AI Nav
MENU
Sign up

Blog

AI, Deep Tech, and the New Startup Investment Landscape

The AI Revolution in Startup Building

AI, Deep Tech, and the New Startup Investment Landscape

A tool that connects everyday work into one space. It gives you and your teams AI tools—search, writing, note-taking—inside an all-in-one, flexible workspace.

Research:
We did research on the investments and the challenges in 2025 in Europe on the major VC’s  (125) and FO’s (63)

AI, Deep Tech, and the New Startup Investment Landscape

 

Introduction: Startups in the Age of AI

 
 

The rise of generative AI is reshaping how startups are built and scaled. In a recent piece titled “AI will change how we build startups – but how?”, investor Andrew Chen highlights that while AI is poised to transform startup creation, many open questions remain on its exact impact. Founders and investors are grappling with unknowns about team structure, go-to-market strategies, and competitive moats in an AI-driven world. What is clear, however, is that AI can dramatically reduce the time and resources needed to launch new products – potentially enabling smaller teams to achieve more and spawning an abundance of new startups. This “AI-native” era has led to a surge of tools and micro-solutions, but also considerable uncertainty. In parallel, the venture capital climate has shifted from the free-flowing funds of 2021 to a far more cautious environment by 2023[1][2]. This report dives deep into the emerging trends (from generative AI to deep tech), examines why investors have been pumping the brakes, and explores how platforms like YB Inspire’s 42MTRX can help navigate an overloaded startup ecosystem. We will also differentiate key concepts (e.g. deep tech vs. GenAI) and propose strategies – including new investment models and AI-driven venture evaluation – that could redefine how innovation is funded. Finally, we segment investor types (family offices, VCs, angels) and provide a SWOT analysis of the current startup investment climate to ensure a comprehensive overview

The AI Revolution in Startup Building

AI as a New Paradigm in Startup Building

Overload of Startups vs. Microservices Complexity

 
One noticeable trend in this AI era is an overload of startups, sometimes compared to the overload of microservices in software architecture. It’s important to understand the difference between these concepts:
 
 
Startup Proliferation: Because it’s easier and cheaper to create new products (thanks to cloud services, open-source models, and AI automation), investors and customers are inundated with startups pitching solutions for every micro-problem. The number of seed-stage companies has skyrocketed, especially in hot areas like generative AI. This proliferation can overwhelm investors – it’s challenging to filter signal from noise when dozens of AI startups may be tackling similar use cases (e.g. AI writing assistants, AI code reviewers, etc.). Just as too many apps in an app store can confuse consumers, too many startups chasing the same trend can strain the ecosystem.
 
 
Microservices in Tech: Separately, the tech industry has seen a trend of breaking software into microservices – many small, single-purpose services that together form a complex application. While microservices can offer scalability for large systems, early-stage startups adopting a microservice architecture too soon often face complexity overload without clear benefit[4]. In recent years, experienced founders note that many startups “got microservices wrong” by adding needless complexity instead of starting with a simple monolith[5]. This parallels the startup proliferation issue: in both cases, fragmentation can lead to inefficiency. Too many microservices can bog down a product’s development, just as too many undifferentiated startups can bog down investor decision-making.
 
In essence, the overload of startups refers to market saturation and noise in the startup ecosystem, whereas microservices overload refers to technical fragmentation within software systems. Both are about managing complexity – one at the ecosystem level and one at the architecture level. As we navigate the AI startup boom, there’s a growing call for simplicity and focus: investors encourage startups to prove a clear, standout value (not just be one more AI widget), and technologists urge using simpler architectures until scale truly demands complexity. Understanding this difference ensures we address the right kind of “overload” with the right solutions – whether it’s improving startup quality (fewer, more solid ventures) or improving software design (leaner, easier-to-maintain systems).
 
 
ybinspire - 2

Investors Pumping the Brakes: Why Funding Is Slowing

Investors Pumping the Brakes: Why Funding Is Slowing

 

After a record-smashing 2021, venture capital investment has markedly slowed down. Global startup funding in 2023 fell to about $285 billion – a 38% year-over-year decline from 2022, and the lowest in five years[6]. Nearly every stage was affected: early-stage funding dropped over 40%, and even seed funding fell ~30%[7]. So why are investors pumping the brakes? Several factors are at play: Macroeconomic and Geopolitical Headwinds: The easy money era ended as inflation surged and central banks hiked interest rates. Higher interest rates make capital more expensive and safe assets more attractive, so VCs had less dry powder and more caution[8]. Geopolitical instability – notably the war in Ukraine and increased US-China tensions – added risk and uncertainty, causing many investors to adopt a risk-off stance[2][8]. Concerns over global supply chain disruptions and energy prices further dampened enthusiasm in 2022. In short, when the macro outlook darkens, speculative investment in startups is often the first to slow down.

Post-Boom

Correction: 2021’s funding boom set unsustainably high valuations and expectations[1]. As tech stock prices tumbled in 2022 and IPO exits evaporated, a reality check set in. Many “unicorn” startups that raised at lofty 2021 valuations couldn’t justify them by 2023, leading to flat or down rounds[1]. Investors refocused on fundamentals like unit economics and path to profitability, pushing startups to cut burn rates (hence the wave of tech layoffs in 2022-23[9]). This valuation reset meant investors were now doing fewer deals, at lower prices, and with a higher bar for traction. Essentially, the market swung from FOMO (fear of missing out) to FOMU – fear of messing up. Too Much Hype (and Uncertainty) in Generative AI: While AI is the hottest area (more on that soon), there’s also a sense of overheating. By mid-2023, it seemed every pitch deck had “AI” on it, and investors started voicing skepticism about how many of these AI startups will truly succeed. There is “too much GenAI” noise, and even seasoned investors admit it’s hard to know the difference – i.e. to discern which AI companies have real, defensible tech versus those simply riding the hype with an API call to a large language model. A recent MIT report underscores this concern: an astounding 95% of generative AI business projects are failing to deliver meaningful revenue despite massive investment, suggesting a growing hype-reality gap[10][11]. If only 5% of companies see notable success with AI integrations, a shakeout is likely. This looming uncertainty makes investors cautious about over-committing to unproven AI startups. Reduced Liquidity and VC Fund Cycles: With fewer IPOs and acquisitions, venture funds aren’t seeing returns, which makes their limited partners more hesitant to re-up commitments. Many VC funds raised huge pools in 2020-21 and are now slowing deployment, extending their investment periods. New funds launching are smaller and sometimes have shorter durations, aiming to return capital faster. There’s a recognition that long 10-12 year fund horizons may not fit sectors where technology cycles (and competitive advantages) are now evolving in 5-7 year spans. Investors are experimenting with smaller, time-bound funds that force discipline – an attempt to not get caught holding stakes in startups that miss the next tech wave. Investor Focus on Existing Portfolio: When times get tough, VCs often triage: prioritizing follow-on funding for their existing portfolio companies (to protect their prior investments) rather than investing in brand new startups. This dynamic has played out since 2022[12]. For entrepreneurs, it means fewer first-check opportunities and longer fundraising processes. For investors, it means slower deal flow and more stringent due diligence on any new investment. In summary, the funding slowdown is a product of economic reality meeting excess. Easy capital and exuberance gave way to caution sparked by war, inflation, and the sense that perhaps the market overcorrected to too many speculative bets. Yet even amid the pullback, there are pockets of excitement (notably AI), which we explore next. Understanding these reasons helps frame why investors are behaving differently today – and why solutions are needed to restore confidence in backing innovation.

