Britain is trying to use state equity to keep its most important startups at home, but the test is still simple: whether public money can change where founders raise, hire, and eventually list.
The reference point nobody in government has to spell out is Arm. Cambridge-built, decades in the making, and now a Nasdaq company worth well over $170 billion after choosing New York for its 2023 listing. That is the fear behind the new policy push. Business Secretary Peter Kyle told The Sunday Times this month that ministers want to take more risk backing British companies before the centre of gravity moves abroad.
The machinery is already visible. The British Business Bank has taken stakes in companies that would normally be courted hardest by US funds: quantum computing, autonomous driving, energy software, and artificial intelligence infrastructure. As The Wall Street Journal reported this week, Kyle described the government as needing to be more assertive through the 2020s and 2030s if it wants British scaleups to stay rooted in Britain rather than follow capital across the Atlantic.
Oxford Quantum Circuits is one of the clearest tests. The British Business Bank has made a recent £100 million follow-on investment in the quantum computing company, a much larger signal than the kind of early support the state has historically provided through innovation grants and fund commitments. The point is not simply to help a lab-born company survive. It is to make sure that when strategic buyers, sovereign funds, or Silicon Valley investors come calling, the UK has a real seat at the table.
Wayve offers a second example. The London autonomous driving company raised a $1.5 billion round earlier this year, backed by investors including SoftBank, Microsoft, Nvidia, Uber, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, and Stellantis. The British Business Bank put in £25 million. That is small beside the full round, but politically it matters because Wayve sits in one of the few markets where Britain has a credible claim to global leadership. If robotaxi software becomes a major platform layer, the UK does not want its strongest company in the category to become a foreign story by default.
Kraken Technologies shows why this is not only about frontier science. The Octopus Energy software arm, whose platform manages tens of millions of utility accounts worldwide, received a £25 million British Business Bank investment as part of its wider funding and separation from Octopus. Kraken is exactly the kind of company London says it wants to list at home: fast-growing, software-heavy, commercially proven, and globally relevant. The harder question is whether a modest state stake can compete with the liquidity, analyst coverage, and valuation premium still attached to New York.
The AI push adds another layer. The UK’s £500 million sovereign AI programme, announced in April, is built to behave more like a venture investor than a traditional grant scheme. Its first disclosed backing included stakes in companies such as Callosum, alongside compute access for startups using government-funded supercomputing resources. That mix matters because capital is only one reason founders leave. Compute, visas, procurement, and customer access all shape where a company can scale.
There is a real risk in this approach. Government co-investment can distort pricing, especially when a public institution becomes a large anchor in a private round. A sovereign investor may accept terms that a purely commercial lead would challenge, and private investors may read the state’s presence as downside protection. That can push valuations higher than the market alone would support.
The counterargument is stronger than it first sounds. Britain’s problem has not usually been too much money chasing its best startups. It has been too little domestic scale capital arriving at the moment when companies need to move from promising to unavoidable. Founders often raise early money in London, then discover that the deeper pools sit in the US. Headquarters, senior hiring, customers, and exit plans tend to follow.
France has taken a different route through the Tibi initiative, which mobilises insurers and other institutional investors into venture and growth funds rather than putting the state directly on company cap tables. That model avoids some valuation signalling problems and builds a broader private funding base. Britain’s model is blunter. It is faster, more visible, and easier for ministers to point to, but it also puts more pressure on investment discipline.
The urgency is not imagined. UK AI companies continue to attract meaningful venture capital, but the US still captures the overwhelming majority of global AI funding. That gap matters because the companies defining markets are usually shaped by where their largest customers, investors, and exit options sit. If Britain wants to keep more of the value it creates, writing occasional cheques will not be enough. The state has to help build the market around those companies.
Kyle’s bet is that equity changes the conversation at the moment founders are deciding whether Britain is big enough for their ambitions. The next proof will not be an announcement or another funding round. It will be whether companies like OQC, Wayve, and Kraken choose to scale, hire, and eventually list in the UK when they have every incentive to look elsewhere.
Also read: A scaffolding company's earnings reveal who really pays for the AI buildout • Singapore will reward SMEs that make AI show its working • Avataar builds video AI on Indian cultural data, winning HP and Victoria's Secret as customers
