Austrian Startup Monitor 2018

Abstract

The Austrian Startup Monitor 2018 is the first comprehensive report about the status,
perspectives, and eco-system of startups in Austria. The survey also covers questions from the EU Startup Monitor. We gathered insights from 512 founders or CEOs of Austrian startups in a survey conducted in spring 2018. By collecting data from different sources more than 1,500 startups have been identified, which were invited to participate in the survey.

Full text

AUSTRIAN
STARTUP
MONITOR
2018

2018

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Austrian Startup Monitor 2018
Copyright © 2018
All rights reserved. Any part of the contents of this book can be reproduced
or transmitted with reference to the source, provided that
the publisher is notied in advance.
ISBN 978-3-200-05768-5
Online: www.austrianstartupmonitor.at
Published in Vienna, July 2018
MEDIA OWNER AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH, Center for Innovation
Systems & Policy, Gienggasse 4, 1210 Vienna, www.ait.ac.at
PRODUCTION & PUBLISHER
Home Town Media GmbH, Mariahilfer Strasse 49/15, 1060 Vienna, Austria
hometownmedia.eu, oce@hometownmedia.eu
EDITORIAL MANAGEMENT Alyssa-Ninja Weis
EDITING Sonja Burger
TRANSLATION (German to English) Home Town Media
GRAPHIC DESIGN & ILLUSTRATIONS Karin Dreher, karin-grakdesign.com
AUTHORS Karl-Heinz Leitner (AIT), Georg Zahradnik (AIT), Rudolf Dömötör (Vienna University of
Economics and Business), Markus Raunig (AustrianStartups), Martina Pardy (AustrianStartups),
Elke Mattheiss (AustrianStartups)
CONTRACTING ENTITIES Austria Wirtschaftsservice (aws), Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG),
Austrian Council for Research and Technology Development (RFTE), Vienna Business Agency,
Austrian Federal Economic Chamber (WKO), Vienna Economic Chamber (WKW), Federation of Austrian
Industry (IV)
PRINTED AND BOUND
NEOGRAFIA, a.s. Sučianska 39A
038 61 Martin-Priekopa Slovakia
Contents
About the Austrian Startup Monitor .................... 13
Startups in Austria ........................................................ 17
Founders in Austria ..................................................... 25
Employees ...................................................................... 43
Strategy & Business Model ...................................... 55
Innovation ....................................................................... 63
Austrian & International Markets ......................... 69
Cooperations .................................................................75
Revenue & Financing ................................................. 83
Environment & Development ............................... 95
Contracting Entities & Promoters .................... 103
Team ................................................................................108
List of Figures ..............................................................110
References ......................................................................111