Why Investors Are Pumping the Brakes

Key Trends Shaping the Startup Ecosystem (2023–2025)

Key Trends Shaping the Startup Ecosystem (2023–2025)

 

Despite the challenges, it’s not all doom and gloom. Several important trends are shaping how startups and investors operate in the current landscape: Generative AI Gold Rush: AI has been the biggest exception to the VC pullback. Funding for AI startups actually increased in 2023, totaling nearly $50 billion (up ~9% from 2022)[13]. The top deals went to “frontier model” companies like OpenAI, Anthropic, and Inflection, which collectively raised an eye-popping $18B in 2023[14]. In early 2025, investor appetite remained huge – over $44B poured into AI startups in just the first half of 2025[15]. Clearly, investors see AI as a transformative platform shift on the scale of the internet or mobile. However, this gold rush skews heavily toward a few players and infrastructure (training large models, building chips, etc.). Meanwhile, countless smaller generative AI startups sprung up in niches from copywriting to drug discovery. The hype is immense, but as noted, many are struggling to find sustainable revenue[10]. Gartner’s hype cycle for 2025 even shows generative AI cresting into the “Trough of Disillusionment,” meaning a reality check is coming as initial excitement wears off. The next 1-2 years will likely see consolidation – only the most promising AI startups (or those with unique data/technology) will survive, while copycats fade. Back-to-Basics: Sustainable Growth Over Blitzscaling: The mantra for startups has shifted from “growth at all costs” to “prove you can make money.” In 2023, many startups cut burn rates and aimed for breakeven or clear revenue models[9]. Investors are rewarding companies that show efficient growth and real customer traction, as opposed to just user growth fueled by heavy spending. 

 

This is a return to fundamentals – things like positive unit economics, reasonable customer acquisition costs, and even profitability are cool again. We see more bridge rounds and extension rounds to support companies hitting milestones, rather than huge pre-emptive rounds on lofty valuations. The era of easy IPOs is over (for now), so startups are preparing to operate longer without public markets, focusing on building resilient businesses. This trend is essentially a collective prudence: both founders and funders know that only the strong, revenue-generating startups will weather a dry funding climate. Deep Tech and Industrial Innovation Rise: While consumer app and ecommerce startups saw funding drop steeply (media and entertainment startups funding fell ~64%, for example[16]), harder tech sectors gained favor. Semiconductors and battery technology actually saw increased investment in 2023[17], as did climate-tech and manufacturing-related startups (their decline was modest compared to others)[18]. Deep tech – which includes things like biotech, AI at the infrastructure level, robotics, quantum computing, advanced materials, aerospace – received the most VC funding of any sector in 2024, second only to AI[19]. Investors appear to be rotating into areas with tangible breakthroughs and defensible IP, perhaps viewing them as long-term bets worth the risk. This is partly geopolitical too: governments and corporates are backing deep tech (like chips, energy, space) to secure supply chains and technological leadership. For instance, corporate venture arms are investing in energy transition and sustainability startups despite the downturn[20]. The takeaway trend: patient capital for deep innovations is growing, even as quick-buck consumer plays fall out of favor. Market Correction & Valuation Reset: A significant trend of the past two years is the correction of startup valuations. In 2021, revenue multiples reached stratospheric levels; by 2023, median valuations at every stage had come down to earth, closer to historical norms. The average VC deal size shrank (from ~$16M in 2022 to ~$10M in 2023)[21], implying investors are writing smaller checks at earlier stages or taking smaller positions. Late-stage “mega-rounds” virtually disappeared except in AI. This reset means new investors can enter at saner prices, but it also means many startups had to swallow lower paper valuations. A positive side of the correction is that talent and resources have been reallocated from frothy areas (like dozens of similar crypto projects) towards more productive pursuits (like AI and deep tech). A negative side is that some startups couldn’t raise at all and shut down, and many employees saw stock options go underwater. Still, most industry observers see this normalization as healthy in the long run – a necessary cooling-off after 2021’s fever. Regulatory and Policy Impacts: Geopolitics is not just affecting sentiment but also policy. The U.S. CHIPS Act and IRA (Inflation Reduction Act) have injected huge funding and momentum into semiconductor and clean energy startups, respectively – stimulating private co-investment. In Europe, proposed AI regulations (the EU AI Act) are being closely watched by AI startups; compliance requirements could become a barrier to entry, favoring those with resources to navigate them. Meanwhile, data privacy laws (GDPR and similar) continue to shape product design, and concerns about AI ethics and bias are prompting calls for self-regulation. For investors, increased regulation is a double-edged sword: it can raise the moat for certain startups (those who comply may have an advantage), but it can also stifle or delay innovative products. Public sector involvement is growing, whether via funding or rulemaking, making it a trend that anyone building or investing in tech must keep in mind. Role of Corporate and Alternative Investors: Another emerging trend is the greater role of corporate venture capital (CVC) and other non-traditional investors in the ecosystem. With traditional VCs being cautious, corporates have been stepping up – 93% of large company CEOs said they plan to increase or maintain their CVC investments in 2024[22]. These corporate investors often have strategic goals (access to innovation, solving specific industry problems) and can be more patient. Additionally, family offices and sovereign wealth funds have become more prominent in venture rounds, sometimes filling the gap left by retreating VCs. Some startups turned to venture debt or revenue-based financing to extend their runway when equity was too dilutive. Crowdfunding also saw a boost for early-stage funding in certain regions. The funding landscape is diversifying: it’s not just Sand Hill Road VCs writing checks now, but a mix including industry players and alternative financing models. These trends illustrate a startup ecosystem in flux. On one hand, we have an unprecedented technological catalyst (AI) driving a flurry of innovation; on the other, a sobering investment climate forcing that innovation to be more disciplined and impact-focused. The intersection of these trends sets the stage for why differentiated approaches – like focusing on deep tech or leveraging structured platforms – are timely.

