According to Sifted, European science startups are trapped in a patent obsession that’s holding back real innovation. Venture firm Wilbe revealed that half their investments in 2025 went to companies before they’d even filed a single patent application. The firm specifically called out Proxima Fusion, U-ploid Bio, and Milvus Advanced as examples of successful companies that secured multiple funding rounds without holding foundational patents initially. Universities across Europe file tens of thousands of patents annually, yet very few translate into thriving ventures. Wilbe’s data shows only about 1% of scientists they meet ultimately receive investment, indicating how rare the right combination of founder talent and market focus actually is.
The patent illusion
Here’s the thing about patents in science startups: they’ve become this weird security blanket for investors. Everyone treats them like they’re actual progress, when really they’re just paperwork. Universities are filing tens of thousands of these things every year across Europe, but how many actually turn into real companies that solve real problems?
Basically, we’re spending millions keeping patents alive through renewal fees and technology transfer office budgets while the actual scientists who could be building stuff are getting overlooked. The money spent maintaining dormant patents could instead be funding the very people capable of turning ideas into impact.
What actually matters in science startups
So if patents aren’t the golden ticket, what is? Market validation, a clear mission, and the right team. Look at the companies Wilbe highlighted – Proxima Fusion in nuclear energy, U-ploid Bio in IVF therapeutics, Milvus Advanced in nanomaterials. None started with foundational patents, but all had exceptional founders who understood their markets.
And here’s the real kicker: patents often become redundant by the time they’re ready to be licensed. Good scientists don’t stop discovering after filing a patent – they keep learning, refining, sometimes even pivoting entirely. The know-how advances beyond what’s in the patent filing.
When patents signal trouble
This is where it gets interesting. Wilbe actually considers startups built around patents to be a red flag for investability. Why? Because it often means the team is more motivated by scientific pride than entrepreneurial instinct. They’re searching for a problem to fit their solution rather than solving an actual market need.
A startup with a sharp sense of the problem it’s solving will naturally generate valuable IP along the way. But starting with the IP? That’s putting the cart before the horse. It’s like building a beautiful hammer and then wandering around looking for nails.
The human element behind the science
The most valuable early assets in any science startup aren’t patents – they’re people and purpose. Scientists aren’t just data producers; they’re capable of empathy, judgment, and leadership. But we’ve built this system that discounts the human behind the science in favor of paperwork.
Wilbe’s philosophy is refreshingly simple: start with the market, the mission, and the team. The right IP will follow. And their 1% investment rate shows how selective you need to be to find scientists who combine technical brilliance with entrepreneurial grit. When you find that combination? That’s when magic happens, patents or no patents.