67
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
DEFINITION
OF STARTUPS
Startups are
dened as
companies with
the following
characteristics:
1. STARTUPS are
younger than 10 years
old.
2. STARTUPS are
innovative with their
products, services,
technologies or
business models.
3. STARTUPS have a
signicant employee
or revenue growth or
strive to do so.
Startups are considered the
spearheads of technologi-
cal and economic change.
This is because they create
the markets of tomorrow and
positively aect the economic
growth and competitiveness of
a country. Two things could be
observed in Austria: The impor-
tance of startups increased rap-
idly in recent years and, in the
meantime, the topic has gained
the attention of the general
public. Just a few years ago, the
term “startup” was foreign to
many people. Today, just about
everyone has an opinion about
it. This image is far too seldom
based on actual gures, data
and facts. No wonder - after all,
to date, no scientically sound
pool of data has existed con-
cerning the founding, dynamics,
and evolution of startups in
Austria.
In order to close this gap, the
Austrian Startup Monitor (ASM)
was initiated. The Austrian
Startup Monitor is a joint project
nanced by Austria Wirtschafts-
service Gesellschaft mbH, the
Austrian Federal Economic
Chamber, the Austrian Council
for Research and Technology
Development, the Austrian
Research Promotion Agency, the
Federation of Austrian Industry,
the Vienna Economic Chamber
and the Vienna Business Agency.
We are proud that, with the rst
2018 edition, we have suc-
ceeded in being able to draw a
meaningful, profound, and fact-
based image of the Austrian
startup scene.
The Austrian Startup Monitor
answered a series of relevant
questions: Who starts up a
company when, where, how
and why? What is characteristic
for startups in Austria? What
are some of the problems and
issues they currently face? What
are they seeking from political
decision-makers? What strat-
egies do they pursue? And, last
but not least: What are they
planning in the future?
That and much more is available
for you to discover in the rst
Austrian Startup Monitor!
This being said, the ASM also
has longer-term goals beyond
conveying a current image of
the startup scene’s situation.
It forms the foundation of a
long-term project, which is
similar to existing initiatives in
Germany, Switzerland and the
Netherlands. The ASM seeks to
identify all Austrian startups, nd
out where they are located and
accompany them in the years
ahead on a continual scientic
research basis. In this context,
the ASM can used as a key refer-
ence source and guideline in the
coming years to make analysis
and further development of the
startup landscape possible.
We are convinced that the
present report is a milestone in
the development of the Austrian
startup ecosystem and are look-
ing forward to a lively discussion
of the results. We hope you enjoy
reading it and getting better
aquainted with the Austrian
startup scene!
INTRODUCTION
KARL-HEINZ LEITNER
(AIT AUSTRIAN INSTITUTE OF
TECHNOLOGY)
MARKUS RAUNIG
(AUSTRIANSTARTUPS)
RUDOLF DÖMÖTÖR
(VIENNA UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS
AND BUSINESS)
On behalf of the study team,

89
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
STATEMENTS CONCERNING THE
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR 2018
VIENNA BUSINESS
AGENCY
Vienna is the nucleus of the local start-
up scene. In the face of international
competition, the Vienna
Startup City is shining more vividly
than ever. Of course, we know that so
much more is possible. Figures, data
and facts are the basis for other e-
cient development steps. They are now
available at a very high quality. We will
utilize these in Vienna in order to more
eectively support startups in being
successful. Here in Vienna, in Europe
and around the world.
Mag. Gerhard Hirczi, Managing
Director of the Vienna Business Agency
AUSTRIAN
RESEARCH
PROMOTION AGENCY
(FFG)
Startups are one of the main drivers of
the Austrian innovation system. There-
fore, these young innovative companies
also represent an essential target group
of the FFG. The FFG provides support
from the very rst idea through product
development, all the way to market
launch and market development. The
digitalization agency of the Austrian
Research Promotion Agency will also
make a signicant contribution for
startups in the future.
Dr. Henrietta Eggerth and Dr. Klaus
Pseiner, Managing Directors of the
Austrian Research Promotion Agency
AUSTRIA
WIRTSCHAFTS-
SERVICE
GESELLSCHAFT MBH
Startups make an important contri-
bution to the innovative strength of
the country and ensure the success of
Austria as a business location in co-
operation with existing companies. As
federal business development bank,
aws supports innovation and growth
throughout all phases of company de-
velopment. One of aws nancing and
funding focuses lies in ICT, digitaliza-
tion, physical and life sciences.
DI Bernhard Sagmeister and Mag.a
Edeltraud Stiftinger, Managing
Directors of Austria Wirtschaftsservice
GmbH
AUSTRIAN COUNCIL
FOR RESEARCH AND
TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
FEDERATION OF
AUSTRIAN INDUSTRY VIENNA ECONOMIC
CHAMBER
AUSTRIAN FEDERAL
ECONOMIC
CHAMBER
The Austrian Economic Chamber
actively supports startups and es-
tablished companies when going in-
ternational. The Economic Chamber
establishes benecial parameters for
all companies, because economic
activity functions as a whole.
Dr. Harald Mahrer, President of the
Austrian Federal Economic Chamber
The startups of today are the shooting
stars of tomorrow. It is crucial to opti-
mize the use our regional economy as a
network. That's why we, as the Vienna
Economic Chamber, set two levers into
motion: On the one hand, we support
startup founders and, on the other, we
build bridges to existing companies. In
this way, we create a new dynamic for
Vienna as a business location, which
everyone can benet from.
Walter Ruck, President of the
Vienna Economic Chamber
For the industrial sector, startups can
represent crucial partners, giving a
competitive advantage when bringing
new products to market and creating
innovative business models. Therefore,
in order to increase the dynamism of
innovation in Austria, collaborations
between young and established inno-
vative companies must be increasingly
made possible and taken advantage of.
Mag. Georg Kapsch, President of the
Federation of Austrian Industry
Innovative startups are the basis for eco-
nomic momentum and social prosperity.
This is where new ideas happen, where
the courage to try things lives, and where
we shape the future. For this reason, from
the point of view of the council, it is a key
aspect of forward-looking economic and
social policy to provide startups in Austria
with the best possible space for them to
develop. Fortunately, successful rst steps
have already been taken. However, there
is still a great deal of untapped potential.
Dr. Hannes Androsch, Chairman of the
Council for Research and
Technology Development