Deep Tech vs. Generative AI: Understanding the Difference

Amid these trends, it’s crucial to distinguish “deep tech” startups from the wave of generative AI startups, as they represent different investment profiles and innovation models: Deep Tech: Deep tech refers to companies built on profound scientific or engineering breakthroughs – often years of R&D – aiming to solve big, fundamental problems. These are also called “hard tech” because they’re rooted in hard science. Deep tech ventures can span AI at the core research level, biotechnology, quantum computing, new materials, aerospace, cleantech, robotics, and more[23]. What sets deep tech apart is the long development cycle and high capital expenditure required, as well as the specialized talent needed[24][25]. These startups often require patience from investors: building a new battery chemistry or a fusion reactor might take a decade of development. However, if they succeed, they tend to have massive impact and defensibility. Deep tech companies typically accumulate strong IP (e.g. patents) and achieve technological milestones that are hard for competitors to copy[26][27]. In other words, deep tech can create wide moats – by the time a deep tech startup has a working product, it might be one of few in the world with that capability. As an example, a company like SpaceX (rocketry) or Moderna (mRNA vaccines) represented deep tech in their early days. Success in deep tech means opening new frontiers, and often tackling challenges like climate change, disease, or infrastructure at scale[28][29]. Investors in deep tech are typically those willing to take long bets – some VC funds specialize in this, and governments/universities often co-fund early research. Generative AI Startups: Generative AI startups, in the current context, are often software-oriented ventures leveraging AI models (like large language models or image generators) to offer new services or products. Unlike classic deep tech, many GenAI startups do not develop fundamentally new AI algorithms from scratch (though a few do); rather, they apply existing AI models to solve domain-specific problems. For example, a generative AI startup might use GPT-4’s API to build an AI copywriting tool, or fine-tune Stable Diffusion to create a design assistant. The barrier to entry here is relatively low – with open-source models and APIs, a minimum viable product can be built quickly without years of research. Thus, generative AI startups often resemble traditional software startups in their go-to-market: fast development, quick user feedback, and the need to scale up a user base quickly to win a market niche. Competition is fierce because many can attempt similar ideas. These companies rely on data and execution for defensibility – e.g. using proprietary datasets to fine-tune models, building network effects, or integrating deeply into customer workflows. Importantly, not all AI startups are “deep tech” in the strict sense; many are application-layer companies. Their risk is that if the underlying AI tech becomes commoditized (which is happening as model costs drop), they must differentiate on UX, brand, or specific vertical focus. Also, generative AI startups face uncertainty in business models (will customers pay for AI content? how to price something that runs on an API?) and in trust (ensuring AI outputs are accurate, safe, unbiased). In summary, deep tech is typically long-term, high-impact, scientifically novel, and demands patient capital, whereas genAI startups are often fast-moving, software-centric, and riding a hype cycle. We can think of deep tech as “building new engines” and generative AI startups as “building new cars using a powerful engine that’s widely available.” Both are crucial, and indeed they intersect (some AI companies are deep tech – e.g. those building new AI chip architectures or new foundational models). But from an investor’s perspective, the difference is stark: deep tech might require 5-7 years of R&D before a product, whereas a genAI app might get users in 5-7 weeks. Deep tech investments often have lower competition and huge moats if successful[26], while generative AI investments have a higher failure rate but also the potential for quick scale on a successful product-market fit. Notably, current data reflects these differences: Deep tech funding has stayed robust – it led all sectors in VC funding in 2024 (only AI had more)[19] – indicating investors believe in its long-term promise. Generative AI funding, meanwhile, spiked in 2023-2025 but is concentrated in a few winners and a long tail of startups that may not all survive. For a platform like YB Inspire (with deep industrial ties), understanding this distinction is key: supporting truly deep tech startups (say in advanced manufacturing or AI hardware) may require a different approach than supporting a quick-to-market AI SaaS company. Both types can benefit from 42MTRX’s structured acceleration, but their paths and needs will diverge significantly.

Amid these trends, it’s crucial to distinguish “deep tech” startups from the wave of generative

AI startups, as they represent different investment profiles and innovation models: Deep Tech: Deep tech refers to companies built on profound scientific or engineering breakthroughs – often years of R&D – aiming to solve big, fundamental problems. These are also called “hard tech” because they’re rooted in hard science. Deep tech ventures can span AI at the core research level, biotechnology, quantum computing, new materials, aerospace, cleantech, robotics, and more[23]. What sets deep tech apart is the long development cycle and high capital expenditure required, as well as the specialized talent needed[24][25]. These startups often require patience from investors: building a new battery chemistry or a fusion reactor might take a decade of development. However, if they succeed, they tend to have massive impact and defensibility. 

Deep tech companies typically accumulate strong IP (e.g. patents) and achieve technological milestones that are hard for competitors to copy[26][27]. In other words, deep tech can create wide moats – by the time a deep tech startup has a working product, it might be one of few in the world with that capability. As an example, a company like SpaceX (rocketry) or Moderna (mRNA vaccines) represented deep tech in their early days. Success in deep tech means opening new frontiers, and often tackling challenges like climate change, disease, or infrastructure at scale[28][29]. Investors in deep tech are typically those willing to take long bets – some VC funds specialize in this, and governments/

universities often co-fund early research. Generative AI Startups: Generative AI startups, in the current context, are often software-oriented ventures leveraging AI models (like large language models or image generators) to offer new services or products. Unlike classic deep tech, many GenAI startups do not develop fundamentally new AI algorithms from scratch (though a few do); rather, they apply existing AI models to solve domain-specific problems. For example, a generative AI startup might use GPT-4’s API to build an AI copywriting tool, or fine-tune Stable Diffusion to create a design assistant. The barrier to entry here is relatively low – with open-source models and APIs, a minimum viable product can be built quickly without years of research. Thus, generative AI startups often resemble traditional software startups in their go-to-market: fast development, quick user feedback, and the need to scale up a user base quickly to win a market niche. Competition is fierce because many can attempt similar ideas. These companies rely on data and execution for defensibility – e.g. using proprietary datasets to fine-tune models, building network effects, or integrating deeply into customer workflows. Importantly, not all AI startups are “deep tech” in the strict sense; many are application-layer companies. Their risk is that if the underlying AI tech becomes commoditized (which is happening as model costs drop), they must differentiate on UX, brand, or specific vertical focus. Also, generative AI startups face uncertainty in business models (will customers pay for AI content? how to price something that runs on an API?) and in trust (ensuring AI outputs are accurate, safe, unbiased). In summary, deep tech is typically long-term, high-impact, scientifically novel, and demands patient capital, whereas genAI startups are often fast-moving, software-centric, and riding a hype cycle. We can think of deep tech as “building new engines” and generative AI startups as “building new cars using a powerful engine that’s widely available.” Both are crucial, and indeed they intersect (some AI companies are deep tech – e.g. those building new AI chip architectures or new foundational models). But from an investor’s perspective, the difference is stark: deep tech might require 5-7 years of R&D before a product, whereas a genAI app might get users in 5-7 weeks. Deep tech investments often have lower competition and huge moats if successful[26], while generative AI investments have a higher failure rate but also the potential for quick scale on a successful product-market fit. Notably, current data reflects these differences: Deep tech funding has stayed robust – it led all sectors in VC funding in 2024 (only AI had more)[19] – indicating investors believe in its long-term promise. Generative AI funding, meanwhile, spiked in 2023-2025 but is concentrated in a few winners and a long tail of startups that may not all survive. For a platform like YB Inspire (with deep industrial ties), understanding this distinction is key: supporting truly deep tech startups (say in advanced manufacturing or AI hardware) may require a different approach than supporting a quick-to-market AI SaaS company. Both types can benefit from 42MTRX’s structured acceleration, but their paths and needs will diverge significantly.

