our fund is known for its focus on early-stage investments. Against this backdrop, how do Ukrainian startups compare? Are they ready to compete for investment on equal terms with American and European projects?
The market does not give anyone a discount based on where a company comes from — and that is fair. Funds invest private investors’ money, and venture capital is, first and foremost, a business.
The selection criteria are standard regardless of geography. The first thing we look at is capital efficiency. Ukrainian founders have historically been accustomed to operating in bootstrapping mode — building companies without significant external funding — so they tend to use capital very efficiently. This trait is also common among startups from Eastern Europe and Brazil.
The second advantage is speed of adaptation, shaped by decades of crises: from the collapse of the Soviet Union and the events of 2014 to the full-scale war. The third is a strong technical and mathematical education base, which today combines naturally with artificial intelligence skills.
Ukrainian technology companies have already attracted at least half a billion dollars in investment, although the actual figure is likely higher, as many deals are not reflected in official statistics.
You often emphasize the importance of Founder–Market Fit. What unique psychological traits, or conversely red flags, do you most often notice among Ukrainian founders?
I am convinced that Founder–Market Fit emerges earlier than Product–Market Fit. A product or market can change almost instantly, especially during wartime, but changing the founder is nearly impossible. That is why the primary focus of our due diligence is the individual.
We assess a founder’s resilience — their ability to remain psychologically stable, recover from setbacks and adapt to change. We also look at how quickly they learn and whether they are willing to make small pivots when necessary — adjusting the product, strategy or direction of the company.
Honesty is extremely important. We like founders who openly acknowledge problems and discuss potential solutions with investors rather than simply telling compelling stories.
Another important quality is the ability to attract people who are stronger than themselves, because that is the only way to build a successful business.
One of the weaker points is a certain limitation in the choice of markets where venture capital is concentrated. Most founders are accustomed to looking toward the US or Europe, although today there is enormous potential for building and developing capital-intensive businesses specifically in Ukraine.
The fund helps its portfolio companies find developers in Central and Eastern Europe. Does Ukraine remain the main recruiting hub for your startups?
The trend of “looking for developers specifically in Ukraine because they are cheaper” is already a thing of the past. Strong specialists today are compensated according to their level regardless of the country they are based in.
At the same time, Ukraine remains one of the largest talent hubs in the region. A shared identity and cultural proximity make it easier to find high-quality talent at international market rates. More than a quarter of our portfolio companies have Ukrainian professionals on their teams.
We do not build our own recruiting system like large multibillion-dollar funds do. Instead, we help connect founders with candidates through our network.
I believe the next stage in the development of Ukraine’s technology ecosystem should not be the export of talent, but the creation of global companies that keep R&D, intellectual property and jobs in Ukraine.
Your fund follows an early-liquidity strategy. How does this model work for investments in Ukrainian startups, where the path to an exit or IPO may be more difficult?
We deliberately began building our product around early liquidity starting with our third fund. If a company demonstrates strong growth, we can partially sell our stake — approximately 5–25% — during a subsequent funding round, without waiting for a full exit or IPO.
This is consistent with the broader market trend. A few years ago, only 10–15% of private capital was concentrated at the growth stage, while today that figure is already 25–50%.
We segment investors according to their risk appetite. Some are interested only in early-stage investments, others in growth-stage opportunities, while others are interested in all stages of a company’s development.
We build separate products for each type of demand: a flagship early-stage fund, iClub for growth deals, and an index product for those who want to automatically allocate capital across all deals completed during the year.
You chaired the Supervisory Board of the Ukrainian Startup Fund for many years. How has the role of the state and private venture capital in supporting Ukraine’s technology sector changed?
I chaired the Supervisory Board of the Ukrainian Startup Fund for six years. After the start of the full-scale war, the state innovation infrastructure changed radically, and Brave1 became one of its key elements.
Before the war, the logic was straightforward: the state acted as a grant provider and, following the example of Israel’s Yozma programme, supported startups at certain stages of development.
Today, the state has simultaneously become a customer, validator and creator of an entire market. According to the available figures, Brave1 now includes more than 2,500 companies and nearly 5,000 developments. Around one thousand grants worth billions of hryvnias have been issued, while in 2026 alone the military ordered more than 250,000 drones and other units of equipment through the platform.
What Ukraine has accomplished in four years has taken other countries forty years — and in some cases they still have not achieved it.
Defense, cyber and dual-use technologies have become a hallmark of Ukraine. Does TA Ventures plan to increase its focus on these verticals, or will the fund remain committed to traditional SaaS, Digital Health and marketplaces?
The opposition between “defense tech versus SaaS” or “dual-use versus healthtech” is a false dichotomy that is already costing investors money. The boundary between defense and civilian technologies has effectively disappeared.
Our fund operates across six verticals: infrastructure, frontier tech, defense tech, healthtech, fintech and consumer. All of them are interconnected.
We never enter a new vertical from scratch. Our portfolio already includes companies, including in space tech, that have been operating at the intersection of these areas for years.
Global military spending approached $3 trillion in 2024 and, according to some forecasts, could reach nearly $5 trillion by 2030. This is not a temporary wave, but a long-term supercycle supported by government contracts.
The key concept here is dual-use. A technology developed for military applications can often also serve civilian markets. This reduces one of the main risks for investors: what happens to the company when the war ends.
Most Ukrainian startups today are created from the outset as global companies with legal entities in the US or EU. Does this lead to an outflow of intellectual capital from Ukraine?