10 11
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
Key Facts
The Austrian Startup Monitor 2018 is the rst comprehensive report about the status,
perspectives, and ecosystem of startups in Austria. The survey also covers questions from
the EU Startup Monitor. We gathered insights from 512 founders or CEOs of Austrian startups
in a survey conducted in spring 2018. By collecting data from dierent sources more than
1,500 startups have been identied, which were invited to participate in the survey.
The Austrian
Startup
Monitor
comprises
more than
1,500 startups
founded in
Austria since
2004. More
than the
half of these
startups were
launched in
Vienna.
On average, the
surveyed startups
employ 8.2
people. Thus, the
Austrian startup
sector signicantly
contributes to job
creation in Austria.
Articial
intelligence,
autonomous
vehicles, and
big data are
considered
the most
important future
technologies.
The founders can be charac-
terised as follows: 62% are
aged between 25 and
39, 12% are women, 75%
have a university degree and
14% come from abroad. Of
the participating founders,
42% are serial entrepre-
neurs and have already built
up another company before
their current venture.
The majority of startups
are active in the IT-in-
dustry. On average, the
startups doubled their
revenue from last year
to this year, and in the
coming year they aim to
double revenue again.
12% of the surveyed
startups are spin-offs
from universities,
university of applied
sciences, research
institutes or companies.
About 75% of the startups
participating in the survey have
already developed international
markets and thus export their
products and services. Within the
next year. Right from the start, 42%
of the startups are “born glo-
bals,” meaning that they target
global markets from day one.
Most of the
startups
(90%) collaborate
with national and inter-
national partners. They
see market access and
the development of new
products and services
as the most important
reasons to cooperate.
The three most important
financing sources are the
founder’s own savings (81%),
public subsidies and all-
owances (55%), and business
angels (33%).
15% of the surveyed
startups have already
acquired external ca-
pital of more than €1
million euros and
69% intend to rai-
se external capital
within the next 12
months.
The current business
situation is conside-
red “good” or
“excellent” by
53% of the startups.
Only one in eight
startups thinks
that the Austrian
government
is seriously
interested in
supporting
startups. The
most important
appeals startups
would make to
policy makers are
for decreasing
social security
contributions
and taxes (75%)
and reducing
bureaucratic
obstacles (70%).
A vast majority of the surveyed start-
ups (87%) are planning to hire new
employees within the next 12 months.
On average, startups intend to hire ab-
out four new employees in this time peri-
od, resulting in a 40% growth in the num-
ber of employees. However, every other
startup reported difficulties
acquiring adequate personnel.

