe Fund and STEP Scale Up.
EIC Fund approves ~€1 billion of deep tech investments in its first year — what it means and what to watch
On 14 November 2023 the European Commission announced that the European Innovation Council Fund had approved nearly €1 billion in venture investments in deep tech companies since the Fund started operations in September 2022. The figure represents investment approvals for 159 start‑ups and SMEs that had been selected under the EIC Accelerator pathway. The announcement positions the EIC Fund as a major public investor in European deep tech but it is important to distinguish approvals from cash actually disbursed and to understand the remaining steps these companies must clear to complete funding rounds and scale.
What the announcement covers
The Commission statement made three core claims. First, that approvals for nearly €1 billion in equity investments were granted to 159 companies selected under the EIC Accelerator between September 2022 and November 2023. Second, that the EIC Fund acts as the venture arm of the European Innovation Council which operates under Horizon Europe to support high‑risk breakthrough technologies. Third, that in many cases EIC decisions catalyse additional private capital with 71 companies reported to have completed co‑investment rounds representing roughly three times the EIC Fund amounts.
Core numbers, recent results and examples
| Metric or item | Value or example | Source / comment |
| Investment approvals in first year | ≈ €1.0 billion | Commission press statement, Nov 14 2023 |
| Companies with approved investments | 159 start‑ups and SMEs | Selected under EIC Accelerator |
| Companies that completed co‑investment process | 71 companies | Reported to have attracted co‑investment equal to about 3x EIC commitments |
| Recent Accelerator cut | 47 additional companies selected | Total package of €349 million of support of which €236 million earmarked for investments |
| EIC Fund capitalisation | Over €4 billion | EIC Fund profile under Horizon Europe |
| Portfolio and impact (overview from EIC reporting) | 300+ EIC Fund companies; €6.5 billion allocated across EIC programmes; €3.5 leveraged per €1 invested in some reporting | Figures come from EIC published data and Impact reports |
| Company examples mentioned | Quandela, Microsure, Methinks | Illustrative portfolio companies highlighted by the EIC |
Selected company examples in the announcement illustrate the types of technology being targeted. Quandela is a French quantum photonics company pursuing optical quantum computing and recently raised a large external round. Microsure is a Netherlands‑based developer of a robot for microsurgery that has attracted tens of millions in funding for clinical development. Methinks is a Spanish company using AI for early stroke detection and announced convertible loans ahead of further fundraising.
How the EIC investment process works in practice
Key terms and instruments explained
Funding instruments at a glance
| Instrument | Primary support type | Typical equity range | Grant element | Target stage (TRL) and objective |
| EIC Accelerator | Blend of grant and equity | ≈ €0.5M to €10–15M | Up to €2.5M | Late prototype to early scale. Help SMEs validate, commercialise and scale disruptive tech |
| EIC STEP Scale Up | Equity only major investments | €10M to €30M | None as equity, but BAS available | Support very large rounds to create global scaleups in strategic technologies |
| EIC Pre‑Accelerator (Widening) | Grant and coaching | No equity | €300k–€1M lump sums in some calls | Early stage deep tech in widening countries to raise readiness to attract further investment |
| EIC Pathfinder | Grants for research | No equity | Up to €4M | Very early stage research and proof of concept TRL 1–4 |
| EIC Transition | Grants to mature technology | No equity | Up to €2.5M | Move technology from lab validation towards market validation TRL 3–6 |
Governance, roles and checks
The EIC Fund operates within a multi‑actor governance model. The European Commission is the shareholder of the Fund. An independent Fund Manager administers portfolio and investment decisions with the EIB acting as investment adviser and often as investor of record for technical due diligence. The EIC Fund Board oversees strategy while advisory committees and company board representatives support portfolio oversight.
Context: why the EU is deploying public venture capital for deep tech
European policy makers frame the EIC Fund as a way to close the so‑called ‘valley of death’ for deep tech that is capital intensive and has long lead times to commercialisation. The public role is to take strategic, patient positions to catalyse private capital, retain industrial value and support technologies that underlie EU strategic autonomy such as semiconductors, quantum, advanced manufacturing and climate tech.
Critical look and remaining questions
The headline of €1 billion in one year is an encouraging signal of public intent but requires scrutiny. First, an approval is not equivalent to money disbursed. Investment approvals follow selection and due diligence steps, but closing rounds depends on legal, commercial and co‑investment realities. Second, the co‑investment multiple of three times EIC capital is positive but so far applies to 71 companies and may reflect early stage announcements. Private follow‑on financing remains conditional on market appetite, commercial milestones and macroeconomic conditions. Third, the public investor model introduces political and policy trade‑offs in portfolio construction. The EIC Fund has introduced provisions to protect EU interests including voting or shareholder agreements in strategic areas but preserving commercial governance and attracting top tier co‑investors simultaneously is a delicate balance.
Other open questions include geographic distribution of approved investments, the sectoral concentration of portfolio companies, the time taken from approval to disbursement, the eventual exit pathways and returns for the Fund, and the transparency of valuation and term‑setting in blended public‑private transactions. For long term impact, the EIC will need demonstrable exits, follow‑on funding rounds led by private investors and demonstrable industrial scaling inside Europe.
What to watch next
Key indicators to follow in coming quarters are: the proportion of approved investments actually closed and disbursed, the total private capital mobilised against EIC investments, sector and country distribution of investments to check for geographic concentration, progress of STEP Scale Up investments and the launch of the Scaleup Europe Fund and its fund manager appointment, and evidence of exits or large follow‑on rounds that signal successful scaling.
Bottom line
The EIC Fund reaching approvals of approximately €1 billion within its first year is a meaningful milestone and reflects a significant public push to underwrite risky deep tech. The real test will be how many of these approvals translate into closed rounds, sustainable scale‑ups based in Europe, and measurable market impact. Continued transparency on disbursements, co‑investment follow‑through and portfolio performance will be critical for evaluating whether the Fund achieves its policy goals without becoming overly dependent on political objectives rather than market discipline.

