Les étapes clés pour construire une startup via le Venture Building

Dans l’imaginaire collectif, créer une startup rime souvent avec solitude, prise de risques extrêmes et nuits blanches à chercher son premier client. Mais depuis quelques années, une nouvelle approche change la donne : le Venture Building. Plutôt que de laisser des fondateurs naviguer seuls dans l’incertitude, le Venture Building met à leur disposition une méthode structurée, des ressources partagées et une équipe expérimentée. Résultat : les chances de succès augmentent, et les erreurs fatales diminuent.

En 2025, cette approche attire autant les entrepreneurs que les investisseurs, et il n’est pas difficile de comprendre pourquoi. Pour construire une startup via le Venture Building, certaines étapes clés sont devenues incontournables.

Comprendre le problème avant de penser à la solution

Beaucoup de startups échouent parce qu’elles partent directement d’une idée séduisante, sans s’assurer que le problème est réel. Dans un modèle Venture Building, la première étape consiste à identifier des problèmes de marché concrets. Cela se fait à travers des recherches approfondies : analyse de tendances, entretiens clients, études sectorielles.

L’objectif est clair : valider que le problème existe, qu’il est suffisamment douloureux pour les utilisateurs, et qu’il touche un marché accessible. Sans cette base solide, même la meilleure idée de produit a peu de chances de survivre.

La validation rapide : tester avant d’investir

L’une des grandes forces du Venture Building est sa capacité à tester les hypothèses très tôt. Plutôt que de dépenser des millions dans un produit complet, les studios construisent des prototypes simples ou des “Minimum Viable Products” (MVP). Ces tests permettent de mesurer l’intérêt du marché, d’obtenir des retours concrets et d’ajuster l’idée.

Selon une étude de McKinsey, les venture builders expérimentés multiplient par 2 les chances de succès de leurs startups comparé aux novices, car ils savent répéter ces cycles de test et d’apprentissage.

Constituer l’équipe fondatrice

Le capital humain reste la clé. Un Venture Builder ne se contente pas d’une bonne idée, il cherche aussi à assembler l’équipe fondatrice idéale. Souvent, le studio recrute un CEO, un CTO et parfois un CPO, afin d’équilibrer vision stratégique, expertise technique et exécution produit.

Prenons l’exemple de Hexa (anciennement eFounders), un Venture Builder parisien qui a contribué au lancement de plus de 40 startups SaaS, dont Aircall ou Front. Leur approche ? Associer très tôt des fondateurs complémentaires et les entourer de designers, développeurs et experts en croissance. Résultat : un taux d’échec extrêmement bas, autour de 6%, bien inférieur à la moyenne du marché.

Les ressources partagées : gagner du temps et réduire les coûts

Créer une startup, c’est aussi gérer mille détails : comptabilité, juridique, recrutement, communication. Le Venture Builder fournit des ressources mutualisées qui permettent aux jeunes équipes de se concentrer sur ce qui compte vraiment : le produit et le marché.

C’est un gain de temps énorme. Au lieu de perdre des mois à structurer l’administratif, la startup démarre avec un cadre professionnel dès le jour un. Cela réduit aussi le risque d’erreurs coûteuses, comme de mauvaises clauses juridiques ou un recrutement mal géré.

Trouver le Product-Market Fit

Après la phase de test et le premier MVP, vient l’étape cruciale : atteindre l’adéquation produit-marché (Product-Market Fit). Le Venture Building insiste sur des itérations rapides : écouter les utilisateurs, ajuster les fonctionnalités, repositionner si nécessaire.

Un rapport du Global Startup Studio Network (GSSN) montre que les startups issues de Venture Studios atteignent le Series A en moyenne en 25 mois, contre 56 mois pour les startups traditionnelles. Ce rythme accéléré s’explique par le travail constant sur l’adéquation produit-marché, mené avec méthode et ressources.

Le financement structuré

Contrairement aux startups classiques, qui doivent convaincre des investisseurs dès le début, les startups issues de Venture Building bénéficient d’un financement interne initial. Le studio investit souvent plusieurs centaines de milliers d’euros pour couvrir les premiers 12 à 18 mois. Cela réduit le stress financier et permet de construire des bases solides avant d’aller chercher du capital externe.