12 13
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
ABOUT THE
AUSTRIAN
STARTUP
MONITOR

14 15
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
The Austrian Startup Monitor (ASM) is a
long-term project with the aim of compiling
and continuously analyzing information
about the status quo and development of
Austrian startups over time. As a rst step,
Austrian startups were identied based on
various sources, characterized with the aid of
publicly available data and compiled into a
database. In an online survey, the startups
were asked about their perspectives as well
as their perception of the Austrian startup
ecosystem. In addition to the data from the
database, the results of the ASM Survey form
the central empirical basis for the ASM 2018.
Note concerning interpretation of the gures:
In some cases, due to rounding dierences, the
responses do not always add up to 100%.
METHOD ASM DATABASE
With the ASM database, for the rst time, Austrian startup
companies are documented to the furthest extent possible.
In Austria, no publicly available
information, such as statistical
surveys, registrations or similar
sources concerning startups ex-
ists to date. This decit made it
impossible to record and quan-
tify them until now. According to
the Austrian Federal Economic
Chamber, in recent years, the
number of companies founded
amounted to between 37,000
and 40,000 (including approx.
10,000 personal consultants)
per year. In order to be able to
narrow down and identify start-
ups, a wide variety of search
strategies needed to be used to
lter the relevant data from all
founded companies. Startups
often settle in particular loca-
tions, for example, in the vicinity
of incubators and other facilities
that provide support for found-
ers as well as coworking spaces.
Numerous startups could be
found in this environment. The
analysis of competitions and
events (e.g. Pioneers Festival,
Fifteen Seconds, Startup Live,
Entrepreneurship Avenue) was
also enlightening. In turn, a dif-
ferent search strategy entailed
focusing on the systematic
analysis of the media coverage
on startups. Since they use spe-
cic forms of nancing, such as
venture capital, crowdfunding,
or public subsidies programs, the
publicly available information
surrounding this funding was
used for the evaluation.
Databases such as Startablish or
Crunchbase were also important
sources when locating startups.
Based on publicly available
information, it was then possible
to collect a great amount of
data concerning the charac-
teristics of enterprises and their
innovation activities. Against
the background of the afore-
mentioned denition criteria, a
group consisting of 1,534 start-
ups were identied for this rst
edition of the ASM. They were
all established between 2004
and 2017 and the vast major-
ity - more than 90% - were
founded after 2008 and are
thereby are a maximum of ten
years old, in accordance with
the denition. Due to the chosen
approach, not all startups were
able to be identied and it is
assumed that the population
of founded startups in Austria
is higher. Nevertheless, the pool
of data contained in the ASM
database represents the most
comprehensive population of all
startups in Austria to date.
1
,
5
3
4
s
t
a
r
t
u
p
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
r
e
c
o
r
d
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
d
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
(
2
0
0
4
-
2
0
1
7
)
a
l
l
s
t
a
r
t
u
p
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
368 surveyed Startups
all founded companies
(approx. 40,000 per year)
Note: The graph is not proportional to the data.
TOTAL POPULATION OF STARTUPS

16 17
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
ASM SURVEY
ASM REPORT
All the startups counted during the course of building
the ASM database were invited to an online survey.
The aim of the survey was, above
all, to nd out how founders
evaluate the Austrian startup
ecosystem and identify specic
company characteristics.
The development of the survey
took place in close collaboration
with the project leads of the EU
Startup Monitor (startupmonitor.
eu). The EU study is supported
by the European Commission
and compares European startup
ecosystems and also contributes
to the SME annual report issued
by the European Commission.
The corresponding annual Con-
gress "SME Assembly" took place
in Austria in 2018. The results of
the survey were published using
a stand-alone report in the fall
of 2018.
The online survey was carried
out from the beginning of March
to the end of April, 2018. The
startups were mainly contacted
by AustrianStartups. In addition,
several disseminators have
communicated the importance
of the survey within the com-
munity. Overall, the survey had
532 participants, whereby more
than one person participated
in some cases. The majority of
the participants - 88% - were
the startup founders. To en-
able a more in-depth analysis,
participants were asked to state
the name of the startups on a
voluntary basis. Ultimately, in this
way, 368 companies were iden-
tied as startups by denition.
The dierence between the total
number of all responses and
the number of responses from
companies classied as startups
can be traced back to multiple
expert answers or anonymized
participation. For the questions
of the Austrian Startup Monitor
2018, both groups were included
in the data pool depending on
the relevant questions.
In view of the entire popula-
tion (1,534 startups), that is a
response rate of about 24%
calculated on the startup level. If
comparisons between the survey
(368 startups), and the data-
base (1,534 startups) are taken
into account with regard to the
geographical distribution of
local startups, a similar pattern
is evident. Therefore, the data
obtained through the survey can
be deemed representative of
the entire Austrian startup eco-
system, taking their distribution
throughout the federal states
into account.
Two dierences between the
data pool and the survey were
apparent: The startups that
responded to the survey are
younger on average and are in
earlier stages of development
than those from the existing
data pool.
The rst ASM report for the year
2018 is based on data in the ASM
database and the ASM Survey.
Concerning the ASM Survey, a
dierentiation should be made
between the total group of par-
ticipants and the group of iden-
tied startups. Dierentiating
between the data source, ASM
Survey participants (N max. 532,
depending on the completeness
of the respective question) and
ASM Survey startups (N max.
368) ensures this.
On a case-by-case basis, ref-
erence is made to the results
of other studies, such as the
European Startup Monitor (ESM),
the German Startup Monitor
(GSM) or the Community Inno-
vation Survey (CIS). They allow
for a rough classication of the
current ndings to be made on a
national level.
STARTUPS
IN AUSTRIA

