Innovation Consulting

FAQ

Find answers to common questions about European startup funding and innovation.

271
Answers
1
Sources

271

answers

EIC Accelerator Step 1 Short Proposal Statistics: Country Success Rates, Sector Odds, Gender Data, and Application Volumes

What does the EIC Accelerator Step 1 short proposal dataset cover?

It covers 17,590 EIC Accelerator short proposal applications across 83 countries, 15 sectors, and the 2021 to 2026 period.

The dataset records 8,364 GO decisions and 9,226 NO-GO decisions.

Open FAQ page →
What is the source of the short proposal statistics?

The article identifies EISMEA as the source of the dataset.

Success rates in the article are calculated as GO decisions divided by GO plus NO-GO decisions.

Open FAQ page →
How is the short proposal success rate calculated?

The success rate is calculated as GO divided by GO plus NO-GO.

For the full dataset, 8,364 GO decisions divided by 17,590 total decisions gives an overall success rate of 47.5%.

Open FAQ page →
How many EIC Accelerator short proposal applications are in the dataset?

The dataset includes 17,590 short proposal applications.

These applications span 2021 through the partial 2026 data covered by the article.

Open FAQ page →
How many short proposals received a GO decision?

A total of 8,364 short proposals received a GO decision.

That means these applicants advanced beyond the first competitive filter.

Open FAQ page →
How many short proposals received a NO-GO decision?

A total of 9,226 short proposals received a NO-GO decision.

That represents 52.5% of all short proposal applications in the dataset.

Open FAQ page →
What is the overall EIC Accelerator short proposal success rate?

The overall short proposal success rate is 47.5%.

That headline rate is historical across 2021 to 2026 and does not represent the current 2025 or 2026 environment.

Open FAQ page →
How many applications were needed per GO decision overall?

The executive summary reports one GO decision for every 2.1 applications.

This is derived from 17,590 total applications and 8,364 GO decisions.

Open FAQ page →
How many countries or territories are represented?

The dataset covers 83 countries or territories.

Application volume is heavily concentrated, so most of those countries contribute only a small number of applications.

Open FAQ page →
How many sectors are covered in the short proposal dataset?

The dataset covers 15 sectors.

The largest sectors by volume are Health, ICT, Engineering and Technology, Energy, Transport and Mobility, Consumer Products and Services, Biotechnology, and Earth and Environmental Sciences.

Open FAQ page →
What is the EIC Accelerator short proposal stage?

The short proposal stage is the first competitive filter in the EIC Accelerator application process.

It is designed to be faster and more accessible than the full proposal stage, but a significant share of applicants still fail to advance.

Open FAQ page →
How does the short proposal success rate compare with the full proposal stage?

The article reports a 47.5% historical success rate for the short proposal stage.

It contrasts this with the full proposal stage, where the success rate is around 22.8%.

Open FAQ page →
Why is the 47.5% headline success rate misleading for current applicants?

The 47.5% rate combines years with very different evaluation conditions.

Applicants submitting in 2025 or 2026 should benchmark against the 21-22% range instead of the early 2021 and 2022 rates.

Open FAQ page →
What success rate should current short proposal applicants use for planning?

Current applicants should plan around the 2025 and partial 2026 success rates.

The article gives 21.7% for 2025 and 21.3% for the partial 2026 data.

Open FAQ page →
What planning error does the article warn against?

The article warns against using 2021 or 2022 success rates to estimate current short proposal odds.

Those early rates were above 58%, while 2025 and partial 2026 sit near 21%.

Open FAQ page →
Which year had the highest short proposal success rate?

2022 had the highest short proposal success rate.

It recorded 1,761 GO decisions, 1,017 NO-GO decisions, and a 63.4% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What was the EIC Accelerator short proposal success rate in 2021?

The 2021 success rate was 58.8%.

The dataset records 5,161 applications, 3,033 GO decisions, and 2,128 NO-GO decisions for 2021.

Open FAQ page →
What was the EIC Accelerator short proposal success rate in 2022?

The 2022 success rate was 63.4%.

The dataset records 2,778 applications, 1,761 GO decisions, and 1,017 NO-GO decisions for 2022.

Open FAQ page →
What was the EIC Accelerator short proposal success rate in 2023?

The 2023 success rate was 60.6%.

The dataset records 3,015 applications, 1,827 GO decisions, and 1,188 NO-GO decisions for 2023.

Open FAQ page →
What happened to the short proposal success rate in 2024?

The success rate fell sharply to 33.3% in 2024.

The dataset records 2,637 applications, 879 GO decisions, and 1,758 NO-GO decisions for that year.

Open FAQ page →
What was the short proposal success rate in 2025?

The 2025 success rate was 21.7%.

The dataset records 3,378 applications, 732 GO decisions, and 2,646 NO-GO decisions for 2025.

Open FAQ page →
What is the short proposal success rate in the partial 2026 data?

The partial 2026 data shows a 21.3% success rate.

The dataset records 621 applications, 132 GO decisions, and 489 NO-GO decisions for the partial 2026 period.

Open FAQ page →
How much did the success rate drop from 2022 to 2025?

The success rate dropped from 63.4% in 2022 to 21.7% in 2025.

That is a decline of 41.7 percentage points in three years.

Open FAQ page →
How large is the gap between the 2022 peak and partial 2026 data?

The 2022 peak was 63.4%, while the partial 2026 rate is 21.3%.

The article identifies this as a 42.1 percentage point gap when partial-year data is included.

Open FAQ page →
Was the success rate decline caused only by higher application volume?

No. The article states that 2024 had fewer applications than both 2021 and 2023.

It points instead to evaluation criteria, round-specific funding availability, and changes in the EIC strategic focus across work programmes.

Open FAQ page →
What is the range of country-level short proposal success rates?

Among countries with at least 10 applications, the rate ranges from 79.1% for Iceland to 0.0% for Kosovo.

The article emphasizes that small samples should be read with care.

Open FAQ page →
Which country has the highest short proposal success rate?

Iceland has the highest success rate among countries with at least 10 applications.

It recorded 43 applications, 34 GO decisions, 9 NO-GO decisions, and a 79.1% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
Why should Icelands 79.1% rate be interpreted carefully?

Iceland has the highest rate, but it only has 43 applications in the dataset.

The article states that the most reliable signals come from countries with several hundred applications.

Open FAQ page →
Which countries lead the short proposal success ranking?

The top five countries with at least 10 applications are Iceland, Norway, Israel, France, and Sweden.