Investor Segments and Shifting StrategiesThe investor community is not monolithic.

Investor Segments and Shifting Strategies

Different types of investors are reacting to the current trends in distinct ways. Below, we differentiate key segments – family offices, venture capital firms, and angel investors – and explore how each is navigating the present landscape: Family Offices (FOs): Typically managing the wealth of a high-net-worth family, family offices can have more flexible mandates than traditional funds.

Many FOs became active startup investors in the past decade, some directly investing in ventures or via venture funds. In the current climate, single-family offices (SFOs) are often taking a cautious but opportunistic approach. They don’t answer to external LPs, so they can afford to be patient. Some FOs have slowed their startup investments as public markets offer better yields (e.g. turning to bonds or blue-chip stocks during high-interest periods). However, others see the dip in valuations as a chance to get in at reasonable prices. Family offices are also segmenting their strategy: for instance, an FO might reserve part of their capital for deep tech or impact-driven projects that align with the family’s long-term vision (even if returns take longer), while allocating another portion to shorter-horizon opportunities like profitable tech startups or funds with a 5-7 year outlook. One trend is that FOs increasingly co-invest with structured platforms – they appreciate programs like 42MTRX that vet and prepare startups, because it saves them diligence effort. 

 

Unlike VCs, family offices prioritize capital preservation, so they are drawn to deals with lower downside risk (even if upside is moderate). This explains interest in structures like convertible loans or revenue-share notes, which can cap downside. For YB Inspire, engaging family offices may mean highlighting how the 42MTRX process de-risks ventures and how involvement can be tailored to the family’s strategic interests (like a manufacturing family investing in industry 4.0 startups). Venture Capital Firms (VCs): Venture capitalists are the traditional engine of startup funding, and they have been hit by and responding to the slowdown in specific ways. Firstly, many VC firms have raised smaller or fewer funds recently; LPs (like pension funds, endowments) pulled back after 2021’s excess, meaning VCs must do more with less. They have become more selective: as one seed investor noted, “Investors deployed capital more sparingly, with a higher bar at each stage” in 2023[30]. Early-stage VCs are still writing seed checks but expecting more proof-of-concept or user traction even at seed. Late-stage VCs have largely stepped back unless a company has clear scale or strategic value – hence the dearth of Series D/E rounds outside of AI. Another change is terms have become more investor-friendly: liquidation preferences, structured rounds, and lower valuations that give VCs more ownership are back in fashion[30]. The bright spot for VCs is AI – many established funds have spun up dedicated AI-focused funds or initiatives (for example, a16z’s “Speedrun” accelerator for AI). Yet even in AI, they are grappling with how to diligence the technology (often bringing in experts to vet models) and how to avoid backing redundant products. Some VCs are experimenting with data-driven screening: using AI themselves to triage pitch decks and market data so they can handle the high volume of AI startup pitches. Overall, VCs are segmenting into those who follow the hype (chasing the next OpenAI) and those who are doubling down on their domain expertise (be it fintech, healthcare, or industrial) where they feel more confident in picking winners. For YB Inspire, VC partners will likely value any data or pipeline YB can provide (e.g. “here are 10 vetted startups in manufacturing AI with pilot customers at our factories”) because it aligns with the higher bar they now set. Angel Investors: Angels are individual investors, often former entrepreneurs or executives, writing smaller checks (typically five to six figures) at early stages. Angels tend to be less formulaic and more driven by personal conviction or connections. During the 2021 boom, many new angels flooded in (some armed with newfound crypto wealth or stock gains). In 2023-2024, the ranks of active angels thinned somewhat – when public markets turn down, individual wealth contracts, making angels more cautious. That said, seasoned angels who have been through cycles often step in when VCs pull back, providing critical early capital to startups that might be too early or too risky for institutional funds. Today’s angels are increasingly syndicating deals online (through platforms like AngelList or Seedrs), letting them pool capital and share due diligence. The themes angels chase often mirror the hype cycles (lots of angels have been backing AI-first startups, sometimes even pre-seed, on the premise that one could strike “the next big one”). Angels also enjoy fast-moving deals – they might fund a prototype to test a concept. The convertible SAFE notes are common in these deals, postponing valuation questions. For YB Inspire, engaging angels might mean highlighting the opportunity to get early access to promising startups in the 42MTRX pipeline. Angels often seek not just financial returns but also to mentor or be part of exciting innovations – YB’s network and structured program could be attractive for them to plug into (for example, an angel could advise a startup during the program and invest at Demo Day). (Other notable segments: Corporate Venture Capital arms deserve mention, as many corporations are investing for strategic alignment. They slowed new launches of CVC in 2023[20], but those existing became crucial sources of capital in sectors like AI, where tech giants and chipmakers are investing heavily in startups (e.g. Microsoft, Google funding AI companies)[31]. Public sector and development funds also are notable in regions like Europe and Asia where governments have tech funding initiatives to counter the venture slowdown.) Each investor segment has unique motives and constraints. By differentiating them, YB Inspire and others can tailor their approach: e.g., pitch the long-term vision and societal impact to family offices, the de-risked validated metrics to VCs, and the excitement and mentorship opportunities to angels. All investors, however, share a common need in today’s climate: confidence that the startups they back are high-quality and have a real shot at sustainable success. This is where structured solutions come in.

New Approaches for Investors in a Fast-Changing MarketGiven

Given the current challenges – too many startups to evaluate, uncertainty in who will survive, and tighter capital – investors are exploring new approaches to maximize returns while minimizing risks. Some potential solutions and evolving practices include: 

Shorter Fund Horizons & Flexible Capital: 

Traditional venture funds operate on a ~10-year cycle.

But technology (especially in AI) is moving so fast that many are questioning if that model is too rigid. One emerging approach is forming funds or investment vehicles with 5-7 year horizons. A shorter cycle forces discipline to find exits or liquidity in that timeframe, aligning with the quicker innovation cycles we see today. It also appeals to LPs who are hesitant to lock money up for a decade in uncertain times. Additionally, funds are adding flexibility: for instance, side-pocket allocations for quick flips or using rolling funds that accept new capital more frequently to seize timely opportunities. These innovations in fund structure aim to make venture investing more adaptive to the pace of modern tech. Convertible Loans / Notes to Start: Rather than diving into an equity investment at an uncertain valuation, investors are increasingly using convertible instruments (like SAFE notes or convertible loans) as a first step. A convertible loan acts as a bridge: it’s essentially debt that converts to equity in a future round (often at a discount or with a valuation cap). The benefit is twofold: (1) it delays the valuation question until the startup has more progress, and (2) if structured with a repayment clause, it can offer some downside protection (if the startup fails to raise a next round, sometimes these notes can be repaid or at least you haven’t priced an overvalued equity). 