Survey participants
Startups founded from
2004 to 2017 (ASM data-
base)
Salzburg 4%
Styria 12%
Tyrol 3%
Vorarlberg 2%
Burgenland 2%
Kärnten 4%
Niederösterreich 9%
Oberösterreich 15%
Salzburg 4%
Steiermark 12%
Tirol 3%
Vorarlberg 2%
Wien 50%
Totals
362
18 19
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
NUMBERS AND LOCATIONS
NUMBER OF STARTUPS
IN AUSTRIA, 2004 TO 2017
Fig. 2. Source: ASM database, N=1,534
* Due to the selected search strategies (see Chapter ASM DATABASE) and the startup
infrastructure, which is first built up during the first few years of its existence and
makes identification easier, it was particularly difficult to identify startups in the years
prior to 2010. Here, the number of startups founded is probably higher.
25 31 32 41 53 85 90 96 128 146 173 227 227 180
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*
NUMBER OF STARTUPS
IN AUSTRIA
Fig. 1. Source: ASM Survey (startups) and ASM database
Totals 1,534
VORARLBERG
8 24
In a federal-state comparison, Vienna clearly ranks rst place
as a startup location, shown by the number and distribution of
startups. In specic gures: 773 startups, meaning around half
of all Austrian startups that took root between 2004 and 2017,
settled down in Vienna. Upper Austria follows in second place;
Styria is in third place. Approximately 13% of all startups are
respectively located in both federal states.
There too, startups are concentrated in the respective state
capitals, Graz and Linz. In other federal states, the quota is
considerably under this. A total of 9% of startup companies
were in Lower Austria, followed by Carinthia with 4% and Tyrol
with 3%. When it comes to founding new startups, Vorarlberg
and Burgenland are in last place with a share of less than 2%.
CARINTHIA
13 92
Startups nach Bundesländern
(das hat wenig direkten Mehrwert zur Abbildung davor, zeigt aber das die Befragung repräsentativ ist.
Kann man wohl auch ganz kompakt darstellen wie z.B. Abb 30 im DSM.Betonung auf die Ähnlichkeitund nicht die geringen Unterschiede!)
Burgenland Kärnten Niederösterreich Oberösterreich Salzburg Steiermark Tirol Vorarlberg Wien
Befragung 1.9% 3.6% 8.8% 14.6% 3.9% 11.6% 3.3% 2.2% 50.0%
Gründungen 1.0% 6.6% 6.8% 12.7% 3.5% 12.9% 5.1% 1.6% 49.9%
2004-2017
Startups nach Bundesländern
(das hat wenig direkten Mehrwert zur Abbildung davor, zeigt aber das die Befragung repräsentativ ist.
Kann man wohl auch ganz kompakt darstellen wie z.B. Abb 30 im DSM.Betonung auf die Ähnlichkeitund nicht die geringen Unterschiede!)
Burgenland Kärnten Niederösterreich Oberösterreich Salzburg Steiermark Tirol Vorarlberg Wien
Befragung 1.9% 3.6% 8.8% 14.6% 3.9% 11.6% 3.3% 2.2% 50.0%
Gründungen 1.0% 6.6% 6.8% 12.7% 3.5% 12.9% 5.1% 1.6% 49.9%
2004-2017
Startups nach Bundesländern
(das hat wenig direkten Mehrwert zur Abbildung davor, zeigt aber das die Befragung repräsentativ ist.
Kann man wohl auch ganz kompakt darstellen wie z.B. Abb 30 im DSM.Betonung auf die Ähnlichkeitund nicht die geringen Unterschiede!)
Burgenland Kärnten Niederösterreich Oberösterreich Salzburg Steiermark Tirol Vorarlberg Wien
Befragung 1.9% 3.6% 8.8% 14.6% 3.9% 11.6% 3.3% 2.2% 50.0%
Gründungen 1.0% 6.6% 6.8% 12.7% 3.5% 12.9% 5.1% 1.6% 49.9%
2004-2017
REPRESENTATIVE
STUDY RESULTS
Fig. 3. Source: ASM Survey (startups) and ASM database
Fig. 3 shows the distribution of startups
that took part in the survey. The percent-
ages somewhat correspond to the basic
population of all startups listed in the
database. In the survey, only startups from
the federal states of Carinthia and Tyrol
are somewhat less frequently represent-
ed than in the basic population. On the
whole, however, a representative data
pool can be assumed.
Burgenland
1.9
1.1
3.6
6.0
8.8
7.0
14.6
12.0
3.9
4.1
11.6
12.3
3.3
5.1
2.2
1.6
50.0
50.8
Carinthia
Lower Austria
Upper Austria
Salzburg
Styria
Vorarlberg
Tyrol
Vienna
Survey participants
Companies founded from 2004 to 2017 (ASM database)
In percent
The basic population
of the database includes
1,534 startups founded
between 2004-2017.
BURGENLAND
7 16
SALZBURG
14 62
UPPER AUSTRIA
53 183
LOWER AUSTRIA
32 106
STYRIA
42 187
VIENNA
181 773
The importance of startups has
signicantly increased in public
perception. This does not only
have to do with a few famous
examples of success and media
coverage that have become
more intense over the years, but
it can also be seen on an empiri-
cal level.
In principle, it is ascertainable
that the number of startup
companies listed in the
database between 2004 and
2016 has steadily increased: Only
25 startup companies were listed
in 2004, 12 years later there were
227, and 180 last year. Since the
listing of startups in the ASM
database can only be compiled
with a certain time delay, it can
be assumed that the number of
startups in 2017 is higher than in
the previous year and thus, the
growth rate continued.
On average, the number of
startup companies listed in the
database has grown by around
20% annually between 2004
and 2016.
STARTUPS
IN AUSTRIA
IN PERCENT
Burgenland 2% Carinthia 4%
Lower Austria 9%
Upper Austria 15%
Vienna 50%
TYROL
12 78