Par exemple, Hexa investit environ 800 000 € par projet dès la phase initiale, ce qui permet aux fondateurs de se consacrer pleinement au développement sans se soucier immédiatement de lever des fonds. 

Le spin-off : voler de ses propres ailes

Une fois que le produit a trouvé son marché, que l’équipe est stable et que la traction est prouvée, vient l’étape du spin-off : la startup sort du Venture Builder pour devenir une entité autonome. Elle garde cependant souvent des liens forts avec le studio, qui reste actionnaire (en moyenne autour de 30% de participation).

Ce modèle crée un alignement d’intérêts : le studio a tout intérêt à maximiser les chances de succès, car son rendement dépend de la réussite de l’entreprise sur le long terme.

L’impact global du Venture Building

Avec cette approche, les risques de faillite diminuent sensiblement. Là où 9 startups sur 10 échouent dans le modèle classique, les données montrent qu’une majorité des projets issus de Venture Builders atteignent au moins le stade du financement externe, et certains deviennent des scale-ups internationales.

C’est aussi une manière de répondre à un contexte où les investisseurs recherchent davantage de sécurité et de discipline. En 2025, dans un environnement économique marqué par la prudence, le Venture Building apparaît comme une réponse adaptée : il combine créativité entrepreneuriale et rigueur méthodologique.

Le prochain chapitre

Construire une startup via le Venture Building n’élimine pas tous les risques, mais cela les transforme. Au lieu de parier sur une idée et un fondateur isolé, on s’appuie sur un cadre reproductible, une équipe solide et un accompagnement pas à pas.

Les étapes clés sont claires: identifier un problème réel, valider rapidement, recruter l’équipe fondatrice, bénéficier de ressources partagées, trouver le Product-Market Fit, sécuriser le financement et enfin, voler de ses propres ailes. En suivant ce chemin, les startups issues du Venture Building ne se contentent pas de survivre : elles posent les bases pour grandir plus vite, plus fort, et avec davantage d’impact.

L’avenir du Venture Building dans le prochain cycle d’innovation

L’histoire de l’innovation n’est jamais linéaire. Elle avance par vagues, par cycles, où des périodes d’exubérance sont suivies par des moments de rationalisation. Après les excès de la décennie passée -  capital abondant, valorisations gonflées, course effrénée à la croissance - 2025 ouvre un nouveau chapitre, plus sélectif, plus exigeant. Dans ce contexte, une question émerge avec force : quel sera le rôle du Venture Building dans le prochain cycle d’innovation ?

Ce modèle, encore méconnu du grand public il y a dix ans, s’impose désormais comme un pilier incontournable des écosystèmes entrepreneuriaux. Les données le confirment : selon le Global Startup Studio Network, une startup issue d’un Venture Studio a près de 30 % de chances supplémentaires de réussir par rapport à une startup traditionnelle. Et au moment de lever des fonds, ces startups passent du pré-seed à la Série A en 25 mois en moyenne, contre 56 mois pour les autres.

Un contexte favorable à l’émergence des Venture Builders

La première raison de croire en l’avenir du Venture Building réside dans le climat économique actuel. Les investisseurs se montrent plus prudents : les levées de fonds globales ont reculé de près de 42 % en 2023 par rapport à l’année record de 2021. Dans ce nouvel environnement, où chaque euro compte, le Venture Building apparaît comme une réponse logique.

Pourquoi ? Parce qu’il réduit le gaspillage. Les idées sont testées rapidement, les ressources mutualisées, les équipes accompagnées pas à pas. Là où un startup classique peut brûler des millions avant de se rendre compte que son produit ne trouve pas son marché, un projet issu d’un Venture Builder ajuste le tir bien plus tôt.

Leçons tirées des pionniers

Des acteurs comme Flagship Pioneering aux États-Unis ont déjà montré la voie. Ce Venture Builder de Boston est à l’origine de plusieurs géants de la biotech, dont Moderna, qui a joué un rôle clé dans la mise au point du vaccin à ARNm contre le Covid-19. Ici, l’exemple est frappant : sans un Venture Builder capable de financer la recherche fondamentale, de recruter les bons scientifiques et de structurer une startup avant même qu’il y ait un marché, une telle réussite aurait été improbable.

