Sequoia and Founders Fund back Stark Defence at 3.5B-euro valuation, Bloomberg says
Bloomberg reports the German loitering‑munitions maker is valued at 3.5 billion euros after new backing from Sequoia and Founders Fund.
By Ryan Merket · Published
Why it matters
Stark Defence's valuation shows Silicon Valley investors are underwriting European defense startups against government procurement, not consumer-style growth.

Bloomberg Technology reported on June 23, 2026, that Sequoia Capital and Founders Fund backed Stark Defence at a 3.5 billion euro valuation.
The valuation puts Stark Defence in the center of Europe's new defense-tech trade: small, software-heavy weapons makers that can turn Ukraine battlefield lessons into NATO procurement lines faster than legacy primes. It also turns a German loitering-munitions supplier, still working through the usual gap between prototype, trials and fielded reliability, into one of the most richly priced defense startups in Europe.
Uwe Horstmann is CEO of Stark Defence. He moved into the role in October 2025 as the business was trying to convert wartime demand into production commitments.
Stark Defence says its flagship system, Virtus, is a software-defined one-way effector integrated with Minerva, Stark Defence's command-and-control software, and designed for swarm deployment or operation alongside intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance drones. Stark Defence lists Virtus specifications including more than 130 kilometers of range, up to 90 minutes of flight time, a payload of up to 5 kilograms, and a 250 kilometer-per-hour attack speed.
The round follows a procurement breakthrough
The financing follows a concrete market signal from Berlin. On February 25, 2026, Germany's parliamentary budget committee approved an initial 540 million euro tranche for loitering-munition systems from Helsing and Stark Defence, Defence Industry Europe reported. The committee capped the framework at a maximum of 1 billion euros per supplier and required the Defence Ministry to report back before additional purchases.
Stark Defence then said on February 26 that it had signed a framework agreement with the German Armed Forces for Virtus, with deliveries starting in 2026 and full delivery of several thousand systems within two years following successful qualification.
That is the detail that explains the price. A 3.5 billion euro valuation is not just a bet that the drone is useful. It is a bet that German and allied procurement offices will keep buying attritable, software-updatable strike systems in volumes that look more like munitions than aircraft programs.
NATO's own spending framework gives that thesis air cover. At the 2025 Hague summit, allies committed to investing 5% of GDP annually on core defense requirements and defense- and security-related spending by 2035, with up to 1.5% of GDP available for areas including innovation and strengthening the defense industrial base, according to NATO. That creates a pool of budgetary oxygen for companies like Stark Defence, Helsing, Anduril and Quantum Systems, but it does not remove the harder question: who can manufacture reliable systems at military scale, under political oversight, and still update software fast enough to survive electronic warfare.
Sequoia and Founders Fund are buying speed
The investor lineup is the other story. Sequoia's role signals that mainstream Silicon Valley capital no longer treats European weapons manufacturing as an edge-case mandate. Founders Fund's role is less surprising. Peter Thiel's orbit has long been associated with defense and national-security technology, and German scrutiny of his Stark Defence exposure was already public before this round.
Correctiv reported in February that Germany's Defence Ministry told lawmakers Thiel, through Thiel Capital, was one of around 50 minority shareholders in Stark Defence, with a stake below 10% and no seat on the supervisory board. Correctiv also reported that lawmakers were asking whether a separate Founders Fund investment had been considered in that assessment. The politics are not a side note. Stark Defence is selling systems into sovereign defense programs, and investor nationality, influence rights and export-control boundaries become part of the product's acceptability.
Stark Defence has tried to answer the operational side by emphasizing field testing and production pace. In April 2026, Stark Defence said it participated in Bundeswehr trials using Virtus and Minerva with Quantum Systems' Vector reconnaissance drone, framing the exercise around shortening the time between detection and engagement.
That is exactly where the category is moving. Helsing's HX-2 is marketed as a software-defined AI strike drone with up to 100 kilometers of range and integration into Altra for coordinated swarm strikes. Anduril has pushed a similar systems-plus-production argument in the U.S. with its Bolt and Bolt-M lines and its Barracuda-500M production agreement. Rheinmetall, meanwhile, gives Germany a familiar industrial-prime path for loitering munitions, even as startups argue that the procurement cycle has to move at drone-war speed.
The open question is execution, not demand
The demand signal is clear. Germany wants thousands of loitering munitions. NATO wants higher defense spending. Ukraine has shown that small autonomous and semi-autonomous systems can impose strategic cost on larger forces. The open question is whether Stark Defence can turn that demand into delivered, qualified systems at the pace its valuation now assumes.
That means the next test is less about whether venture capital is willing to fund defense. Bloomberg's reported round answers that. The sharper test is whether Horstmann and the Stark Defence team can operate in two clocks at once: the startup clock that rewards rapid iteration, and the sovereign-procurement clock that requires qualification, oversight, export compliance and political trust.
If Stark Defence clears that bar, the round will look like an early claim on Europe's next defense industrial layer. If Stark Defence stumbles, it will become the cautionary version of the same story: that venture money can accelerate weapons startups, but cannot by itself manufacture reliability, legitimacy or battlefield trust.