Their success rates are 79.1%, 68.3%, 68.1%, 67.3%, and 61.9%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Norway perform in the short proposal dataset?

Norway recorded 341 applications, 233 GO decisions, and 108 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 68.3%, the second-highest rate among countries with at least 10 applications.

Open FAQ page →
How did Israel perform in the short proposal dataset?

Israel recorded 1,091 applications, 743 GO decisions, and 348 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 68.1%, placing it among the strongest high-volume countries.

Open FAQ page →
How did France perform in the short proposal dataset?

France recorded 1,114 applications, 750 GO decisions, and 364 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 67.3%, well above the 47.5% overall average.

Open FAQ page →
How did Sweden perform in the short proposal dataset?

Sweden recorded 762 applications, 472 GO decisions, and 290 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 61.9%, placing it fifth among countries with at least 10 applications.

Open FAQ page →
How did Finland perform in the short proposal dataset?

Finland recorded 492 applications, 302 GO decisions, and 190 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 61.4%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Austria perform in the short proposal dataset?

Austria recorded 307 applications, 188 GO decisions, and 119 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 61.2%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Denmark perform in the short proposal dataset?

Denmark recorded 453 applications, 265 GO decisions, and 188 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 58.5%.

Open FAQ page →
How did the Netherlands perform in the short proposal dataset?

The Netherlands recorded 919 applications, 537 GO decisions, and 382 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 58.4%, and the article lists it among countries with deep EIC ecosystems.

Open FAQ page →
How did Ireland perform in the short proposal dataset?

Ireland recorded 383 applications, 223 GO decisions, and 160 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 58.2%.

Open FAQ page →
Which country submitted the most short proposals?

Italy submitted the most short proposals.

It recorded 2,133 applications, 573 GO decisions, 1,560 NO-GO decisions, and a 26.9% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
Why is Italy a major scale-trap example in the article?

Italy is the largest applicant country by volume but has a 26.9% success rate.

The article highlights Italy as evidence that application volume does not translate into stronger short proposal odds.

Open FAQ page →
How did the United Kingdom perform in the short proposal dataset?

The United Kingdom recorded 1,766 applications, 698 GO decisions, and 1,068 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 39.5%, below the 47.5% overall average.

Open FAQ page →
How did Germany perform in the short proposal dataset?

Germany recorded 1,653 applications, 899 GO decisions, and 754 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 54.4%, above the overall average despite its large applicant volume.

Open FAQ page →
How did Spain perform in the short proposal dataset?

Spain recorded 1,160 applications, 667 GO decisions, and 493 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 57.5%, which the article describes as strong given its volume.

Open FAQ page →
How did Poland perform in the short proposal dataset?

Poland recorded 778 applications, 296 GO decisions, and 482 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 38.0%, below the overall average.

Open FAQ page →
How concentrated are applications among the five largest applicant countries?

The five largest applicant countries are Italy, United Kingdom, Germany, Spain, and France.

Together they account for 7,826 of 17,590 applications, or 44.5% of all applications.

Open FAQ page →
How much of the dataset comes from the top three applicant countries?

Italy, United Kingdom, and Germany account for 5,552 of 17,590 applications.

That is 31.6% of the total applicant pool.

Open FAQ page →
Which country has the lowest success rate while still recording at least one GO?

Bosnia has the lowest success rate among countries with at least 10 applications and at least one GO.

It recorded 75 applications, 3 GO decisions, 72 NO-GO decisions, and a 4.0% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
How did Serbia perform in the short proposal dataset?

Serbia recorded 95 applications, 13 GO decisions, and 82 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 13.7%.

Open FAQ page →
How did North Macedonia perform in the short proposal dataset?

North Macedonia is listed as N. Macedonia in the table.

It recorded 19 applications, 3 GO decisions, 16 NO-GO decisions, and a 15.8% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
How did Ukraine perform in the short proposal dataset?

Ukraine recorded 139 applications, 22 GO decisions, and 117 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 15.8%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Romania perform in the short proposal dataset?

Romania recorded 333 applications, 66 GO decisions, and 267 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 19.8%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Turkiye perform in the short proposal dataset?

Turkiye recorded 383 applications, 100 GO decisions, and 283 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 26.1%.

Open FAQ page →
How many countries or territories recorded zero GO decisions?

A total of 29 countries or territories recorded zero GO decisions across the dataset.

Kosovo is the largest zero-GO entry with 40 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What does the article say about Kosovo in the short proposal data?

Kosovo recorded 40 applications and zero GO decisions.

It is the largest zero-GO entry in the dataset.

Open FAQ page →
What pattern appears among zero-GO countries?

The article identifies underperformance in non-EU and non-associated countries.

It links that underperformance to limited EIC track record, ecosystem depth, and advisory infrastructure.

Open FAQ page →
What is the scale trap in the article?

The scale trap is the assumption that countries submitting more applications have learned to produce better proposals.

The article states that the short proposal data does not support that assumption.

Open FAQ page →
Do high-volume countries systematically outperform low-volume countries?

No. High-volume countries do not systematically outperform low-volume ones in the dataset.

Italy is the largest applicant country but has one of the weakest rates among high-volume countries.

Open FAQ page →
Which countries form the mid-volume high-rate cluster?

The article identifies France, Israel, Norway, and Sweden as mid-volume or high-volume countries with strong rates.

These countries outperform both low-volume niche applicants and high-volume mass applicants.

Open FAQ page →
What matters more than raw submission frequency?

The article points to ecosystem quality, proposal sophistication, and sector alignment.

Raw submission frequency alone does not produce stronger short proposal success rates.

Open FAQ page →
Which sector has the highest number of short proposal applications?

Health is the largest sector by application count.

It recorded 3,926 applications, 2,313 GO decisions, 1,613 NO-GO decisions, and a 58.9% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What is the Health sector success rate?

The Health sector has a 58.9% success rate.

It is the largest sector and ties Biotechnology for the highest sector success rate in the article.

Open FAQ page →
What is the Biotechnology sector success rate?

Biotechnology has a 58.9% success rate.

It recorded 827 applications, 487 GO decisions, and 340 NO-GO decisions.

Open FAQ page →
How did Earth and Environmental Sciences perform?

Earth and Environmental Sciences recorded 819 applications, 462 GO decisions, and 357 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 56.4%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Engineering and Technology perform?

Engineering and Technology recorded 1,868 applications, 1,006 GO decisions, and 862 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 53.9%.

Open FAQ page →
How did the Space sector perform?

Space recorded 228 applications, 120 GO decisions, and 108 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 52.6%.