En Europe, le studio parisien Hexa (anciennement eFounders) démontre également la puissance du modèle. Avec plus de 40 startups lancées et un taux d’échec limité à 6 %, Hexa prouve que l’innovation peut être industrialisée sans perdre son agilité. Leurs spin-offs, comme Aircall ou Front, sont devenus des scale-ups internationales, générant des milliers d’emplois.

Le Venture Building comme réponse aux grands défis

Le prochain cycle d’innovation sera marqué par des défis mondiaux : le climat, l’intelligence artificielle, la santé, la cybersécurité. Autant de secteurs où le temps presse et où les erreurs coûtent cher. Or, le Venture Building est particulièrement adapté pour s’attaquer à ces problématiques complexes.

Dans le domaine climatique, par exemple, les projets nécessitent des investissements lourds et des validations scientifiques rigoureuses. Les Venture Builders peuvent absorber ce risque en mutualisant les ressources, en travaillant avec des chercheurs et en créant plusieurs projets en parallèle. Cela augmente les chances qu’au moins l’un d’entre eux réussisse à atteindre une échelle significative.

De même, dans l’IA, où l’innovation avance à une vitesse vertigineuse, les studios offrent un cadre permettant de tester rapidement des cas d’usage, de sécuriser l’accès aux talents et de lever des fonds dès que la traction est prouvée.

Une industrialisation de l’entrepreneuriat ?

Certains critiques voient dans le Venture Building une forme de « fabrique à startups » qui risque de standardiser l’entrepreneuriat. Mais l’expérience montre l’inverse. En réalité, le modèle ne bride pas la créativité : il la canalise. Il donne aux idées le cadre nécessaire pour passer du stade de concept à celui d’entreprise viable.

McKinsey souligne que les Venture Builders expérimentés produisent en moyenne des startups générant 12 fois plus de revenus au bout de cinq ans que celles issues de studios novices. Cela prouve que l’expérience accumulée ne tue pas l’innovation, elle la renforce.

Vers une hybridation des modèles

L’avenir du Venture Building ne se limitera pas aux studios indépendants. On observe déjà une hybridation :

• Des entreprises traditionnelles lancent leurs propres Venture Builders pour explorer de nouveaux marchés (par exemple, les grands groupes énergétiques qui développent des spin-offs dans les énergies renouvelables).

• Des fonds de capital-risque commencent à intégrer des équipes de Venture Building pour mieux accompagner leurs participations.

• Des gouvernements soutiennent des programmes de studios nationaux afin de stimuler l’innovation locale et de retenir les talents.

Cette hybridation crée un écosystème plus robuste, où le Venture Building n’est plus une alternative marginale mais un composant central du cycle d’innovation.

Une promesse d’impact à long terme

À mesure que ce modèle gagne en maturité, une chose devient claire : le Venture Building n’est pas seulement un outil pour créer des startups plus vite, c’est une méthode pour créer des entreprises plus solides et plus alignées sur les grands besoins de la société.

En réduisant les risques d’échec, en attirant les meilleurs talents et en canalisant les capitaux vers des projets réellement validés, il contribue à un écosystème entrepreneurial plus durable. Et dans un monde où les crises se succèdent - sanitaires, climatiques, géopolitiques, cette durabilité est plus précieuse que jamais.

Le prochain chapitre

L’avenir du Venture Building dans le prochain cycle d’innovation sera donc marqué par trois dynamiques : une adoption massive par les investisseurs en quête de sécurité, une expansion vers des secteurs critiques comme le climat et la santé, et une hybridation avec les entreprises et les institutions.

Nous entrons dans une période où l’innovation ne peut plus se permettre d’être chaotique ou gaspilleuse. Le Venture Building, avec sa rigueur et sa créativité, apparaît comme le modèle capable d’écrire les prochaines grandes histoires entrepreneuriales.

Dans dix ans, il est probable que nous ne parlerons plus de Venture Building comme d’une nouveauté, mais comme de l’infrastructure invisible de l’innovation mondiale.