 

For investors, this means they can support startups early – allowing them to hit milestones – without fully committing to a price. In the context of 42MTRX, one could imagine an investor offering startups in the program a convertible loan to fund their prototype or pilot phase. If the startup meets certain milestones by program’s end (e.g. validated product-market fit), the loan converts into equity in the next round, possibly led by that investor. If not, the investor’s exposure was limited. This approach de-risks early-stage bets and aligns founders and investors on proving out the business before equity comes into play. Data-Driven Due Diligence & AI Assistance: With so many startups out there, investors are turning to tools – including AI – to augment their decision-making. Due diligence, which used to take months of manual document analysis and market research, can be partially automated. AI-driven platforms can scrape market data, benchmark a startup’s metrics against industry peers, and flag inconsistencies in financial projections. VC firms now use AI to “score” pitch decks and parse founder backgrounds. According to industry reports, using AI in tech due diligence can cut analysis time by up to 40%[32]. For example, AI tools can analyze a startup’s financials, customer reviews, and even codebase quality to quickly surface potential red flags or strengths[33]. They also help in scanning vast deal flow – an AI system might sift through thousands of companies to highlight those matching an investor’s criteria[3]. In practice, we’re seeing the rise of the “AI analyst” in investment teams: not a replacement for human judgment, but a powerful filter and insight generator. The endgame might be a full AI team for startup assessment – imagine an AI business analyst (crunching market size and trends), an AI technical analyst (reviewing the product’s tech stack or IP for novelty), and an AI financial analyst (projecting runway and burn) working in tandem. 

Such a team could run 24/7, evaluating opportunities at scale and even updating their analysis continuously as new data comes in. While fully autonomous investing is still on the horizon, these tools already help venture firms operate with leaner teams and make more objective, data-backed decisions[34][35]. Investors who leverage AI effectively gain an edge in not missing the next big thing or avoiding pitfalls hidden in big data. Milestone-Based Funding and Tranching: Instead of handing a startup $5 million to spend over two years with loose oversight, some investors are adopting milestone-based financing. 

In this model, a commitment is made to invest a total amount, but it’s released in tranches as the startup hits agreed milestones (e.g., product launch, 1,000 paying users, regulatory approval, etc.). This approach, common in deep tech and pharma historically, is now trickling into software and AI deals. It ties capital deployment to actual de-risking of the business. Startups may resist it as it complicates cash flow, but in a tough climate many agree to it. Milestone funding protects investors from over-exposure and keeps startups laser-focused on reaching the next critical milestone. It’s somewhat analogous to how 42MTRX has structured phases – ensuring validation at each step before scaling. 

Collaboration and Ecosystem Building: Investors are also mitigating risk by not going it alone. Co-investment clubs, syndicates, and consortiums are more active. For instance, multiple VCs might jointly create a thematic fund (like a climate tech coalition fund) to spread risk and share expertise. Corporates and VCs co-invest side by side more often now, blending market savvy with industry know-how. There’s also growing collaboration between accelerators/innovation platforms and investors – exactly the space YB Inspire occupies. By plugging into an ecosystem, investors can see more curated deal flow and rely on expert networks to vet technical or market aspects. Essentially, community-driven due diligence and shared deal structures are on the rise, replacing the lone-wolf investor approach with a more networked model. Overall, these new approaches represent a more cautious, structured, and tech-enabled investing ethos. The freewheeling days of spray-and-pray investing are fading; in their place, we see measured bets, creative financing, and augmented intelligence guiding decisions. For YB Inspire and similar organizations, this is validation of their model – providing structure, data, and risk reduction is exactly what the market now demands.

The 42MTRX Advantage: Structured Validation for YB Investors

The 42MTRX Advantage: Structured Validation for Investors

YB Inspire’s 42MTRX platform is a response to the very challenges and trends we’ve been discussing. It’s a structured innovation and startup acceleration framework designed to take promising ideas and rigorously validate them into investor-ready ventures. For investors overwhelmed with startup deal flow and wary of unvetted hype, 42MTRX offers a clear value proposition: de-risked, high-quality opportunities. Here’s how 42MTRX facilitates investors, according to YB Inspire’s methodology: Comprehensive Evaluation Framework: Startups in the program are put through a four-phase process – from ideation and validation to structuring, execution, and growth. At each phase, key metrics and milestones must be met. This systematic validation ensures that by the time a startup “graduates,” it has thoroughly tested its business model, proven customer interest, and built a scalable plan[36]. For an investor, seeing a venture that has passed 42MTRX’s checkpoints is reassuring: it’s less likely to be a half-baked idea and more likely a venture with real traction and a vetted strategy. 

Data-Driven Insights and Progress Tracking: The 42MTRX methodology emphasizes measurable insights and progress tracking[37].

 

Startups track customer discovery interviews, MVP performance data, pilot results, financial projections, etc., all in a structured way. This creates a rich data trail of the startup’s journey. Investors gain access to these data-driven dashboards, meaning they can see evidence of market traction or product improvement rather than just taking founders at their word. It’s akin to due diligence baked into the program – by the end, an investor can review the startup’s 42MTRX dossier and quickly grasp its strengths and remaining risks. Scalability and Market Readiness Assessment: A critical aspect for investors is a startup’s scalability and market potential. 42MTRX includes detailed analysis of market size, competitive landscape, and growth potential for each startup[38]. The framework pushes founders to quantify their market and identify their differentiators. It also assesses whether the startup’s solution can scale (both technically and commercially). For example, if a startup is targeting an industrial use-case, 42MTRX would ensure they’ve addressed how to scale deployment across multiple factories, perhaps leveraging YB’s own industrial network. By the end, investors are presented not just with a cool idea, but with a realistic road map of how it can grow into a large business – or why it might not, if certain challenges remain. This level of scalability assessment is often what trips up inexperienced startups, so having it pre-done is a boon for potential funders. Risk Reduction (De-Risking Investments): The ultimate promise to investors is in the tagline: “derisk investments & data-driven insights.” YB Inspire explicitly markets that its startups are validated, assessed for scalability, market traction, and investment potential[39]. In practice, that means 42MTRX acts as a filter: many raw ideas might enter, but only those that achieve validation milestones get showcased to investors. It weeds out non-viable ventures early (or helps pivot them to viability). From technology risk (does the product actually work?) to market risk (will someone pay for it?), each dimension is examined. Thus, when an investor sees a 42MTRX alumni startup, they know major risks have been mitigated or transparently documented. This dramatically improves the signal-to-noise ratio for investors – instead of sifting through 100 random pitches, they can engage with, say, 10 program graduates that have real evidence behind them.