Open FAQ page →
How did the Energy sector perform?

Energy recorded 1,266 applications, 654 GO decisions, and 612 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 51.7%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Agriculture, Rural Development, and Fisheries perform?

Agriculture / Rural Dev / Fisheries recorded 687 applications, 339 GO decisions, and 348 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 49.3%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Food and Beverages perform?

Food and Beverages recorded 386 applications, 177 GO decisions, and 209 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 45.9%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Security perform?

Security recorded 234 applications, 107 GO decisions, and 127 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 45.7%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Transport and Mobility perform?

Transport and Mobility recorded 853 applications, 379 GO decisions, and 474 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 44.4%.

Open FAQ page →
How did ICT perform in the short proposal dataset?

ICT recorded 3,476 applications, 1,397 GO decisions, and 2,079 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 40.2%, below the 47.5% average despite ICT being a core EIC priority.

Open FAQ page →
How did Construction and Civil Engineering perform?

Construction and Civil Engineering recorded 568 applications, 220 GO decisions, and 348 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 38.7%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Education and Culture perform?

Education and Culture recorded 385 applications, 114 GO decisions, and 271 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 29.6%, making it the third-most-difficult sector in the article.

Open FAQ page →
How did Public Sector Innovation perform?

Public Sector Innovation recorded 171 applications, 48 GO decisions, and 123 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 28.1%.

Open FAQ page →
Which sector has the weakest success rate?

Consumer Products and Services has the weakest sector success rate.

It recorded 828 applications, 216 GO decisions, 612 NO-GO decisions, and a 26.1% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
Which sectors are the weakest by success rate?

The weakest sectors are Consumer Products and Services at 26.1%, Public Sector Innovation at 28.1%, and Education and Culture at 29.6%.

The article links these sectors to weaker commercial scalability narratives at the short proposal stage.

Open FAQ page →
Why does the article single out ICT?

ICT is the second-largest sector but has only a 40.2% success rate.

The article says ICT attracts many general software or platform proposals that struggle to demonstrate breakthrough novelty.

Open FAQ page →
What should ICT applicants emphasize?

ICT applicants should anchor proposals in deep technology and systemic innovation.

The article warns against relying on digital product differentiation alone.

Open FAQ page →
What trend does the article identify for Health applications?

Health dominated application counts in 2021 with 1,241 applications.

It remained the leading sector in each subsequent year, although absolute volume was lower after 2021.

Open FAQ page →
What trend does the article identify for ICT applications?

ICT declined from a 2021 peak of 1,086 applications.

It partially recovered in 2025 with 715 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What trend does the article identify for Engineering and Technology?

Engineering and Technology peaked in 2021 with 575 applications.

It dropped to 246 applications in 2023 and recovered to 396 applications in 2025.

Open FAQ page →
Which sector shows the clearest application decline?

Consumer Products and Services shows the clearest decline.

It fell from 286 applications in 2021 to 115 in 2025, a 60% decline.

Open FAQ page →
What share of short proposal applications came from female applicants?

Female applicants represent 18.4% of total short proposal submissions.

That equals 3,230 applications out of 17,590.

Open FAQ page →
What was the female applicant success rate?

Female applicants recorded 1,415 GO decisions and 1,815 NO-GO decisions.

Their success rate is 43.8%.

Open FAQ page →
What share of short proposal applications came from male applicants?

Male applicants represent 79.6% of total short proposal submissions.

That equals 13,999 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was the male applicant success rate?

Male applicants recorded 6,762 GO decisions and 7,237 NO-GO decisions.

Their success rate is 48.3%.

Open FAQ page →
What is the overall gender gap at the short proposal stage?

The overall gender gap is 4.5 percentage points in favour of male applicants.

The article states that this gap is smaller than the representation imbalance would suggest.

Open FAQ page →
What does the NA gender row mean?

The NA row is an explicit source-data row for applications where gender is not reported.

It records 339 applications, 185 GO decisions, 154 NO-GO decisions, and a 54.6% rate.

Open FAQ page →
What does the Non Binary row show?

The Non Binary row records 22 applications, 2 GO decisions, and 20 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 9.1%, and the article states that the sample is too small for meaningful conclusions.

Open FAQ page →
Which sector has the largest gender gap?

Engineering and Technology has the largest gender gap.

Male applicants have a 55.9% rate and female applicants have a 42.6% rate, a 13.3 percentage point gap.

Open FAQ page →
Which sector shows female applicant outperformance?

Biotechnology is the only listed sector where female applicants outperform male applicants.

Female applicants have a 60.6% rate, compared with 58.5% for male applicants.

Open FAQ page →
What is the gender gap in Consumer Products?

Consumer Products shows a 27.9% male rate and a 20.1% female rate.

That is a 7.8 percentage point gap in favour of male applicants.

Open FAQ page →
What is the gender gap in Construction and Civil Engineering?

Construction and Civil Engineering shows a 40.2% male rate and a 32.6% female rate.

That is a 7.6 percentage point gap in favour of male applicants.

Open FAQ page →
What is the gender gap in Food and Beverages?

Food and Beverages shows a 47.7% male rate and a 40.8% female rate.

That is a 6.9 percentage point gap in favour of male applicants.

Open FAQ page →
What is the gender gap in Education and Culture?

Education and Culture shows a 32.1% male rate and a 25.2% female rate.

That is a 6.9 percentage point gap in favour of male applicants.

Open FAQ page →
What is the gender gap in Energy?

Energy shows a 52.7% male rate and a 46.9% female rate.

That is a 5.8 percentage point gap in favour of male applicants.

Open FAQ page →
What is the gender gap in ICT?

ICT shows a 41.2% male rate and a 36.4% female rate.

That is a 4.8 percentage point gap in favour of male applicants.

Open FAQ page →
What is the gender gap in Health?

Health shows a 60.1% male rate and a 55.6% female rate.

That is a 4.5 percentage point gap in favour of male applicants.

Open FAQ page →
What should advisors take from the gender-sector analysis?

The article says the gender gap is real and uneven by sector.

For female founders in engineering-intensive domains, it highlights the need for rigorous framing around technological breakthrough and market leadership.

Open FAQ page →
Which country had the strongest application growth from 2021 to 2025?

The United Kingdom had the strongest growth.

It increased from 302 applications in 2021 to 576 in 2025, a 90.7% increase.

Open FAQ page →
How did Switzerland application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

Switzerland increased from 154 applications in 2021 to 189 in 2025.

That is a gain of 35 applications, or 22.7%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Estonia application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

Estonia increased from 57 applications in 2021 to 61 in 2025.

