Signals Inbox·July 15, 2026·Defense Tech

Why is Helsing so expensive compared with Anduril?

Helsing is almost 2.5 times more expensive than Anduril relative to forecast 2026 revenue. The premium partly reflects Helsing’s privileged position in European defense, but its $18 billion valuation already assumes that it will turn that strategic advantage into Anduril-level growth.

Q1How much more expensive is Helsing than Anduril today?

Helsing is currently almost 2.5 times more expensive than Anduril when we compare their valuations with forecast 2026 revenue.

Helsing raised $1.8 billion on July 13, 2026, at an $18 billion post-money valuation. Removing the new capital leaves an implied pre-money valuation of $16.2 billion. Against reported forecast revenue of €441 million, approximately $502 million, that produces a forward revenue multiple of about 32.3 times.

Anduril raised $5 billion in May 2026 at a $61 billion post-money valuation. Its corresponding pre-money value was $56 billion. With projected 2026 revenue of $4.3 billion, Anduril’s forward multiple is approximately 13 times.

The difference is striking, even in a sector where investors already accept aggressive prices. The Financial Times placed Shield AI at approximately 21 times forward revenue and Quantum Systems at 8.5 times. Helsing therefore trades about 54% above Shield AI, almost four times above Quantum Systems and 148% above Anduril.

Helsing’s forward valuation premium compared with defense-tech peers

Q2Has Helsing’s valuation risen faster than Anduril’s?

Helsing’s valuation rose faster during its early breakout, but Anduril delivered the more aggressive jump in the latest round.

Helsing was valued above €1.7 billion after its September 2023 Series B. Ten months later, its July 2024 round valued the company at roughly €4.95 billion, an increase of around 191%. Helsing then reached €12 billion in June 2025, adding another 142% in eleven months.

The latest move was smaller. CB Insights recorded Helsing’s June 2025 dollar valuation at approximately $13.87 billion. The rise from that level to $18 billion in July 2026 was close to 30%.

Anduril followed a different pattern. It reached $14 billion in August 2024, $30.5 billion in June 2025 and $61 billion in May 2026. Its valuation more than doubled in 2025 and then doubled again in less than one year.

Helsing’s dramatic repricing happened in 2024 and 2025, when investors decided it could become Europe’s leading new defense company. Anduril’s valuation is rising faster today, alongside several billion dollars of revenue and a growing list of production programs.

How Helsing’s and Anduril’s valuations changed between rounds

Q3Was Anduril valued as aggressively as Helsing at the same age?

Yes. At approximately five years old, Anduril appears to have carried a revenue multiple close to Helsing’s current one.

Anduril was founded in 2017. Its December 2022 round valued the company at approximately $8.48 billion, around five years after launch. External estimates place its 2022 revenue near $236 million, which implies a post-money multiple of approximately 36 times revenue.

Helsing was founded in 2021 and is now also around five years old. Dividing its $18 billion post-money valuation by approximately $502 million of forecast 2026 revenue produces virtually the same multiple: close to 36 times.

This historical comparison is the strongest defense of Helsing’s price. Investors previously paid a similarly extreme multiple for Anduril, and Anduril subsequently grew into a much larger business.

Helsing still carries more execution risk in dollar terms. Its same-age valuation is more than twice Anduril’s 2022 valuation, and the revenue figure used for Helsing is a forward management forecast rather than an estimate of revenue already generated during the year.

Helsing and Anduril at roughly five years old

Q4Why has Anduril’s revenue caught up with its valuation faster than Helsing’s?

Anduril looks cheaper today because its revenue has grown almost exactly as fast as its valuation since 2024.

Anduril was valued at $14 billion in August 2024, when its annual revenue was approximately $1 billion. That represented a post-money revenue multiple near 14 times.

Its revenue then reached approximately $2.2 billion in 2025, up 120%, before management projected $4.3 billion for 2026. Over the same period, Anduril’s valuation increased from $14 billion to $30.5 billion and then $61 billion.

From 2024 to 2026, Anduril’s valuation multiplied by approximately 4.36, while revenue multiplied by roughly 4.3. Its revenue multiple consequently remained close to 14 times throughout the entire period.

Helsing has not yet shown that kind of public multiyear progression. Its reported 2026 revenue forecast may prove accurate, but investors are paying before the company demonstrates several consecutive years in which revenue keeps pace with valuation.

Anduril’s valuation and revenue growth since 2024

Q5Are Helsing’s contracts strong enough to deserve a higher multiple than Anduril?

No. Helsing’s contracts support rapid growth, but Anduril currently has the broader and more mature procurement base.