How Venture Builders Reduce Startup Failure Risks

Startups often feel like walking a tightrope in a storm: one wrong step, one misstep in timing, market, or team, and everything falls. It’s no surprise that about 90% of startups fail overall. But in 2025, a different model is proving it can lower those odds: the venture builder. These are organizations that don’t just invest - they build. They nurture ideas, assemble teams, offer infrastructure, and walk alongside founders through early storms.

Here’s how venture builders are reducing failure risks - and what data and case studies show about their effectiveness.

The Stakes: Understanding Startup Risk

The numbers are stark. Many reports show failure rates over time are steep: roughly 10% of new startups fail within their first year, and between years two through five, majority of failures happen. By year ten, few survive. These aren’t just abstract stats, they represent teams who ran out of runway, misread market demand, or couldn’t piece together strong execution. That’s the baseline. Venture builders aim to shift those odds by intervening early on the common failure triggers.

What Venture Builders Do Differently

Venture builders provide what many startups struggle to assemble quickly: clarity of idea, team strength, operational support, and effective validation.

You can think of it this way: instead of solo founders trying to juggle everything - product, user-feedback, hiring, legal, finances - the builder supplies scaffolding. They often supply shared services (legal, HR, strategy), access to domain experts, and a process for iterating ideas before major investment. This means startups born inside builder models often avoid big, early mistakes.

There are multiple pieces to this, but one that researchers call out often is the capacity to test product-market fit before “going big.” Because builders usually demand early user feedback, safe prototyping, proof of concept. That early feedback loop weeds out ideas with weak demand.

Data & Case Studies: Proof in Practice

• Venture Studio Survival & Alive Ratios

A study called Big Venture Studio Research 2024 looked at hundreds of venture studios, hybrid builders, and corporate builders. They found that hybrid venture studios (those that combine venture studio activities with things like corporate building, accelerator, VC fund) have much higher survival rates: for every studio that closes, there are ~10.86 that remain alive. Corporate builders had ~9.3:1. Pure venture studios had lower survivorship: ~4.73:1.(That means builders which diversify or bring in hybrid functions tend to reduce risk further.

• Experienced Builders vs Novice Ones

McKinsey recently published findings in “The Three Building Blocks of a Successful Venture Factory” that more experienced venture builders are about twice as likely to achieve success compared to newcomer studios. Over time, with repeat efforts, their output (in revenue in fifth year) can be 12 times higher than that of novice studios. That suggests that venture builders don’t just reduce risk by the model - they get better at reducing risk as they build more companies.

• Corporate Venture Building vs Traditional Startup Paths

An article by CreativeDock noted that corporations using venture building (internally creating new startups or spin-outs) report success rates around 66% for their ventures, far above the 20-30% or so typical for venture capital backed startups or corporate ventures without structured building. They also say that venture building-born startups achieve better IRRs (~44% higher on average) compared to traditional startups, faster transitions from seed to Series A, and earlier exits (on average under 4 years) compared to 6-7 years typical elsewhere.

Human Stories Behind the Data

Consider a venture builder that continuously launches several projects per year. With the builder model, a given project might start not with a blank page, but with a research phase. Founders test assumptions: Is there demand? Can the technology or product be built affordably? Who is competition? These early experiments expose flaws early - low demand, wrong features - so adjustments are made before major investment.

Another important case is around the “business-building muscle.” McKinsey points out that entities that build many ventures develop repeated systems: standard ways to onboard teams, validate ideas, launch MVPs, spin-outs. Over time, they make fewer rookie mistakes - less duplicated effort, fewer misfires - so each new project starts from a stronger foundation.

What Failures Are Reduced

By virtue of these mechanisms, venture builders tend to reduce risk in several specific ways:

• Team risk: builders often match people with complementary skills rather than solo founders. They bring in domain experts early.

• Market risk: they test demand, refine product-market fit before big spends.

• Execution risk: shared infrastructure and expertise mean better supply chain, legal, hiring, finance practices early.

• Timing & capital risk: because builders tend to pace investment, control burn, and have staged funding, they avoid over-extension before product is solid.

These interventions don’t eliminate risk entirely. But they shift the risk curve substantially.