That is a gain of 4 applications, or 7.0%.

Open FAQ page →
Which country had the steepest application volume decline?

Italy had the steepest absolute decline.

It fell from 973 applications in 2021 to 241 in 2025, a drop of 732 applications or 75.2%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Israel application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

Israel fell from 358 applications in 2021 to 103 in 2025.

That is a decline of 255 applications, or 71.2%.

Open FAQ page →
How did France application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

France fell from 340 applications in 2021 to 155 in 2025.

That is a decline of 185 applications, or 54.4%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Spain application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

Spain fell from 402 applications in 2021 to 190 in 2025.

That is a decline of 212 applications, or 52.7%.

Open FAQ page →
Why does the article describe UK growth as a catch-up effect?

The United Kingdom re-associated with Horizon Europe under the Windsor Framework in 2023.

The article states that the UK growth trend reflects that structural policy change rather than superior relative ecosystem performance.

Open FAQ page →
How did Germany application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

Germany fell from 415 applications in 2021 to 288 in 2025.

That is a decline of 127 applications, or 30.6%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Netherlands application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

The Netherlands fell from 261 applications in 2021 to 173 in 2025.

That is a decline of 88 applications, or 33.7%.

Open FAQ page →
What was unusual about Polands application trend?

Poland rose from 150 applications in 2021 to 245 in 2022.

The article calls this 2022 spike an outlier that was not sustained.

Open FAQ page →
Why is Israels volume decline notable?

Israel fell from 358 applications in 2021 to 103 in 2025.

The article says this is notable because Israel kept a high success rate, pointing to strategic withdrawal rather than performance-driven weakness.

Open FAQ page →
How many large applicant countries are in the dataset?

The article defines 29 countries as large because they have at least 100 applications.

Together they account for 16,767 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What share of applications comes from large countries?

The 29 large countries account for 95.3% of all short proposal submissions.

That equals 16,767 of 17,590 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What share of applications comes from the remaining countries?

The remaining 54 countries account for only 4.7% of all applications.

This means the headline statistics are driven overwhelmingly by large applicant countries.

Open FAQ page →
How many medium applicant countries are in the dataset?

The article defines 15 countries as medium because they have 10 to 99 applications.

Together they account for 715 applications.

Open FAQ page →
How many small applicant countries are in the dataset?

The article defines 19 countries as small because they have 2 to 9 applications.

Together they account for 88 applications.

Open FAQ page →
How many countries submitted only one application?

Twenty countries or territories submitted a single application.

Together they account for 20 applications.

Open FAQ page →
Why can the top three countries shift aggregate statistics?

Italy, United Kingdom, and Germany account for 31.6% of all applications.

Changes in evaluation policy, call structure, or applicant behaviour in any one of these countries can measurably shift the aggregate figures.

Open FAQ page →
How many NO-GO decisions are in the dataset?

The dataset contains 9,226 NO-GO decisions.

That represents 52.5% of all short proposals submitted.

Open FAQ page →
Which country contributed the most NO-GO decisions?

Italy contributed the most NO-GO decisions.

It recorded 1,560 NO-GO decisions, a 73.1% rejection rate.

Open FAQ page →
How many NO-GO decisions did the United Kingdom record?

The United Kingdom recorded 1,068 NO-GO decisions.

Its rejection rate is 60.5%.

Open FAQ page →
How many NO-GO decisions did Germany record?

Germany recorded 754 NO-GO decisions.

Its rejection rate is 45.6%.

Open FAQ page →
Which complete year was best for applicants?

2022 was the best year for short proposal applicants.

GO decisions represented 63.4% of all applications that year.

Open FAQ page →
Which complete year was hardest for applicants?

2025 was the hardest complete year in the dataset.

GO decisions represented 21.7% of all 2025 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What is the main expectation-setting takeaway for applicants?

Applicants should not treat the 47.5% headline success rate as their current probability.

For 2025 and partial 2026, the relevant benchmark is 21-22%.

Open FAQ page →
Is country of origin meaningful at the short proposal stage?

Yes. The article states that country of origin is a meaningful predictor of short proposal performance.

Countries with deep EIC ecosystems, such as France, Israel, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands, consistently outperform the average.

Open FAQ page →
Are applicants from lower-performing countries weaker in technology?

The article does not frame lower-performing countries as weaker in technology.

It states that many lack the application-specific expertise that evaluators reward at the short proposal stage.

Open FAQ page →
Why does sector choice matter for short proposal strategy?

Sector choice signals risk tolerance and positioning.

Health and Biotechnology have 58.9% success rates, while ICT has 40.2% and Consumer Products and Services has 26.1%.

Open FAQ page →
What should applicants in lower-rate sectors do?

Applicants in lower-rate sectors should invest more in proposal precision and differentiation.

The article singles out ICT and Consumer Products and Services as demanding stronger positioning at the short proposal level.

Open FAQ page →
What is the key gender-gap takeaway?

The gender gap is real and uneven across sectors.

Engineering and Technology has the largest gap at 13.3 percentage points in favour of male applicants, while Biotechnology shows female outperformance.

Open FAQ page →
What does volume decline in established markets signal?

The article treats volume decline in Italy, France, Israel, and Spain as a signal worth watching.

It connects the decline to strategic repositioning, market discouragement, or deliberate de-emphasis of the EIC Accelerator in those ecosystems.

Open FAQ page →
What is the main counter-trend in application volume?

The United Kingdom is the major counter-trend, with applications rising from 302 in 2021 to 576 in 2025.

The article explains this through Horizon Europe re-association rather than comparative ecosystem improvement.

Open FAQ page →
How did Switzerland perform in the short proposal dataset?

Switzerland recorded 394 applications, 212 GO decisions, and 182 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 53.8%, above the overall 47.5% average.

Open FAQ page →
How did Portugal perform in the short proposal dataset?

Portugal recorded 338 applications, 131 GO decisions, and 207 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 38.8%, below the overall average.

Open FAQ page →
How did Belgium perform in the short proposal dataset?

Belgium recorded 321 applications, 183 GO decisions, and 138 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 57.0%, above the overall average.

Open FAQ page →
How did Estonia perform in the short proposal dataset?

Estonia recorded 236 applications, 90 GO decisions, and 146 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 38.1%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Hungary perform in the short proposal dataset?

Hungary recorded 229 applications, 82 GO decisions, and 147 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 35.8%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Bulgaria perform in the short proposal dataset?

Bulgaria recorded 223 applications, 66 GO decisions, and 157 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 29.6%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Slovakia perform in the short proposal dataset?