Helsing has secured an initial German HX-2 contract worth approximately €268 million, with options that could eventually lift the program to €1.46 billion. It also has a roughly €223 million German combat-cloud agreement and previously announced orders covering thousands of drones for Ukraine.

Those wins are substantial for a company founded in 2021. Helsing has crossed from experimental projects into funded military procurement.

The larger optional values need to be read carefully. A €1.46 billion ceiling only becomes revenue when Germany exercises the options, allocates funding and accepts deliveries. Multiyear programs may also recognize revenue gradually and include work performed by industrial partners.

Anduril’s record is deeper. Its US Army enterprise agreement consolidated more than 120 separate procurement actions into one framework with a potential ceiling of $20 billion. The ceiling is not guaranteed spending, but those existing actions reveal a wider base of repeat purchasing than Helsing has disclosed.

Anduril also signed a framework to scale surface-launched Barracuda-500M production and won the US Air Force production phase for its FQ-44 collaborative combat aircraft in June 2026.

Helsing’s contracts make its forecast believable. They do not justify a revenue multiple almost 2.5 times higher than Anduril’s by themselves.

How Helsing’s contract base compares with Anduril’s

Q6Does Helsing have a bigger European procurement advantage than Anduril?

Yes. European procurement policy currently gives Helsing a structural advantage that Anduril cannot remove simply by offering a competitive product.

The EU’s SAFE instrument can provide up to €150 billion in loans for joint defense procurement. Its priority categories include drones, precision strike, artificial intelligence, electronic warfare, underwater capabilities and C4ISTAR, all of which overlap with Helsing’s portfolio.

SAFE also restricts the share of component costs originating outside the EU, EEA-EFTA or Ukraine. For sensitive systems, buyers must retain enough technological control to maintain and modify the equipment without restrictions imposed by a non-European country.

Helsing remained predominantly European-owned after its latest financing. It reinforced that position by acquiring German aircraft manufacturer Grob, developing European production capacity and embedding its software inside programs linked to Gripen, Eurofighter and Germany’s combat cloud.

Anduril is pursuing localization through European partners and manufacturing arrangements. But local assembly alone does not automatically resolve questions around ownership, source technology, export controls and modification rights.

This is the clearest reason Helsing can justify a higher multiple. Investors are paying for a company that may receive privileged access to a large and increasingly protected European procurement pool.

Q7Is Helsing’s technology more valuable in Europe than Anduril’s?

Yes, in some European programs. Helsing’s products are less mature overall, but its integration into existing European platforms can be more strategically valuable than Anduril’s standalone systems.

Helsing’s Centaur AI agent controlled a Saab Gripen E during live test flights in 2025, performing combat maneuvers and issuing firing commands under a Swedish government program. The company also secured a three-year program involving AI integration into the Eurofighter’s electronic-warfare architecture.

That gives Helsing access to aircraft and defense infrastructure European governments already treat as strategically sensitive. A software supplier embedded inside Gripen, Eurofighter or a national combat cloud can become difficult to replace before it has even built the largest standalone product portfolio.

Helsing also demonstrated progress with the HX-2 during the US Army’s Flytrap exercise in Lithuania. Seventeen HX-2 drones reportedly achieved 15 direct hits and two near misses in an electronic-warfare environment.

The drone’s earlier Ukrainian record was less convincing. Reports in January 2026 described launch problems, missing autonomous features and vulnerability to electronic warfare during frontline trials. Helsing disputed that account, and the later US exercise suggests performance may have improved.

Anduril remains ahead in overall maturity. Its FQ-44 has moved into the production phase, while Helsing’s CA-1 had not completed its planned first flight as of July 2026.

Helsing’s premium comes from strategic placement more than technical supremacy across every category. Europe may value an AI layer inside its own aircraft and command systems more highly than a mature American platform still subject to foreign control.

Helsing and Anduril’s current technology positions

Q8Are investors pricing Helsing more like a software company than Anduril?

Yes. Helsing receives a much richer software-platform multiple even though its business is becoming increasingly industrial.

Helsing began with AI and battlefield software, but its expansion now requires factories, aircraft development, underwater vehicles, warheads and large-scale drone production.

The company acquired Grob Aircraft in 2025 and announced its first US factory in West Virginia in July 2026. Helsing says the facility could eventually produce more than 2,000 HX-2 drones per month. Its German factory was previously designed for capacity above 1,000 units per month.

That expansion can improve control over supply and product performance. It also introduces capital expenditure, inventory, specialized labor, testing and maintenance. These economics usually receive lower revenue multiples than pure software.

Anduril faces the same problem and is investing more than $900 million in its Arsenal-1 manufacturing campus. Its larger revenue base and 13-times multiple already reflect the market’s recognition that defense software must eventually be delivered through expensive physical products.