Broader Trends & What Investors Are Saying

Investors in 2025 say they want a higher floor - some guarantee of minimal failure, clearer paths from concept to growth. They like models where founders aren’t isolated. Where you can see how an idea was validated, how the team was assembled. Where overhead is shared and costs are lean early.

Corporations also find benefit: many large firms are adopting corporate venture building to create new growth engines. In one survey by EY-Parthenon, nearly 45% of executives from surveyed companies reported they have launched ventures in the last five years that now generate $100 million+ in annual revenue. Venture building gives them structure to do that.

Looking Ahead: What Makes a Builder Even More Robust

The data suggests certain traits make some venture builders better at reducing risk:

• Repetition: builders who launch many ventures learn faster.

• Hybrid or diversified models: studios that also do corporate venturing, VC funds, accelerators tend to have higher survival of their ventures.

• Strong validation early: demand testing before full build.

• Deep domain or technical competence: where builders understand industry/technology well, they avoid mis-positioning or under-estimating costs.

The Next Chapter

Startups will always carry risk. That’s part of what gives them upside. But a model growing in legitimacy in 2025 is one that doesn’t treat failure as inevitable, but as something to manage. Venture builders are showing how structured support, domain expertise, shared infrastructure, and repeated experience can tilt the odds in favor of survival.

For founders thinking of starting under a builder, the message is hopeful: you don’t have to brace for failure alone. For investors, it means better early signals, stronger teams, and less wasted cost.

In a world where capital is tighter and demands are higher, venture builders are proving to be more than trend - they might be the most reliable path through the startup storm.

Funding the Future: The Role of VCs and Sovereign Funds in Singapore’s Venture Studios

The venture studio model has redefined how startups are born. Instead of betting on lone founders, venture studios build companies from the ground up, pairing entrepreneurial talent with capital, infrastructure, and networks. But behind this model lies a critical question: who funds the future?

In Singapore, the answer increasingly comes from two powerful sources - venture capital firms and sovereign wealth funds. Together, they are shaping not just the trajectory of venture studios but the kinds of companies that will define Asia’s innovation landscape over the next decade.

Why Funding Matters in Venture Building

Traditional startups often begin with a small seed round, testing ideas with limited resources. Venture studios flip that dynamic. They require upfront investment to design infrastructure, hire operational teams, and support multiple ventures simultaneously. The model is capital-intensive, but it also increases the odds of producing sustainable startups.

This is why the involvement of venture capital (VCs) and sovereign wealth funds is so significant. They provide not only the capital but also the long-term vision needed to sustain venture studios through the uncertain early stages of building science-driven or industry-specific companies.

The Numbers Speak

In 2022, Singapore attracted more than US$11 billion in startup funding, according to Enterprise Singapore, with a growing share flowing into venture-building initiatives. The global venture studio market itself is projected to reach US$42 billion by 2027, up from around US$20 billion today, as reported by Global Startup Studio Network.

Within Singapore, sovereign wealth funds play a particularly influential role. Temasek Holdings, with assets exceeding US$287 billion, has been steadily increasing its exposure to early-stage innovation through vehicles like Xora Innovation, its venture-building arm. Meanwhile, GIC, with more than US$770 billion in assets under management, has also stepped up its participation in deeptech and sustainability-focused ventures, often co-investing alongside studios and VCs.

Case Study: Temasek and Xora Innovation

Temasek’s launch of Xora Innovation in 2019 was a milestone for Singapore’s venture building ecosystem. Xora focuses on commercializing breakthrough scientific research in fields like climate tech, healthcare, and advanced manufacturing. Unlike traditional VC, Xora doesn’t just invest - it co-builds, bringing together teams of scientists, operators, and entrepreneurs to create companies from scratch.
One example is its investment in Eavor, a geothermal technology startup developing closed-loop systems for renewable energy. By backing such ventures, Temasek shows how sovereign funds can align financial returns with global sustainability goals while anchoring these efforts in Singapore.

The Role of Venture Capital Firms

Venture capital firms, too, are leaning into the venture studio model. Global firms like Sequoia Capital and Vertex Ventures (the latter headquartered in Singapore) have backed startups emerging from studios, drawn by the de-risked nature of ventures that already have structured support and validation.