Slovakia recorded 179 applications, 67 GO decisions, and 112 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 37.4%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Greece perform in the short proposal dataset?

Greece recorded 172 applications, 69 GO decisions, and 103 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 40.1%.

Open FAQ page →
How did the United States appear in the bottom country table?

The United States recorded 50 applications, 8 GO decisions, and 42 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 16.0%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Georgia appear in the bottom country table?

Georgia recorded 25 applications, 4 GO decisions, and 21 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 16.0%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Canada appear in the bottom country table?

Canada recorded 11 applications, 2 GO decisions, and 9 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 18.2%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Montenegro appear in the bottom country table?

Montenegro recorded 20 applications, 4 GO decisions, and 16 NO-GO decisions.

Its success rate is 20.0%.

Open FAQ page →
What does the zero-GO table show for Albania?

Albania recorded 8 applications and zero GO decisions.

It is listed in the countries with 0% success rate table.

Open FAQ page →
Which zero-GO countries had 6 applications?

Colombia, Egypt, and Moldova (Republic of) each recorded 6 applications.

All three are listed with zero GO decisions.

Open FAQ page →
What does the zero-GO table show for Brazil?

Brazil recorded 5 applications and zero GO decisions.

It is listed among the countries with 0% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
Which zero-GO countries had 4 applications?

Kenya and New Zealand each recorded 4 applications.

Both are listed with zero GO decisions.

Open FAQ page →
Which zero-GO countries had 3 applications?

Ghana, Jordan, Morocco, and San Marino each recorded 3 applications.

All four are listed with zero GO decisions.

Open FAQ page →
Which zero-GO countries had 2 applications?

Australia and the Russian Federation each recorded 2 applications.

Both are listed with zero GO decisions.

Open FAQ page →
Which listed zero-GO countries had a single application?

Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Curacao, Dominican Republic, Lebanon, and Liechtenstein are listed with one application each.

The table also notes 9 additional countries with small or single-application counts.

Open FAQ page →
What was Italys year-by-year application pattern?

Italy recorded 973 applications in 2021, 352 in 2022, 322 in 2023, 198 in 2024, 241 in 2025, and 47 in partial 2026.

Its total across the table is 2,133 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was the United Kingdoms year-by-year application pattern?

The United Kingdom recorded 302 applications in 2021, 248 in 2022, 190 in 2023, 331 in 2024, 576 in 2025, and 119 in partial 2026.

Its total across the table is 1,766 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was Germanys year-by-year application pattern?

Germany recorded 415 applications in 2021, 290 in 2022, 332 in 2023, 271 in 2024, 288 in 2025, and 57 in partial 2026.

Its total across the table is 1,653 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was Spains year-by-year application pattern?

Spain recorded 402 applications in 2021, 158 in 2022, 220 in 2023, 153 in 2024, 190 in 2025, and 37 in partial 2026.

Its total across the table is 1,160 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was Israels year-by-year application pattern?

Israel recorded 358 applications in 2021, 202 in 2022, 214 in 2023, 198 in 2024, 103 in 2025, and 16 in partial 2026.

Its total across the table is 1,091 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was Frances year-by-year application pattern?

France recorded 340 applications in 2021, 184 in 2022, 250 in 2023, 155 in 2024, 155 in 2025, and 30 in partial 2026.

Its total across the table is 1,114 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was the Netherlands year-by-year application pattern?

The Netherlands recorded 261 applications in 2021, 126 in 2022, 178 in 2023, 155 in 2024, 173 in 2025, and 26 in partial 2026.

Its total across the table is 919 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was Polands year-by-year application pattern?

Poland recorded 150 applications in 2021, 245 in 2022, 153 in 2023, 98 in 2024, 110 in 2025, and 22 in partial 2026.

Its total across the table is 778 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was Swedens year-by-year application pattern?

Sweden recorded 205 applications in 2021, 113 in 2022, 139 in 2023, 124 in 2024, 157 in 2025, and 24 in partial 2026.

Its total across the table is 762 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was Finlands year-by-year application pattern?

Finland recorded 143 applications in 2021, 83 in 2022, 82 in 2023, 77 in 2024, 89 in 2025, and 18 in partial 2026.

Its total across the table is 492 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What are the yearly Health application counts?

Health recorded 1,241 applications in 2021, 658 in 2022, 710 in 2023, 690 in 2024, and 627 in 2025.

The article states that Health remained the leading sector in every subsequent year after 2021.

Open FAQ page →
What are the yearly ICT application counts?

ICT recorded 1,086 applications in 2021, 563 in 2022, 538 in 2023, 574 in 2024, and 715 in 2025.

The 2025 recovery still remains below the 2021 peak.

Open FAQ page →
What are the yearly Engineering and Technology application counts?

Engineering and Technology recorded 575 applications in 2021, 355 in 2022, 246 in 2023, 296 in 2024, and 396 in 2025.

The article describes a sharp 2023 drop followed by recovery in 2025.

Open FAQ page →
What are the yearly Energy application counts?

Energy recorded 413 applications in 2021, 213 in 2022, 224 in 2023, 210 in 2024, and 206 in 2025.

Its post-2021 application volume is relatively stable in the low 200s.

Open FAQ page →
What are the yearly Transport and Mobility application counts?

Transport and Mobility recorded 276 applications in 2021, 138 in 2022, 126 in 2023, 126 in 2024, and 187 in 2025.

The sector recovered in 2025 after lower application counts in 2022 through 2024.

Open FAQ page →
What are the yearly Consumer Products and Services application counts?

Consumer Products and Services recorded 286 applications in 2021, 170 in 2022, 140 in 2023, 117 in 2024, and 115 in 2025.

This is the clearest decline among the listed large sectors.

Open FAQ page →
What are the yearly Biotechnology application counts?

Biotechnology recorded 212 applications in 2021, 138 in 2022, 164 in 2023, 151 in 2024, and 162 in 2025.

Its yearly volume is smaller than Health and ICT, but its success rate is tied for highest at 58.9%.

Open FAQ page →
What are the yearly Earth and Environmental Sciences application counts?

Earth and Environmental Sciences recorded 254 applications in 2021, 125 in 2022, 194 in 2023, 114 in 2024, and 132 in 2025.

Its overall success rate is 56.4%.

Open FAQ page →
What is the gender gap in Earth and Environmental Sciences?

Earth and Environmental Sciences shows a 57.5% male rate and a 51.7% female rate.

That is a 5.8 percentage point gap in favour of male applicants.