14.2%
Other
4.6%
Spin-off
from an existing company
Spin-off
from another
research institution
Subsidiary
of an existing
company
TYPES OF BUSINESSES
OF STARTUPS
IN PERCENT
1.0%
0.8%
0.3% 5.5%
5.8%
Other
86.6%
Independent
company
20 21
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
DEVELOPMENT PHASE
The results allowed for an analysis of what development phase the surveyed startups
are currently in. As is customary, we dierentiate between seed, startup, growth and
the later-stage phases.
Fig. 4. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=366
The majority (44%) is in the
startup phase, followed by
the growth phase at 34%, and
around 14% of the surveyed
startups are in the seed phase.
The distribution of the devel-
opment phases and age of the
companies surveyed are closely
related. About one-fth of the
companies are less than one
year old, and are usually in the
seed phase. Another third are
between two and three years
old and mostly in the startup
phase. Companies that are
older than four years
tend to have graduated to the
growth phase. They account for
about one-third of the
companies surveyed.
DEVELOPMENT
OF
STARTUPS
IN PERCENT
33.6%
1.1%
2.2%
Later stage
(The startup is established
on the market; a sale or
initial public oering is
planned or imminent)
44.3%
Seed phase
(Concept development
and still no revenues/
users)
Steady stage
(The company's development has stagnated,
there is no longer any signicant growth)
Startup
phase
(There is already
a minimum
viable product/
MVP and rst
revenues or
users)
Growth
(Strong revenue growth
and/or user growth)
TYPES OF STARTUPS
Startups have dierent origins
and development histories. The
ASM 2018 investigated how dif-
ferent business types are repre-
sented throughout Austria. The
evaluation showed that the ma-
jority of surveyed startups (87% or
316 companies) are independent
companies. A minority of around
6% were created as spin-os
from a university, college, or
research institution or as a
spin-o from a well- established
company.
Fig. 5. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=365
Spin-off
from a university/university
of applied sciences

