The fourth edition of the 0100 Europe 2026 conference just concluded in Amsterdam. It was three days of about 700 investors from both private equity and venture capital sharing insights about the future of investment.
The big topics at this edition of the conference were defence and dual-use technologies, shifts in geopolitics and policy, and the maturation of secondaries as a primary liquidity engine. Discussions underscored how the industry is pivoting to manage a constrained exit environment, with a particular focus on connecting European opportunities with Global LP capital from the U.S. and MENA region.
One recurring issue is that, in comparison to CEE, Western European investors are wary about investing in weapons. Large institutional investors are worried that they may be perceived wrongly on the market, that defence is not a lucrative field of investment, and that larger organisations will be much better at outcompeting small startup innovators for government contracts.
Investors discussed the need for this investment, framing dual-use technologies as a strategic vehicle for funds to unlock institutional capital that was previously restricted by traditional ESG mandates.
Another topic of the conference was the benefits of shifting to evergreen structures instead of the traditional private equity and venture capital fund structures. Evergreen structures raise capital throughout the cycle and allow for periodic, limited redemptions, providing investors with immediate exposure to a diversified portfolio.
Evergreens are an open-ended investment structure that operates indefinitely without a fixed termination date, constantly raising capital and reinvesting proceeds. The advantage of this structure is that the fund is more flexible. For example, if VC investors start a fund at the start, they find a great startup, and they know that one of the startups will grow a lot, so they contact the LPs that they would like to convert to an Evergreen structure, so that they can ride the increase in startup value.
A large topic that came up during a number of discussions with GPs in charge of VC funds is the fact that VC firms have needed to become more selective with their capital. This has happened as a result of slowed investment from the LPs, the people who invest in these funds, which are becoming more careful with their capital as the global security and regulatory landscape changes.
This change manifested itself at the conference as well, with many of the LPs seeming to be more careful with pledging investment while the demand for them by GPs grew, with every VC GP I met at the conference telling me that they came specifically to meet more LPs. With GPs often cracking jokes about the fact that they are now in the same boat as startups, needing to run around to find potential LPs to pitch their fund to.
However, the real pitching to LPs seemed to be far from the panels, with many of the LPs being more present at the side events. For example, at a side event hosted by NoSuch Ventures, which included a disco party, relaxed atmosphere, and the potential to talk to a combination of VC investors, LPs from family offices, and founders.
Some GPs also shared that due to the selectiveness of startup investment, VC funds have received many more leads than they otherwise would have. Many of the GPs also believe that there are new, very good startups emerging, but due to the relative decrease in funding from LPs, they do not want to be as relaxed when choosing what to invest in.
Throughout the panels, the prevailing mood regarding defense was described as a “strategic recalibration.” While capital deployment from traditional LPs remains largely constrained by historical ESG exclusions, speakers noted a clear shift toward the “CEE Model.” In Central and Eastern Europe, defense is increasingly viewed as a foundational pillar of regional stability rather than a “sin sector.”
LPs in those regions have already transitioned from hesitation to active participation, reframing defense investment as a form of sovereign responsibility. Investors at the conference signaled that Western Europe is beginning a similar pivot, though the pace will ultimately depend on how quickly regulators and institutions formally reclassify “dual-use” technologies. This speed was also discussed with the investors, seeing both positive and negative changes in that direction.
The event effectively captured the cultural spectrum of the VC sector: with investors who just attended a formal panel discussion on how to establish a new playbook for European investors to be autonomous on US investment, getting into a crowded Uber and going to a party where the DJ is the fund director, the partner is mixing drinks, and the investment analysts bring pizza.
The 0100 conference, however, was not only for investors, but it also served as a crossroads for many more interesting people. My conversations ranged from blockchain and quantum software founders to researchers and policy advisors. Particularly notable was the presence of specialists bridging the gap between emerging market governments and cutting-edge tech ecosystems.
All in all, Amsterdam was an interesting spot for all of these investors from around the world, with the VC people liking the relaxed city atmosphere with them looking forward to Kingsday on the 27th of April, and the very innovation-focused ecosystem, and the PE people liking the directness and hardworking Dutch culture.
