I am a certified EU Expert Evaluator, and from my side of the screen a proposal has no flag on it. It is scored on Excellence, Impact and Implementation, and the applicant's country is not one of the three. Yet when you line up every company that has actually won, the map is far from even. This piece is about that map: who wins, how often relative to the size of the country, and how careful you have to be before you draw a conclusion from it.
The data is the winners database on this site, which joins CORDIS and the EIC Data Hub: 747 companies with a signed EIC Accelerator grant agreement under Horizon Europe, from the 2021 calls onward, across 31 countries. Population and GDP are World Bank figures for 2024. You can check any country yourself in the EIC Accelerator winners database.
The short answer: three countries take 42% of the winners
Germany has 118 winners (16%), France 111 (15%), the Netherlands 82 (11%), Spain 65 (9%) and Sweden 52 (7%). The top three countries account for 42% of all winners and the top five for 57%. Money follows the same order, because Accelerator grants cluster close to the EUR 2.5 million cap, so counting companies and counting euros give almost the same ranking.
That ranking mostly tells you which countries are large. It becomes interesting only when you adjust for size.
Per inhabitant: the Nordics and the Baltics lead
Divide winners by population and the order changes completely. Finland (6.6 per million inhabitants) and Estonia (6.6) come out on top, followed by Denmark and Ireland (5.0 each), Sweden (4.9), Israel and the Netherlands (4.6 and 4.6).
| Country | Winners per million inhabitants | Winners |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 6.6 | 37 |
| Estonia | 6.6 | 9 |
| Denmark | 5.0 | 30 |
| Ireland | 5.0 | 27 |
| Sweden | 4.9 | 52 |
| Israel | 4.6 | 46 |
| Netherlands | 4.6 | 82 |
| Norway | 2.9 | 16 |
Among the large countries the gap is wide. France has 1.6 winners per million inhabitants, Germany 1.4, Spain 1.3 and Italy 0.5. Iceland and Luxembourg also score high per head, but on only 3 and 4 winners respectively, so I would not read much into them.
Against economic weight: who punches above its GDP
Population is one yardstick; the size of the economy is another. For each country I compared its share of the winners with its share of the combined GDP of the 31 countries in the data. A value of 1.0x means a fair share. A value of 2.0x means twice its economic weight.
| Country | Winners vs GDP weight | Winners |
|---|---|---|
| Estonia | 7.0x | 9 |
| Finland | 4.2x | 37 |
| Sweden | 2.9x | 52 |
| Israel | 2.9x | 46 |
| Lithuania | 2.8x | 7 |
| Denmark | 2.4x | 30 |
| Netherlands | 2.3x | 82 |
Estonia sits at 7.0x and Finland at 4.2x. The Netherlands, at 2.3x, has 82 winners for a country of about 18 million people: nearly three times Italy's count with about a third of its population. The large economies tell a more mixed story:
| Country | Winners vs GDP weight | Winners |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 0.9x | 118 |
| France | 1.2x | 111 |
| Spain | 1.3x | 65 |
| Italy | 0.4x | 29 |
| Poland | 0.4x | 10 |
Germany is first in absolute terms but slightly below its economic weight (0.9x). France and Spain are above theirs. Italy (0.4x) and Poland (0.4x) are well below. The UK figure needs a footnote, which comes below.
Spain and Italy
Spain has 65 winners, fourth overall, with 1.3 winners per million inhabitants and 1.3x its economic weight. By the standards of the large European economies that is a strong result, though well below the Nordic level per head.
Italy has 29 winners, 0.5 per million inhabitants and 0.4x its economic weight. Together with Poland it is the clearest shortfall among the larger EU economies. What I can say is that the data raises the question. What I cannot say is why. Possible explanations include fewer applications, less familiarity with the instrument, a smaller pool of deep-tech companies at the stage the EIC funds, or a lower hit rate on the applications that are made. Only applicant numbers by country could separate those, and they are not in the data I used. Treat each of them as a hypothesis, not a finding.
What these numbers do not say
- Winners are not applicants. This is not a success rate. A low figure can mean fewer applications as much as fewer wins, and a high one can mean a country applies more.
- The UK and Switzerland joined late. The UK became associated to Horizon Europe on 1 January 2024 and Switzerland on 1 January 2025, so their companies could only win in later calls. All 15 UK winners come from calls in 2024 or later, and all 4 Swiss winners from 2025. Measured only against the calls open to them, the UK is at 0.4x and Switzerland at 1.1x, not the near-zero a naive count suggests.
- GDP is in current US dollars, so exchange rates move it a little. Good for ranking, not for precise ratios.
- Country means the beneficiary's registered country as recorded in CORDIS. It can differ from where the founders come from or where the company mostly operates.
- Only signed grant agreements are counted. The most recent calls are still being signed, so their totals will rise.
How to use this if you are applying
Do not read the map as a verdict on your chances. The evaluation criteria do not include your country, and a company in Estonia and one in Italy are read against the same bar. Use it instead as a source of comparable cases:
- Open the winners database, filter by your country and your technology, and read what the winners from your own ecosystem actually proposed. Examples: Spanish winners and Italian winners.
- If your country has few winners in your sector, the question is not whether you can win, but what a winning proposal in that sector looks like. Look at neighbouring countries with more cases.
- Score yourself against the same floors a panel uses with the free EIC readiness assessment, and read how evaluators actually score a proposal before you write a word.
Questions
Which country has the most EIC Accelerator winners?
Germany, with 118 of the 747 companies, followed by France (111) and the Netherlands (82). Together those three account for 42% of all winners since the 2021 calls. Spain is fourth with 65 and Sweden fifth with 52.
Which country wins the most per inhabitant?
Finland and Estonia, with about 6.6 winners per million inhabitants each, followed by Denmark and Ireland at 5.0 and Sweden at 4.9. Iceland and Luxembourg score high per head too, but on only 3 and 4 winners, so the figure is not meaningful.
Why do the UK and Switzerland look so low?
Because their companies could only win in later calls. The UK became associated to Horizon Europe on 1 January 2024 and Switzerland on 1 January 2025. Measured against the calls open to them, the UK is at 0.4x its economic weight and Switzerland at 1.1x, rather than the very low full-period figure.
Is this a success rate by country?
No. It counts winners, not applicants. A success rate needs the number of applications per country, which is not in this data. A low figure can mean fewer applications as well as fewer wins, so use it to find comparable cases, not to judge your own odds.
Where does the data come from?
The 747 winners come from CORDIS and the EIC Data Hub, joined on the project number, as described in the methodology of the winners database. Population and GDP (current US dollars) are World Bank figures for 2024. Every row in the database links back to its official CORDIS record.
EU Expert Evaluator · 3,700+ companies and proposals reviewed
Wondering where your company sits in this picture?
Your country sets none of the three scores; your proposal does. The fixed-price EIC Fit Assessment scores it the way a panel would, before you write a word. If you would rather start free, the readiness check takes a few minutes.
Book a discovery call →