Open FAQ page →
What is the gender gap in Transport and Mobility?

Transport and Mobility shows a 44.8% male rate and a 43.0% female rate.

That is a 1.8 percentage point gap in favour of male applicants.

Open FAQ page →
What is the gender gap in Agriculture?

Agriculture shows a 49.8% male rate and a 48.2% female rate.

That is a 1.6 percentage point gap in favour of male applicants.

Open FAQ page →
How did Turkiye application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

Turkiye fell from 85 applications in 2021 to 82 in 2025.

That is a decline of 3 applications, or 3.5%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Portugal application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

Portugal fell from 100 applications in 2021 to 88 in 2025.

That is a decline of 12 applications, or 12.0%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Belgium application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

Belgium fell from 88 applications in 2021 to 71 in 2025.

That is a decline of 17 applications, or 19.3%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Sweden application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

Sweden fell from 205 applications in 2021 to 157 in 2025.

That is a decline of 48 applications, or 23.4%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Poland application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

Poland fell from 150 applications in 2021 to 110 in 2025.

That is a decline of 40 applications, or 26.7%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Ireland application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

Ireland fell from 108 applications in 2021 to 70 in 2025.

That is a decline of 38 applications, or 35.2%.

Open FAQ page →
How did Finland application volume change from 2021 to 2025?

Finland fell from 143 applications in 2021 to 89 in 2025.

That is a decline of 54 applications, or 37.8%.

Open FAQ page →
Which top-25 volume country has the lowest success rate?

Ukraine has the lowest success rate among the top 25 countries by application volume.

It recorded 139 applications and a 15.8% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
Which top-25 volume country has the highest success rate?

Norway has the highest success rate among the top 25 countries by application volume.

It recorded 341 applications and a 68.3% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
How do Italy and Norway illustrate the volume-versus-odds problem?

Italy recorded 2,133 applications and a 26.9% success rate.

Norway recorded 341 applications and a 68.3% success rate, showing that smaller volume can coincide with far stronger odds.

Open FAQ page →
How do France and Italy compare in the dataset?

France recorded 1,114 applications and a 67.3% success rate.

Italy recorded 2,133 applications and a 26.9% success rate, despite having nearly twice as many applications.

Open FAQ page →
How do Israel and the United Kingdom compare in the dataset?

Israel recorded 1,091 applications and a 68.1% success rate.

The United Kingdom recorded 1,766 applications and a 39.5% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
How do Health and ICT compare?

Health recorded 3,926 applications and a 58.9% success rate.

ICT recorded 3,476 applications and a 40.2% success rate, despite being almost as large by volume.

Open FAQ page →
How do Biotechnology and Consumer Products compare?

Biotechnology recorded 827 applications and a 58.9% success rate.

Consumer Products and Services recorded 828 applications and a 26.1% success rate, showing nearly identical volume but sharply different outcomes.

Open FAQ page →
How do Public Sector Innovation and Consumer Products compare?

Public Sector Innovation recorded 171 applications and a 28.1% success rate.

Consumer Products and Services recorded 828 applications and a 26.1% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
How many male applications are in the gender table?

The gender table lists 13,999 male applications.

This equals 79.6% of the total short proposal submissions.

Open FAQ page →
How many female applications are in the gender table?

The gender table lists 3,230 female applications.

This equals 18.4% of the total short proposal submissions.

Open FAQ page →
How many applications have no reported gender?

The NA source-data row contains 339 applications.

That equals 1.9% of total applications in the gender table.

Open FAQ page →
How different are current short proposal conditions from the early years?

The early years had success rates of 58.8% in 2021, 63.4% in 2022, and 60.6% in 2023.

The current environment in the article is 21.7% in 2025 and 21.3% in partial 2026.

Open FAQ page →
What is the articles main statistical message?

The article shows that the short proposal stage was historically permissive but has become far more selective.

It also shows that country, sector, gender context, and year materially change the odds behind the 47.5% headline figure.

Open FAQ page →
What does the overview chart support in the article?

The overview chart supports the headline dataset summary.

It sits alongside the 17,590 total applications, 8,364 GO decisions, 9,226 NO-GO decisions, and 47.5% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What does the year-trends chart support?

The year-trends chart supports the article section showing the collapse in short proposal success rates.

It visually reinforces the move from 58.8% in 2021 and 63.4% in 2022 to 21.7% in 2025 and 21.3% in partial 2026.

Open FAQ page →
What does the country-success chart support?

The country-success chart supports the country-level comparison across the 83 countries or territories.

It highlights the spread between high-performing countries such as Iceland, Norway, Israel, France, and Sweden and lower-performing countries.

Open FAQ page →
What does the country-volume chart support?

The country-volume chart supports the application concentration analysis.

It shows that Italy, United Kingdom, Germany, Spain, and France dominate total short proposal volume.

Open FAQ page →
What does the volume-versus-success scatter plot support?

The scatter plot supports the scale-trap argument.

It shows that high application volume does not automatically produce a high short proposal success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What does the sector chart support?

The sector chart supports the comparison across 15 sector categories.

It helps show that Health and Biotechnology sit at 58.9%, while ICT is lower at 40.2% and Consumer Products and Services is lowest at 26.1%.

Open FAQ page →
What does the gender-analysis chart support?

The gender-analysis chart supports the comparison between male, female, Non Binary, and NA source-data rows.

It reinforces the 18.4% female application share and the 4.5 percentage point overall gender gap.

Open FAQ page →
What does the gender-sector-gap chart support?

The gender-sector-gap chart supports the sector-level gender comparison.

It shows Engineering and Technology as the largest gap and Biotechnology as the only listed sector with female outperformance.

Open FAQ page →
What does the volume-growth chart support?

The volume-growth chart supports the 2021 to 2025 application volume comparison.

It highlights United Kingdom growth and the sharp declines in Italy, Israel, France, and Spain.

Open FAQ page →
Does a country success rate determine an individual applicants result?

No. The article treats country of origin as a meaningful predictor, not a deterministic outcome.

The practical point is that ecosystem depth and application-specific expertise influence proposal quality at the short proposal stage.

Open FAQ page →
Does a high sector success rate guarantee a GO decision?

No. A sector success rate describes historical aggregate outcomes, not the result of an individual proposal.

The article uses sector rates to guide positioning, risk awareness, and the level of precision needed in the short proposal.

Open FAQ page →
Does a low sector success rate mean applicants should not apply?

No. A low sector rate means the proposal needs stronger differentiation, clearer breakthrough logic, and sharper commercial scalability framing.