Investor Access and Matchmaking: YB Inspire’s program doesn’t just polish startups in isolation; it actively connects them to investors. They have an Investor Access Program that gives investors tools like 42MTRX scenario planning, and even AI-driven analysis (mention of chatbots for due diligence in marketing)[40]. This means investors can interact with the platform, run scenarios (e.g., “If this startup expands to X market, what are the projections?”), and even use integrated AI to ask questions about the startup’s data (like a chatbot that can answer “What were the results of their pilot test?”). By combining human judgment with such tools, investors can make decisions faster and with more confidence. It’s a two-way street: startups get guidance and access to capital; investors get pre-vetted deals and a richer analytical toolkit. In essence, 42MTRX serves as a bridge between corporate-grade due diligence and startup agility. It embodies the best practices one would want during a slowdown: structured validation, evidence-based progress, and alignment with market needs. For family offices and angels who may not have big analyst teams, it’s like outsourcing a chunk of diligence to the program. For VCs, it’s a source of deals that have undergone an extra filter. By facilitating investors with this framework, YB Inspire is tackling the “overload” problem head-on – making it easier to identify which startups are truly worth investing in.

Empowering Innovation: YB Inspire’s Role and Opportunities

YB Inspire, as the innovation arm of a global industrial manufacturing group, is uniquely positioned to help both startups and investors in today’s climate. Operating across 20 plants in 11 countries with 4 R&D centers, YB Inspire has deep industrial expertise to pair with startup agility. Here’s what YB Inspire can mean to various stakeholders and how it can capitalize on current trends: Bridging Industrial Problems and Startup Solutions: Many of the most promising startups (especially in deep tech and applied AI) need access to real industrial environments to test and prove their solutions. YB Inspire can provide that sandbox. By identifying pressing challenges in its parent company’s manufacturing operations or supply chain, YB can guide startups towards real pain points (e.g., predictive maintenance AI, energy efficiency tech, robotics for hazardous tasks). This domain-driven approach ensures startups are working on high-value, real-world problems, not just tech for tech’s sake. For investors, a startup that has successfully deployed in an actual factory or has a pilot with a major industrial partner (facilitated by YB Inspire) is far more attractive – it demonstrates both market need and an engaged customer.

In a time when investors are skeptical of slides and theories, real-world validation is gold. Combining Corporate R&D Rigor with Startup Speed: YB Inspire’s model of open innovation means it marries the rigor of corporate R&D (safety standards, reliability, scalability concerns) with the speed and creativity of startups. For deep tech ventures (like a new materials startup or an IoT sensor for machines), this support can drastically reduce time to market. The startup gains access to labs, test facilities, and mentorship from industry veterans; the corporate side gains exposure to breakthrough ideas.

Investors benefit because the startups emerging from this synergy are more mature technologically and often have intellectual property backed by serious testing. Essentially, YB Inspire can produce ventures that are startup nimble but enterprise ready – exactly the kind of resilient, validated companies investors are looking to fund in a cautious market. Ecosystem Matchmaking and Network Effects: YB Inspire is cultivating an open-innovation ecosystem across Europe[41][42], bringing together startups, corporates, universities, and government.

This network is a powerful asset. For one, it can match founders with experienced mentors or even co-founders (strengthening the team, which is a key investor criterion). It can also match startups with early adopter customers in the network (driving that coveted traction). As the ecosystem grows, each participant increases the value for others – classic network effect. YB’s convening power (even exemplified by having former Prime Minister Balkenende engage, as quoted on their site[43]) lends credibility and opens doors for startups. For investors, being part of this network via YB’s Investor Access Program means being at the table where new deals and partnerships surface first. In a slowed market, having privileged access to a curated pipeline is a competitive advantage. YB Inspire can emphasize these network effects to investors: join us, and you tap into a pre-vetted pipeline plus a community that can help those startups succeed post-investment. Focus on Sustainability and Societal Challenges: The vision statement for YB Inspire is about driving economic growth and societal progress with a focus on sustainability[41]. This aligns well with where many family offices and corporate investors are heading – towards impact investing and ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) considerations. Many investors slowed down pure profit-chasing investments but are still keen on funding innovations in energy, circular economy, healthcare, etc., that solve big problems (and can yield returns).

 

YB Inspire’s portfolio, by virtue of being tied to industrial and sustainability challenges, is likely rich in such impact-focused startups. By quantifying the potential ESG impact of its startups, YB can attract investors who have mandates beyond just financial ROI. Moreover, in Europe especially, public co-funding and grants often sweeten these deals, reducing risk. YB Inspire can thus be the gateway for investors to participate in transformative innovations (like decarbonizing manufacturing or AI for smarter grids) with the assurance that these have been vetted in the 42MTRX framework. Adopting AI in its Own Processes: As discussed, an all-AI analyst team for startup assessment could be revolutionary. YB Inspire is well positioned to build this AI-driven evaluation service. They already combine “AI-powered automation” in 42MTRX[44]. Taking it further, YB could develop an in-house suite of AI tools: one that automatically conducts market research (pulling industry reports for a startup’s sector), one that evaluates pitch materials (using NLP to identify risk factors or missing pieces in business plans), and one that tracks each startup’s progress metrics and compares them with benchmarks. By investing in such an AI platform, YB Inspire could dramatically scale the number of startups it can evaluate and support without a linear increase in human staff. This would allow YB to perhaps expand 42MTRX beyond its own program – potentially offering Startup Due Diligence as a Service to other investors. For example, an external VC could run a potential deal through YB’s AI assessment pipeline to get an objective second opinion. This not only helps other investors but could be a new revenue stream or partnership avenue for YB Inspire (much like how some accelerators sell access to their alumni data or network). In advising YB Inspire, the key is to leverage its strengths (industrial heritage, structured program, ecosystem) to differentiate in the crowded innovation space. YB should double down on what’s working – the structured de-risking of 42MTRX – and enhance it with the latest tools (AI, data analytics) to stay ahead. Simultaneously, it can broaden its impact by sharing its platform with others (be it through co-investment opportunities or white-labeling its framework).

The end goal is aligned with YB’s tagline: help startups build smarter and help investors innovate with confidence. In a world of overload and slowdown, providing that confidence is perhaps the most valuable currency.

Toward an AI-Augmented Investment Process

One intriguing proposal is to create a full AI team for startup assessment – essentially automating much of the venture evaluation pipeline. Let’s consider what this could entail and how it might help: Imagine an AI “Investment Analyst Team” composed of specialized AI agents or models: – A Business Analyst AI that can read a startup’s business plan, extract the value proposition, and compare it to market needs and competitors by scouring databases and news. It could perform a SWOT analysis of the startup’s idea by pulling information on competitors, patent filings, and market trends. – A Market Analyst AI that continuously monitors industry metrics, sizing the market and its growth, analyzing customer sentiments (through reviews or social media) for the problem the startup addresses, and even assessing timing (why now?). For instance, if the startup is in electric vehicles, this AI would gather EV adoption rates, regulatory incentives, etc., to gauge opportunity size. – An Investment/Financial Analyst AI that digs into the startup’s financial projections, unit economics, and cap table. It could benchmark the projections against industry averages, flag unrealistic assumptions (like gross margins that are too high for hardware companies), and simulate different funding scenarios (e.g., how would a $1M investment extend runway given the burn rate?). Now, if these AI components work in tandem – essentially an AI-driven due diligence – the result is a comprehensive report or even an interactive dashboard, possibly generated in minutes. 