Antler, one of the world’s most prominent venture builders with a major base in Singapore, has partnered with VCs to scale its portfolio. Since its launch, Antler Singapore has created more than 100 startups, many of which have raised follow-on capital from leading VCs. This collaboration demonstrates a virtuous cycle: studios generate investable companies, while VCs provide the growth capital to scale them globally.

Why Sovereign Funds Matter More in Singapore

Singapore’s sovereign wealth funds bring something that private VCs alone cannot - patient capital. DeepTech, climate, and biotech startups often take years to become commercially viable. Sovereign funds like Temasek and GIC are uniquely positioned to absorb these long timelines while maintaining conviction in long-term returns.

Moreover, their participation signals confidence to the market. When a sovereign fund co-invests in a venture, it often catalyzes additional investment from global VCs, corporates, and even governments. This multiplier effect strengthens the ecosystem and accelerates the scale-up of ventures born in Singapore’s studios.

Singapore as a Regional Magnet for Capital

The presence of sovereign wealth funds also amplifies Singapore’s role as a capital hub for Southeast Asia. With over 650 million people, Southeast Asia represents one of the world’s fastest-growing digital economies, projected by Google and Temasek to reach US$330 billion by 2025. By anchoring venture studios in Singapore and funding them with sovereign-backed capital, the city-state effectively positions itself as the launchpad for ventures targeting this massive market.

The Challenges Ahead

While the alignment of VCs and sovereign funds has fueled the rise of Singapore’s venture studios, challenges remain. Venture building is resource-heavy, and not all studios will survive. There is also the question of focus: should capital prioritize moonshot DeepTech ventures with global ambitions, or scalable consumer-tech plays better suited for regional adoption?

Striking the right balance will be key. Too much emphasis on short-term gains risks diluting the transformative potential of venture building. Too much focus on moonshots without market validation risks creating science projects that never scale.

Looking Ahead: Funding the Next Decade

What’s clear is that the combination of VCs and sovereign wealth funds gives Singapore’s venture studios a uniquely powerful advantage. Venture capital brings agility and global networks, while sovereign funds provide stability and patience. Together, they create an ecosystem capable of nurturing bold ideas through the long road from concept to commercial success.

In the next decade, expect to see more sovereign-VC partnerships in Singapore’s venture building space, particularly in fields like climate tech, AI, and advanced manufacturing. These are areas where global challenges intersect with Singapore’s ambition to lead in innovation.

For founders, the message is clear: in Singapore, you don’t just get access to capital - you get access to aligned capital, designed to see you through the toughest years of building. For investors, the takeaway is equally strong: if you want exposure to the next generation of high-impact ventures in Asia, Singapore’s venture studios are where the story begins.

Singapore’s Role in Shaping the Next Wave of DeepTech through Venture Building

DeepTech refers to technologies rooted in scientific discoveries and engineering breakthroughs and it is increasingly seen as the foundation for solving humanity’s toughest problems. From climate resilience and quantum computing to advanced healthcare and space exploration, the promise of DeepTech extends far beyond incremental innovation. But building DeepTech startups is notoriously hard: they require long development cycles, heavy capital investment, and multidisciplinary expertise.

This is where Singapore is quietly taking center stage. Over the last decade, the city-state has positioned itself as one of Asia’s most compelling hubs for DeepTech innovation, not through chance but through a deliberate embrace of venture building. By pairing research talent with structured startup creation, Singapore is charting a path that could make it a global leader in translating science into scalable businesses.

The DeepTech Imperative

DeepTech is not just hype. According to Boston Consulting Group, DeepTech startups globally attracted more than US$60 billion in funding in 2023, double the levels seen in 2016. Yet the barriers to entry remain high. Unlike software startups, where a minimum viable product can be built in weeks, DeepTech ventures often require years of research before commercial viability.

Singapore has recognized both the challenge and the opportunity. With limited natural resources, the country has long invested in knowledge as its most strategic asset. Today, that strategy is paying off as its universities and research institutions - such as the National University of Singapore (NUS) and A-STAR - are increasingly integrated into venture-building pipelines.