The article points especially to ICT and Consumer Products and Services as sectors where positioning discipline matters.

Open FAQ page →
When was the source article published?

The source article is dated 2026-05-27.

The FAQ items use that same date as the current update marker for the extracted answers.

Open FAQ page →
What is the source article slug?

The source article slug is eic-accelerator-step-1-short-proposal-statistics.

The permalink is /eic-accelerator-step-1-short-proposal-statistics/.

Open FAQ page →
Which categories is the source article assigned to?

The source article is assigned to EIC Accelerator and Statistics.

Those categories match the article focus on EIC Accelerator Step 1 performance data.

Open FAQ page →
Which tags are assigned to the source article?

The tags are EISMEA, EIC Accelerator, short proposal, success rate, and grant funding.

Those tags describe both the data source and the main search intent of the article.

Open FAQ page →
Which year had the most short proposal applications?

2021 had the most short proposal applications.

The dataset records 5,161 applications in 2021.

Open FAQ page →
Which complete year had the fewest short proposal applications?

Among complete years in the table, 2024 had the fewest applications.

The dataset records 2,637 applications in 2024.

Open FAQ page →
Which year had the most GO decisions?

2021 had the most GO decisions.

The dataset records 3,033 GO decisions in 2021.

Open FAQ page →
Which complete year had the fewest GO decisions?

Among complete years, 2025 had the fewest GO decisions.

The dataset records 732 GO decisions in 2025.

Open FAQ page →
Which year had the most NO-GO decisions?

2025 had the most NO-GO decisions.

The dataset records 2,646 NO-GO decisions in 2025.

Open FAQ page →
Which complete year had the fewest NO-GO decisions?

Among complete years, 2022 had the fewest NO-GO decisions.

The dataset records 1,017 NO-GO decisions in 2022.

Open FAQ page →
How many 2021 applications were needed per GO decision?

In 2021, the dataset records 5,161 applications and 3,033 GO decisions.

That is approximately 1.7 applications per GO decision.

Open FAQ page →
How many 2022 applications were needed per GO decision?

In 2022, the dataset records 2,778 applications and 1,761 GO decisions.

That is approximately 1.6 applications per GO decision.

Open FAQ page →
How many 2023 applications were needed per GO decision?

In 2023, the dataset records 3,015 applications and 1,827 GO decisions.

That is approximately 1.7 applications per GO decision.

Open FAQ page →
How many 2024 applications were needed per GO decision?

In 2024, the dataset records 2,637 applications and 879 GO decisions.

That is approximately 3.0 applications per GO decision.

Open FAQ page →
How many 2025 applications were needed per GO decision?

In 2025, the dataset records 3,378 applications and 732 GO decisions.

That is approximately 4.6 applications per GO decision.

Open FAQ page →
How many partial-2026 applications were needed per GO decision?

In the partial 2026 data, the dataset records 621 applications and 132 GO decisions.

That is approximately 4.7 applications per GO decision.

Open FAQ page →
What was the NO-GO rate in 2021?

The 2021 success rate was 58.8%.

The corresponding NO-GO rate was 41.2%, based on 2,128 NO-GO decisions out of 5,161 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was the NO-GO rate in 2022?

The 2022 success rate was 63.4%.

The corresponding NO-GO rate was 36.6%, based on 1,017 NO-GO decisions out of 2,778 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was the NO-GO rate in 2023?

The 2023 success rate was 60.6%.

The corresponding NO-GO rate was 39.4%, based on 1,188 NO-GO decisions out of 3,015 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was the NO-GO rate in 2024?

The 2024 success rate was 33.3%.

The corresponding NO-GO rate was 66.7%, based on 1,758 NO-GO decisions out of 2,637 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was the NO-GO rate in 2025?

The 2025 success rate was 21.7%.

The corresponding NO-GO rate was 78.3%, based on 2,646 NO-GO decisions out of 3,378 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What was the NO-GO rate in the partial 2026 data?

The partial 2026 success rate was 21.3%.

The corresponding NO-GO rate was 78.7%, based on 489 NO-GO decisions out of 621 applications.

Open FAQ page →
Why is 2024 an inflection point in the article?

The success rate fell from 60.6% in 2023 to 33.3% in 2024.

The article describes 2024 as the sharp break because NO-GO decisions rose substantially relative to GO decisions.

Open FAQ page →
How do current odds compare with the historical overall rate?

The historical overall rate is 47.5%.

The 2025 and partial 2026 rates are 21.7% and 21.3%, so current applicants face less than half the historical headline rate.

Open FAQ page →
Are current short proposal odds still much better than full proposal odds?

The article gives full proposal success at around 22.8%.

The 2025 and partial 2026 short proposal rates are 21.7% and 21.3%, so the current short proposal stage is no longer clearly easier when judged only by those recent rates.

Open FAQ page →
What should a 2025-style applicant assume about Step 1 odds?

A current applicant should plan around a roughly one-in-five Step 1 environment.

The article supports that with 21.7% in 2025 and 21.3% in the partial 2026 data.

Open FAQ page →
Why should advisors avoid relying on 2021 case-study expectations?

2021 had a 58.8% short proposal success rate and 3,033 GO decisions.

The article warns that using early-cycle expectations for current applicants creates a systematic planning error.

Open FAQ page →
What does the article imply about proposal quality versus submission volume?

The article implies that proposal quality, ecosystem knowledge, and sector alignment matter more than high national submission volume.

Italy, France, Israel, and Norway are used in the data to show that volume and odds do not move together in a simple way.

Open FAQ page →
Which country-level results are more reliable?

The article says the most reliable country signals come from countries with several hundred applications.

Small-country rates, including Icelands top-ranked 79.1%, should be read with sample-size caution.

Open FAQ page →
What is an EIC ecosystem advantage in this article?

The article describes an advantage built from advisory infrastructure, track records, and institutional knowledge.

It names France, Israel, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands as countries with deep EIC ecosystems that consistently outperform the average.

Open FAQ page →
Which sectors struggle with commercial scalability narratives?

The article points to Consumer Products and Services, Public Sector Innovation, and Education and Culture as low-rate sectors.

It links their weakness to commercial scalability narratives that are harder to make compelling at the short proposal stage.

Open FAQ page →
Why is DeepTech positioning important for ICT proposals?

ICT has 3,476 applications but only a 40.2% success rate.

The article says many ICT proposals are judged as insufficiently breakthrough when they are framed as general software, platforms, or digital product differentiation.

Open FAQ page →
What does the article say about female representation versus competitiveness?