This service could be fully autonomous in the near future with enough training data (perhaps using historical cases of startup successes and failures to teach the AI what patterns to look for). How would this help? In the context of our overloaded startup ecosystem, such an AI team would be able to filter and assess far more startups than humans alone could. An investor could throw 100 pitch decks into the system and get back a prioritized list with scores and risk factors for each. This speeds up the “sourcing and screening” phase tremendously[3]. It also adds a level of objectivity – the AI might catch issues humans miss or vice versa, providing complementary insight. For YB Inspire and others, deploying an AI assessment team can augment their human experts. YB’s mentors and analysts can focus on high-level strategic coaching, while AI handles the grunt work of scanning data and checking consistency. Over time, as the AI learns from outcomes (e.g., which startups went on to succeed or fail), it will improve its predictive power. There are already signs of this future: venture firms report using AI for due diligence and seeing efficiency gains, with AI analyzing extensive datasets to evaluate a startup’s health and viability[35]. Some are even using AI to draft investment memos or term sheets[45]. It’s not far-fetched that soon, a startup might pitch to an AI first (submitting info to an AI system) before ever talking to a human investor. However, for full autonomy, trust is a hurdle. Investors will likely use AI as decision support, not decision maker, until there’s a strong track record. But even in that support role, it’s incredibly valuable. It can also help startups – by advising them on how to refine their pitches or business models to match investor expectations (essentially an AI coach that knows what investors look for). 

In conclusion, investing in an AI-driven assessment capability is a smart move for YB Inspire. It aligns with being cutting-edge and could become a selling point: “Our startups are not only reviewed by experts, but also undergo AI-driven analysis against thousands of data points, ensuring nothing is overlooked.” Additionally, offering that service to other investors (like a SaaS product or partnership) fits YB’s mission to help the ecosystem innovate faster and smarter. The future of venture capital might well be hybrid human-AI teams, and being an early adopter of that trend would put YB Inspire and its partners ahead of the curve.

SWOT Analysis: Current Startup & Investment Climate

To summarize the environment and YB Inspire’s position in it, we provide a SWOT analysis of the present startup investment climate and YB Inspire’s strategic context: Strengths: High Innovation Momentum: Breakthrough technologies (AI, deep tech, sustainability solutions) are emerging at a rapid pace, offering investors new avenues for significant returns[14][19]. The excitement around AI has attracted talent and capital, fueling a robust pipeline of ideas. Correction Brings Quality Focus: The recent market correction means only the more resilient startups survive. Those that have weathered 2022-2023 have stronger business fundamentals. For investors, this improves the overall quality of deal flow (less noise from trivial projects). 

YB Inspire’s Structured Platform: The 42MTRX framework is a strength, providing a proven system for validation and de-risking startups[39][36]. 

YB’s connection to a global manufacturing group adds credibility and industry access that typical accelerators lack. 

Collaborative Ecosystem: There’s a growing openness to collaboration among corporates, investors, and innovation hubs. YB Inspire’s network across corporates, SMEs, startups, and research centers forms a strong community engine[46], which is a strategic asset for creating and scaling ventures. 

Weaknesses: Economic Uncertainty: Global economic signals are mixed – inflation, interest rates, and geopolitical conflicts could worsen, which would further suppress risk appetite among investors[2][8]. This means even great startups might struggle to find funding, a systemic weakness outside anyone’s direct control. Overcrowded AI Space: The glut of AI startups means differentiation is hard. Investors and customers can get fatigued by similar-sounding pitches. YB Inspire’s startups in AI must work extra to prove their uniqueness and viability among possibly hundreds of competitors. 

The 95% failure rate warning for generative AI projects is a red flag[10][11] – signaling potential disillusionment ahead. Lengthy Deep Tech Cycles: While deep tech is promising, it carries the weakness of long timelines and high burn. YB Inspire supporting deep industrial tech must ensure continued funding and support through the valley of death (early years with little revenue). Not all investors are willing to endure that, potentially limiting the pool of interested backers. Resource Constraints for Acceleration: Scaling the 42MTRX program itself requires significant mentorship, data analysis, and possibly capital. There’s a limit to how many startups can be accelerated hands-on. If interest surges, YB Inspire might face capacity challenges, unless processes are further augmented with AI and more staff. Opportunities: Investors Seeking Guidance: With many VCs and family offices cautious and overloaded, there’s an opportunity for YB Inspire to become a trusted guide and partner. By providing curated deal flow and even co-investment opportunities, YB can help deploy the sidelined capital into worthy startups. This is an opportunity to perhaps launch a YB Inspire venture fund to directly invest alongside others, leveraging its due diligence advantage. 

Leverage AI for Competitive Edge: Embracing the AI-driven due diligence and scouting capabilities could dramatically increase YB Inspire’s throughput and effectiveness. It can position itself as the tech-forward accelerator that uses AI to pick winners and help them grow (marketing point to both startups and investors). This would attract AI-savvy founders and forward-looking investors to the platform. Strategic Partnerships: YB Inspire can forge partnerships with academic institutions (for cutting-edge research pipeline), government innovation grants (to co-fund startups, reducing risk), and other corporate incubators to co-run programs. All these can expand its reach. For example, the EU has funds for green innovation – YB could be a funnel for those, which elevates its profile and brings in non-dilutive capital for startups. 

Market Needs Post-Crisis: Challenges like supply chain resiliency, energy independence, and digital transformation of legacy industries have been highlighted by geopolitical tensions and the pandemic. Startups solving these are in demand. YB Inspire’s industrial focus positions it well to tap into these pressing market needs, meaning its startups could see accelerated adoption and support from customers and governments. Threats: Bursting of Hype Bubbles: If the generative AI bubble deflates significantly (analogous to the dot-com bust), there could be a broader chilling effect on tech investing. A high-profile failure or an “AI winter” could scare off investors across the board, hurting even non-AI startups in the short term[47]. Talent Shortages: Ironically, while many tech workers were laid off in big firms, the specific talent needed for deep tech (like specialized engineers or scientists) remains scarce[25]. 

If YB’s startups can’t hire the right expertise, their progress stalls – a threat to execution. Similarly, good founders have many choices (Big Tech, academia, etc.); attracting top entrepreneurial talent to start a venture in a shaky market is an ongoing challenge. Competition from Other Accelerators/Funds: The innovation/acceleration space is competitive. Big names like Y Combinator have also launched tracks for climate tech, AI, etc. Corporate giants are creating their own incubators. YB Inspire must keep differentiating (through its industry tie-in and structured approach) or risk being overshadowed by brands with more capital or reach. 