Helsing could reuse its AI, mission software and battlefield data across drones, aircraft and underwater systems. That would create real platform economics. Today, though, no public consolidated gross margin or software-versus-hardware revenue split shows that Helsing has better economics than Anduril.

The valuation assumes Helsing’s software layer will eventually dominate the economics of its hardware portfolio. Investors are paying for that outcome early.

Q9Does Helsing have stronger strategic investors than Anduril?

No. Helsing and Anduril have similarly strong financial investors, although Helsing’s relationship with Saab gives it a more useful strategic investor inside Europe.

Helsing’s July 2026 round included Dragoneer, Lightspeed, Iconiq, Goldman Sachs Alternatives, JPMorganChase, CPP Investments, General Catalyst, Plural, StepStone and Disruptive. Earlier rounds also included Accel, Prima Materia and Swedish defense group Saab.

Anduril’s latest round was led by returning investors Thrive Capital and Andreessen Horowitz. Its wider shareholder base has included Founders Fund, Fidelity, Baillie Gifford, Sands Capital and General Catalyst. Founders Fund alone invested $1 billion in Anduril’s 2025 round, reportedly the largest check in the firm’s history.

There is no persuasive basis for claiming Helsing attracted a better financial syndicate. Both companies can access tier-one venture funds, growth investors and institutions capable of financing multibillion-dollar expansion.

Saab is the meaningful difference. It gives Helsing more than capital: aircraft expertise, relationships with European defense customers and access to the Gripen ecosystem. Anduril has major industrial partnerships, but its investor base does not offer an obvious equivalent inside Europe.

Helsing’s investors reduce financing risk and support the credibility of its expansion. They do not explain a revenue multiple 2.5 times higher on their own.

How Helsing’s investors compare with Anduril’s

Q10How fast must Helsing grow to reach Anduril’s current valuation multiple?

Helsing needs approximately $1.25 billion of annual revenue for its current pre-money valuation to match Anduril’s 13-times forward multiple.

That would require revenue roughly 148% above Helsing’s $502 million forecast for 2026.

Helsing reportedly expects €753 million of revenue in 2027. Reaching that target would bring its pre-money multiple down toward 19 times, which would still leave it approximately 46% above Anduril’s current multiple.

The company must continue growing rapidly beyond 2027, or demonstrate materially better margins, contract quality or strategic value than Anduril.

The operating milestones are quite specific. Helsing needs to convert German contract options into funded purchases, retain customers after frontline deployments, secure actual US orders for its new West Virginia factory, complete the CA-1’s planned flight program and show that its shared software layer produces attractive margins across several hardware categories.

Anduril has already shown that this type of growth is possible. Its revenue moved from approximately $1 billion in 2024 to $2.2 billion in 2025 and a projected $4.3 billion in 2026. Helsing’s valuation assumes it can follow a comparable curve from a smaller base while preserving its European advantage.

Revenue Helsing needs to reach peer valuation multiples

Q11So why is Helsing so expensive compared with Anduril?

Helsing is more expensive because investors are valuing it as the likely winner of a protected European defense market, while Anduril’s valuation now rests much more heavily on revenue and production already delivered.

Helsing has one advantage that deserves a meaningful premium. It is predominantly European-owned, embedded in sensitive European programs and aligned with procurement rules that favor locally controlled technology and supply chains.

The company also has real technical and commercial proof. It has secured large German programs, tested AI inside the Gripen E, entered the Eurofighter ecosystem, produced thousands of drones and recently achieved strong results during a US Army exercise.

Anduril remains ahead on almost every conventional operating measure. It generates around eight times more forecast revenue, has a broader procurement base, operates more mature aircraft and weapons programs, and has kept its revenue multiple stable while its valuation doubled twice.

Applying Anduril’s 13-times forward multiple to Helsing’s forecast revenue would produce a pre-money value of approximately $6.5 billion. Adding the $1.8 billion of new capital results in a mechanical post-money benchmark near $8.3 billion.

That leaves roughly $9.7 billion, or 54% of Helsing’s current valuation, above an Anduril-equivalent benchmark. Investors are effectively assigning that amount to European sovereignty, preferential procurement access, strategic scarcity and Helsing’s chance of becoming the common AI layer across Europe’s future weapons systems.

Some premium is justified. A multiple almost 2.5 times higher remains ahead of the evidence available today.

Helsing is currently priced as though it will reproduce Anduril’s revenue trajectory while keeping competitors away from Europe’s most sensitive programs. That can happen. The $18 billion valuation already assumes a large part of the victory.

Why Helsing trades at a premium to Anduril