A Government-Backed Ecosystem

The Singapore government has been one of the most active global backers of DeepTech venture building. Through initiatives like the SGInnovate Deep Tech Nexus Strategy, launched in 2017, the country committed more than US$150 million to support the translation of science into companies. SGInnovate itself has directly invested in over 100 DeepTech startups spanning fields like autonomous robotics, medtech, and agritech.

This model is designed not just to fund startups but to systematically derisk them. By offering labs, pilot facilities, and structured venture building programs, Singapore reduces the “valley of death” between academic research and commercial application.

Case Study: A-STAR Spinouts

One of the best examples of Singapore’s DeepTech venture building comes from A-STAR, the Agency for Science, Technology and Research. Over the past five years, A-STAR has spun out dozens of startups in biotech, advanced materials, and AI. Companies like Nanoveu, which develops nanotechnology-based films for optics and antiviral protection, have scaled regionally thanks to early support from A-STAR’s venture co-creation efforts.

Another case is RWDC Industries, a biodegradable plastics startup that originated in Singapore and has since raised more than US$135 million in growth funding. RWDC’s success underscores how research-driven ventures can become globally relevant with the right support structure.

Temasek and the Long-Term View

DeepTech requires patient capital, and few institutions embody patience better than Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund, Temasek. Through its venture-building arm Xora Innovation, Temasek partners with scientists and entrepreneurs at the very earliest stages, often before a commercial application is fully proven.

This long-term approach is critical. Traditional VCs often shy away from DeepTech because of long timelines, but venture studios like Xora de-risk the process by building operational capacity around founders. This allows breakthroughs in quantum computing or synthetic biology to be pursued without the pressure of unrealistic short-term returns.

Singapore as Asia’s Testbed

Another advantage lies in Singapore’s role as a testbed for emerging technologies. With its compact size, advanced infrastructure, and supportive regulators, the city-state often serves as a “living laboratory” for pilots.

For example, autonomous vehicle trials, drone delivery pilots, and next-gen biotech therapies have all been deployed in Singapore earlier than in most regional markets. This testbed status makes the country an attractive base for DeepTech venture builders: startups can validate complex technologies locally before scaling across Asia’s 650 million-strong Southeast Asian market.

Talent at the Core

DeepTech thrives on talent density, and Singapore has invested heavily in building a global research workforce. The country attracts scientists and engineers through initiatives like the Research, Innovation and Enterprise (RIE) 2025 Plan, which allocated US$25 billion to science and innovation over five years.

What sets Singapore apart is how this talent is integrated into venture building. Instead of leaving researchers isolated in academia, programs connect them with entrepreneurs, operators, and investors who can help translate breakthroughs into market-ready companies. This culture of collaboration is one reason why Singapore consistently ranks among the top 10 in the Global Innovation Index.

Looking Forward: Singapore’s DeepTech Ambition

The next decade will determine whether Singapore’s DeepTech bets pay off. The foundations are strong: government backing, venture studios, sovereign wealth participation, and global research talent. The challenge lies in scaling beyond local pilots into global leaders.

If Singapore’s studios can consistently produce DeepTech unicorns - companies solving real-world problems in energy, healthcare, and materials - it will cement its place not just as Asia’s DeepTech hub but as one of the world’s great innovation ecosystems.

For founders, Singapore offers a rare combination: scientific depth, supportive policy, and venture-building structures that reduce the odds of failure. For investors, it provides a gateway to high-potential DeepTech startups in Asia with the added security of government and sovereign fund alignment.

The message is clear: while Silicon Valley may dominate software, the next generation of world-changing science-driven startups could well be born in Singapore’s venture studios.

Why Singapore is Emerging as Asia’s Hub for Venture Building

Singapore has long been known as a global financial center, but in recent years, its ambitions have expanded beyond banking and trade. Today, it is carving out a reputation as Asia’s leading hub for venture building, the model where ideas are not just funded but systematically transformed into startups through the structured support of venture studios. While Silicon Valley remains the gold standard for startup culture, Singapore is demonstrating that the future of innovation in Asia might follow a different playbook.

The rise of venture building in Singapore is not accidental. It is the result of a deliberate strategy combining government foresight, investor appetite, and the city-state’s unique position as a connector between East and West. For founders and investors alike, Singapore is increasingly where the region’s most ambitious ideas are being tested, scaled, and launched into the world.