Regulatory Hurdles: New regulations, especially in the EU (where YB operates), could impact startups significantly. For instance, the EU AI Act might restrict certain AI applications or impose compliance costs; climate regulations might shift incentives rapidly. If a startup’s solution inadvertently runs afoul of a new law, that’s an investment threat. Also, data sovereignty rules could limit scaling across borders. YB Inspire and its startups need to be agile in responding to these legal changes. This SWOT analysis shows that while the current climate is challenging, it is navigable with the right strategy. 

YB Inspire’s strengths and opportunities – notably its structured approach and ability to harness AI and partnerships – position it well to mitigate weaknesses and threats. The key will be to remain adaptive: continue scanning the environment (with both human and AI help), listen to investor sentiment, and iterate on the program model.

Conclusion & Recommendations for YB Inspire

The startup and venture landscape in 2025 is characterized by high potential and high uncertainty. Generative AI and deep tech promise to reshape industries and yield the next generation of unicorns, yet the road to get there is strewn with the remnants of overhyped ideas and cautious investors. In this environment, focus and validation are paramount. For investors, the imperative is to find the signal in the noise: to identify which startups have enduring substance (technological edge, market need, solid unit economics) versus those riding a fad. We see investors already slowing down, raising the bar, and seeking more support in making decisions – whether through data or trusted intermediaries. This is indeed a trend, and likely a healthy one: it will curb the excesses of the boom and direct funds to the most deserving ventures. For startups, the message is clear: adapt to the new game. 

Embrace AI not just as a buzzword but as a tool to do more with less. But also don’t expect a red-carpet from investors just because you have AI; you must demonstrate real value and a path to profitability. Deep tech startups should seize the moment of renewed interest, but plan for a marathon, not a sprint. For YB Inspire, you are positioned at the nexus of these dynamics, and my advice would be: lean in and lead. 

Concretely: – Double Down on 42MTRX: It’s a proven formula to reduce risk and should be the core of your pitch to all stakeholders. Perhaps consider publishing an annual “42MTRX Innovation Report” with stats on how your startups performed vs. the market, to quantitatively show the advantage of structured acceleration (e.g., % that raised follow-on funding, % revenue-generating, etc.). This can attract more startups and reassure investors. – Integrate AI at Every Level: Become a case study for how AI can supercharge an innovation platform. Use AI for scouting (find promising university projects or patent filings before they become startups), for program management (personalized learning or advice to each startup via an AI mentor), and for investor matchmaking (an AI could parse an investor’s portfolio and suggest which 42MTRX startups fit their thesis). This not only improves outcomes but builds YB Inspire’s brand as a forward-thinking, tech-driven platform. – Engage Investors with New Models: Try piloting a “convertible note fund” or “innovation bond” where family offices can put in money that will be deployed as convertible loans to 42MTRX startups, with a target to exit/conversion in 3 years. This gives a structured, shorter-term product for investors. Also, consider segment-specific outreach: host private demo days or innovation workshops for family offices vs. VCs vs. angels separately, as their concerns differ.

Educate them on how to invest in deep tech vs. AI, leveraging your expertise. – Expand the Ecosystem Value: Continue forging ties that widen the support for your startups – whether it’s aligning with a university for research support, partnering with a tech company for cloud credits or AI expertise, or linking with government grants. If your startups consistently have access to such resources, they become far more robust (and appealing). Also, involve your industrial parent’s clients and suppliers – they might become first customers or even investors (industry players investing in startups as a way to secure innovation).
– Advise and Lead Thought Leadership: YB Inspire can also help other investors by sharing best practices on innovation. Perhaps host roundtables or publish insights on topics like “Investing in the age of AI” or “Bridging corporate and startup innovation ROI”. By becoming a thought leader, you attract more collaboration. You essentially inspire (aptly, given the name) others to follow models that you pioneer, like structured acceleration or AI-driven diligence. This thought leadership can indirectly benefit your mission by driving more adoption of the approaches you excel at. In closing, while the current slowdown and startup overload seem daunting, they are part of the natural evolution of the innovation ecosystem. The exuberance of the past has been tempered into a more thoughtful pursuit of the future. Investors who adapt by using better tools and frameworks will continue to reap rewards – and those rewards may be more sustainable this time. Platforms like YB Inspire exemplify that adaptation: by combining deep industrial insight with startup agility and a data-driven framework, you reduce uncertainty for everyone involved. In a world buffeted by rapid tech shifts and economic swings, such certainty is invaluable. By continuing to refine your approach and embracing new techniques (from convertible funding to AI teams), YB Inspire can not only weather the current trends but actively shape the next wave of innovation. In helping startups build smarter and helping investors invest smarter, YB Inspire truly can “innovate with confidence” – and enable others to do the same

[48][49].[1] [6] [7] [9] [13] [14] [16] [17] [18] [30] Global Startup Funding In 2023 Clocks In At Lowest Level In 5 Yearshttps://news.crunchbase.com/venture/global-funding-data-analysis-ai-eoy-2023/[2] [8] [12] [20] [21] [22] Understanding the 2023 Venture Capital Slowdown | by Luiz Neto | Innovation Intelligencehttps://blog.innovationintelligence.ai/understanding-the-2023-venture-capital-slowdown-c78cc7600ede?gi=3b695af72b1f[3] [33] [34] [35] [45] How AI Tools are Reshaping Venture Capital: Tools to Know – Visible.vchttps://visible.vc/blog/ai-tools-for-venture-capital/[4] Death by a Thousand Microservices – Hacker Newshttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37477095[5] Why Startups Are Getting Microservices All Wrong IMHO – Reddithttps://www.reddit.com/r/ycombinator/comments/1fbzd98/why_startups_are_getting_microservices_all_wrong/[10] [11] [15] MIT study shatters AI hype: 95% of generative AI projects are failing, sparking tech bubble jitters – The Economic Timeshttps://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/mit-study-shatters-ai-hype-95-of-generative-ai-projects-are-failing-sparking-tech-bubble-jitters/articleshow/123428252.cms?from=mdr[19] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] What Is Deep Tech? | Built Inhttps://builtin.com/artificial-intelligence/deep-tech[31] Things I Don’t Know About AI – by Elad Gil – Elad Bloghttps://blog.eladgil.com/p/things-i-dont-know-about-ai[32] AI in Tech Due Diligence | Insights For VCs and PE Firmshttps://dextralabs.com/blog/ai-in-tech-due-diligence/[36] [37] [38] [39] [41] [42] [43] [46] [48] [49] YBInspire – Driving Europe’s Future with Open Innovationhttps://ybinspire.com/[40] Investors – YBinspirehttps://ybinspire.com/investors/[44] Creating Customers Where buyers become advocates. At 42MTRX …https://www.tiktok.com/@ybinspire1/photo/7528348023500311830[47] Watching the Generative AI Hype Bubble Deflate – Ash Centerhttps://ash.harvard.edu/resources/watching-the-generative-ai-hype-bubble-deflate/

download here the full research

AI, Deep Tech, and the New Startup Investment Landscape​

Don’t miss our upcoming events

View agenda

Related content

Learn more
Load More