Female applicants represent only 18.4% of applications, but their overall success rate is 43.8%.

The article states that female applicants who submit are generally as competitive as male applicants across most sectors.

Open FAQ page →
Why should gender be considered at sector level?

The overall gender gap is 4.5 percentage points, but sector gaps vary substantially.

Engineering and Technology has a 13.3 percentage point male advantage, while Biotechnology has a 2.1 percentage point female advantage.

Open FAQ page →
What explanations does the article give for volume decline in established markets?

The article lists strategic repositioning, market discouragement, and deliberate de-emphasis of the EIC Accelerator.

It also mentions advisor strategy shifts and changes in the EIC communication of eligibility expectations.

Open FAQ page →
Does the article mention applicants skipping the short proposal?

Yes. In the takeaways, the article says volume decline could reflect more applicants skipping the short proposal and entering at full proposal.

It presents that as one possible explanation for declines in established markets.

Open FAQ page →
How severe is Italys rejection pattern?

Italy recorded 1,560 NO-GO decisions out of 2,133 applications.

That means nearly three out of four Italian short proposals did not advance.

Open FAQ page →
What does the rejection analysis say about the current environment?

The rejection analysis shows that 2025 had 2,646 NO-GO decisions and only 732 GO decisions.

The partial 2026 data is similarly hard, with 489 NO-GO decisions and 132 GO decisions.

Open FAQ page →
Are these FAQ answers tied only to post 5305?

Yes. This FAQ collection is attached to source post 5305.

The answers are drawn from the article on EIC Accelerator Step 1 short proposal statistics.

Open FAQ page →
What are the top 10 countries by EIC Accelerator Step 1 success rate?

The top 10 countries with at least 10 applications are Iceland, Norway, Israel, France, Sweden, Finland, Austria, Denmark, Netherlands, and Ireland.

Their success rates range from 79.1% for Iceland to 58.2% for Ireland.

Open FAQ page →
What are the bottom 10 countries with at least one GO decision?

The bottom 10 countries with at least 10 applications and at least one GO are Bosnia, Serbia, North Macedonia, Ukraine, United States, Georgia, Canada, Romania, Montenegro, and Turkiye.

Their success rates range from 4.0% for Bosnia to 26.1% for Turkiye.

Open FAQ page →
What are the top 25 countries by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

The top 25 countries by application volume are Italy, United Kingdom, Germany, Spain, France, Israel, Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Switzerland, Ireland, Turkiye, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Belgium, Austria, Estonia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Greece, and Ukraine.

Italy leads the table with 2,133 applications, while Ukraine is the 25th country with 139 applications.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Italy by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Italy ranks 1st by application volume.

It recorded 2,133 applications, 573 GO decisions, 1,560 NO-GO decisions, and a 26.9% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is the United Kingdom by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

The United Kingdom ranks 2nd by application volume.

It recorded 1,766 applications, 698 GO decisions, 1,068 NO-GO decisions, and a 39.5% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Germany by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Germany ranks 3rd by application volume.

It recorded 1,653 applications, 899 GO decisions, 754 NO-GO decisions, and a 54.4% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Spain by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Spain ranks 4th by application volume.

It recorded 1,160 applications, 667 GO decisions, 493 NO-GO decisions, and a 57.5% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is France by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

France ranks 5th by application volume.

It recorded 1,114 applications, 750 GO decisions, 364 NO-GO decisions, and a 67.3% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Israel by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Israel ranks 6th by application volume.

It recorded 1,091 applications, 743 GO decisions, 348 NO-GO decisions, and a 68.1% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is the Netherlands by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

The Netherlands ranks 7th by application volume.

It recorded 919 applications, 537 GO decisions, 382 NO-GO decisions, and a 58.4% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Poland by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Poland ranks 8th by application volume.

It recorded 778 applications, 296 GO decisions, 482 NO-GO decisions, and a 38.0% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Sweden by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Sweden ranks 9th by application volume.

It recorded 762 applications, 472 GO decisions, 290 NO-GO decisions, and a 61.9% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Finland by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Finland ranks 10th by application volume.

It recorded 492 applications, 302 GO decisions, 190 NO-GO decisions, and a 61.4% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Denmark by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Denmark ranks 11th by application volume.

It recorded 453 applications, 265 GO decisions, 188 NO-GO decisions, and a 58.5% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Switzerland by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Switzerland ranks 12th by application volume.

It recorded 394 applications, 212 GO decisions, 182 NO-GO decisions, and a 53.8% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Ireland by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Ireland ranks 13th by application volume.

It recorded 383 applications, 223 GO decisions, 160 NO-GO decisions, and a 58.2% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Turkiye by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Turkiye ranks 14th by application volume.

It recorded 383 applications, 100 GO decisions, 283 NO-GO decisions, and a 26.1% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Norway by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Norway ranks 15th by application volume.

It recorded 341 applications, 233 GO decisions, 108 NO-GO decisions, and a 68.3% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Portugal by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Portugal ranks 16th by application volume.

It recorded 338 applications, 131 GO decisions, 207 NO-GO decisions, and a 38.8% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Romania by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Romania ranks 17th by application volume.

It recorded 333 applications, 66 GO decisions, 267 NO-GO decisions, and a 19.8% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Belgium by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Belgium ranks 18th by application volume.

It recorded 321 applications, 183 GO decisions, 138 NO-GO decisions, and a 57.0% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Austria by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Austria ranks 19th by application volume.

It recorded 307 applications, 188 GO decisions, 119 NO-GO decisions, and a 61.2% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Estonia by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Estonia ranks 20th by application volume.

It recorded 236 applications, 90 GO decisions, 146 NO-GO decisions, and a 38.1% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Hungary by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Hungary ranks 21st by application volume.

It recorded 229 applications, 82 GO decisions, 147 NO-GO decisions, and a 35.8% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Bulgaria by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Bulgaria ranks 22nd by application volume.

It recorded 223 applications, 66 GO decisions, 157 NO-GO decisions, and a 29.6% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Slovakia by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Slovakia ranks 23rd by application volume.

It recorded 179 applications, 67 GO decisions, 112 NO-GO decisions, and a 37.4% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Greece by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Greece ranks 24th by application volume.

It recorded 172 applications, 69 GO decisions, 103 NO-GO decisions, and a 40.1% success rate.

Open FAQ page →
What rank is Ukraine by EIC Accelerator Step 1 application volume?

Ukraine ranks 25th by application volume.

It recorded 139 applications, 22 GO decisions, 117 NO-GO decisions, and a 15.8% success rate.

Open FAQ page →