The Numbers Behind the Story

Singapore’s startup ecosystem has grown at a remarkable pace. According to Enterprise Singapore, the number of tech startups in the country jumped from around 2,800 in 2003 to more than 4,500 in 2023, employing tens of thousands of people and contributing significantly to GDP. In 2022 alone, venture funding in Singapore reached US$11 billion, accounting for more than 50% of all funding across Southeast Asia, according to DealStreetAsia.

But what’s most striking is not just the raw funding numbers. It is the structural shift toward venture building. More than 30 venture studios now operate in Singapore, ranging from independent builders like Antler, which has a strong base in the city, to corporate-backed and government-supported studios that focus on deeptech, fintech, and sustainability. This density is unmatched anywhere else in Asia, positioning Singapore as the natural hub for the model.

A Supportive Government Framework

One of Singapore’s most powerful advantages is the role of government policy. Agencies such as Enterprise Singapore and EDB (Economic Development Board) have actively fostered venture building by co-investing in studios, providing grants, and streamlining regulatory pathways for new businesses.

For instance, in 2020, the government launched the Startup SG Founder Venture Building Program, a scheme designed specifically to support venture builders in co-developing startups with entrepreneurs. This move signaled not only recognition of the venture building model but also a willingness to bet national resources on it.

The regulatory environment also plays a role. With a reputation for clarity, efficiency, and fairness, Singapore provides a rare sense of stability in a region where startups often grapple with red tape. For deeptech or highly regulated sectors like fintech and biotech, this regulatory clarity can make the difference between stagnation and scale.

Case Studies: Successful Venture Builders

The global venture builder Antler made Singapore its launchpad in Asia, running its residency program for founders and producing startups that have since expanded globally. In just five years, Antler Singapore has backed more than 500 founders and created over 100 startups, several of which have gone on to raise significant Series A and B rounds.

Another standout is Xora Innovation, the venture building arm of Temasek, Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund. Unlike traditional venture capital, Xora works directly with scientists and entrepreneurs to transform advanced research into scalable deeptech ventures. This model reflects Singapore’s ambition not just to create more startups but to anchor globally relevant ones in high-tech, defensible fields. These examples show how Singapore is positioning venture building not as a fringe experiment but as a central pillar of its innovation economy.

Location as a Strategic Advantage

Geography has always been part of Singapore’s success story, and venture building is no different. Situated at the crossroads of Southeast Asia, the city-state offers immediate access to a consumer market of over 650 million people, a young, digital-native population hungry for innovation. At the same time, Singapore remains deeply connected to Western capital markets, making it a natural bridge for global investors seeking exposure to Asia.

This dual access - emerging market scale on one side, developed-world capital on the other - is a rare combination. For venture studios looking to create startups that can expand regionally and scale globally, Singapore offers the perfect launchpad.

Why Founders Are Choosing Singapore

It’s not only investors and policymakers driving this momentum. Founders themselves increasingly see Singapore as the best place to build. The city offers one of the most connected startup communities in Asia, access to a deep pool of talent, and a cosmopolitan culture that values experimentation.

Entrepreneurs also appreciate the reduced risk profile that venture building offers. Instead of going it alone, they join studios that provide initial capital, expert support, and access to networks, dramatically improving their odds of success. For many, especially in capital-intensive sectors like biotech or climate tech, this support is the difference between a promising idea and a real company.

Looking Ahead

As venture building matures globally, Singapore is uniquely positioned to lead its adoption in Asia. With strong government support, growing investor participation, and an ecosystem of studios producing measurable results, the city-state has built the foundations of a venture building hub that rivals the best in the world.

The next chapter will depend on whether these studios can consistently produce companies that scale to unicorn status or become regional champions. If they do, Singapore won’t just be a hub for venture building - it will be the place where Asia’s most important startups of the next decade are born.

For founders, the message is clear: if you want to test bold ideas in Asia with a higher chance of survival, Singapore is the place to start. For investors, the message is equally strong: the most interesting stories in venture building are not just being written in Silicon Valley - they are unfolding right here, at the crossroads of the East.