This is the most important question of all. Two different concepts are often confused here: the jurisdiction of the holding company and the place where value is actually created.
A company incorporated in Delaware does not represent a brain drain — it is simply “plumbing.” An American fund often cannot physically invest in a Ukrainian legal entity because of the terms of its own investment agreements.
Therefore, incorporation abroad is an entry ticket to capital, not a founder’s decision against Ukraine. What matters is not where the holding company is registered, but where the engineers work and where the capital returns once the company becomes successful.
Today, thousands of resident companies and hundreds of thousands of technology professionals operate within Diia.City and pay substantial taxes. The number of residents continues to grow rapidly.
Yes, there is a risk of losing some intellectual property rights if the structure is set up incorrectly. But that is a separate topic for another discussion.
Which three industries in Ukraine do you believe will grow the fastest in the coming years and could produce new unicorns?
I would highlight not individual verticals, but three cross-cutting areas.
The first is physical AI and autonomy — everything related to manufacturing, hardware and robotics.
The second is vertical AI in regulated industries, where companies develop their own models based on accumulated proprietary data without handing that data over to third-party players. This applies to both fintech and medtech.
The third is AI-native consumer products that are built around artificial intelligence from the outset.
These three areas are united by a unique asset that Ukraine possesses: a large volume of data generated in real combat conditions, a pool of engineers capable of working with that data, and access to friendly markets in Europe and the United States. This is an asset that cannot be replicated even with significant amounts of money.
Through iClub, you are opening up the world of venture capital to private investors. How actively are Ukrainian business angels investing today?
iClub is a unique ecosystem of Ukrainian angel investors who can invest in promising companies that have already been vetted by our fund, with minimum investment tickets starting from $5,000.
Today, the platform has more than 8,000 members from over 40 countries, with new investors joining every week. On average, we complete around 20 deals per year.
More than 75% of deals come through referrals from founders themselves. This makes the initial screening process easier because we work with people recommended by our portfolio companies. At the same time, every potential investment undergoes full due diligence.
Unlike traditional crowdfunding platforms, we invest our own money in these companies as well. That means we are genuinely interested in selecting the best deals and earning alongside our investors when an investment generates returns.
What are the main misconceptions about venture capital that you have to address when speaking with potential Ukrainian investors?
Our goal is to build an ecosystem of 100,000 angel investors by 2035, the majority of whom will be Ukrainians. But to achieve this, several myths need to be dispelled.
The first myth is: “Venture capital is a casino.” In fact, the share of failed deals in our first fund was 10%, and in the second fund it was 6.5%. This is significantly below the market average of around 40%. At the same time, the first fund generated a fourfold return on invested capital for investors during its first five years.
The second myth is: “You have to wait 10–12 years.” In reality, our model can provide partial liquidity within one or two years.
The third is: “It is only for the very wealthy.” With a minimum investment of $5,000 per company, venture investments become accessible to a broader group of managers and small business owners.
The fourth — and perhaps the most harmful — myth is: “You need to understand technology in depth.” In reality, the most important thing is the ability to analyze information and ask the right questions. This is something we teach.
The fifth myth is: “It is better to invest in one company you understand well.” That is dangerous because venture capital follows a power-law distribution: only a few companies in a portfolio generate the majority of returns. It is almost impossible to identify those winners in advance.
Another misconception is: “Real estate is a tangible asset, while a startup is just air.” Today, technology companies often create very tangible products: drones, rockets, robotic systems and physical infrastructure.
Historically, crisis years have actually been among the best periods for entering venture capital. Our first fund invested between 2011 and 2021, a period when many strong technology companies emerged.
What would you advise a Ukrainian founder who is currently looking to raise their first pre-seed round?
Fundraising takes longer today — approximately six to nine months compared with three to four months in 2021. The median seed round has increased to around $4 million.
At the same time, the nature of the conversation itself has changed. All market participants are now much better informed, and the necessary data is available almost instantly. As a result, conversations with investors move faster and become more substantive.
My advice is always to start with angels who already know you: former colleagues, university classmates or employers. Operator angels are particularly valuable — people with hands-on experience in your industry who can not only provide capital but also open doors to potential partners, customers and contracts.
You should also conduct your own due diligence on investors. Speak with founders of companies in their portfolios and ask what cooperation with the fund or angel investor was actually like. The gap between promises and reality can sometimes be very significant.
Key Takeaways
Jurisdiction does not define patriotism. Registering a startup in Delaware is often a technical requirement for attracting international capital rather than a sign that the business is “leaving” Ukraine.
Defense technologies are no longer a niche. Dual-use technologies are becoming part of mainstream venture portfolios and, in some cases, may provide liquidity faster than traditional startups.
At the early stage, the founder is often more important than the product. Psychological resilience, the ability to learn quickly and the founder’s honesty are key investment criteria at the pre-seed and seed stages.
The private investment market is becoming more accessible. Entry tickets starting from $5,000 and platforms such as iClub could significantly expand the pool of Ukrainian business angels over the next decade.
The main challenge remains attracting private capital during the war. Without government guarantees and clear mechanisms for protecting investments, both international and Ukrainian private investors find it difficult to deploy capital in Ukraine.
Potential Market Impact
If the share of defense technologies in global venture portfolios continues to grow and angel investing becomes increasingly accessible, Ukraine could become one of the key capital formation hubs for technology companies in Central and Eastern Europe.