22 23
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
The results show that the IT and
software development elds
dominate. As the ASM Survey 2018
has shown, these two sectors
account for around 35% of
startups. With considerable dis-
tance, the elds of “life sciences”
(including biotechnology, health-
care, medical and pharmaceuti-
cal) and “industrial technology/
production/electronics/electrical
engineering” follow with around
10% respectively. Companies of
the latter type are frequently
referred to collectively as “hard-
ware startups”. Creative industries
(communication/marketing and
media) and the eld of consumer
goods (clothing/textiles, consum-
er goods, food products) are in
fourth and fth place at around
7%, ultimately followed by trade
(6%) in sixth place. Other indus-
tries play a subordinate role at a
share of under 5% of startups.
With the dominance of the two
industries, IT and software de-
velopment in startups, Austria is
part of an international trend. A
comparison with other studies on
sector distribution conrmed this
and companies founded in these
elds are the most prevalent in
Germany and Switzerland.
If this is contrasted with the
“enterprise birth” statistics pub-
lished by Statistics Austria, which
lists all founded companies, it
also becomes evident that start-
ups are founded in the elds of IT
and software development at a
disproportionately frequent level.
Another interesting insight of
the study is that startups more
frequently inhabit the elds of life
sciences, industry, or hardware
and nance than the overall
average of all companies found-
ed. On the other hand, startups in
the elds of trade, construction,
hotels and restaurants are more
seldom than the overall average
of company founding statistics.
SECTOR
In order to nd out what sectors have the most Austrian startups, the survey
covered a wide range of industries (22 in total).
Fig. 6. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=364
SOFTWARE
IT/software development
LIFE SCIENCES biotechnology, healthcare,
medical and pharmaceutical/laboratory
technology
34.9% 10.2%
CONSTRUCTION
REAL ESTATE
TRADE
HARDWARE Industrial
technology/production
and electronics/electrical
engineering
CONSUMER GOODS
Clothing/textiles, consumer
goods and food items
TOURISM
ENERGY & TRANSPORT
LOGISTICS
CREATIVE INDUSTRIES
Communications/marketing
and Media
EDUCATION
FINANCE
FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGY
3.0%
6.3%
9.6% 6.6%
1.9%
4.1%
7.4%
1.6%
4.1%

24 25
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
FOUNDERS
IN AUSTRIA

26 27
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
The ASM Survey represents over 1,700
startup founders from 368 startups. In
Austria, founding a startup tends to be the
result of a team eort: More than four out
of ve (81%) were built by a team. The av-
erage team size is 2.5 founders. About two-
thirds of the startups were founded by
two (39%) or three people (21%).
The comparison with the Austrian
data from the ESM 2016 (77% team
company foundations with an aver-
age of 2.3 founders) shows two trends:
Both the proportion of founding teams and
the size of the teams has risen slightly.
FOUNDER TEAM
Fig. 7. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=366
1/19.3%
SIZE AND COMPOSI-
TION OF THE
FOUNDING TEAMS
IN PERCENT
2/39.1%
3/20.7%
4/13.5%
5+/7.4%

28 29
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
GENDER OF THE
FOUNDERS
For the rst time, the ASM 2018 not only enquired about the size of the team, but also its
composition according to the gender of the members of the founding team.
249 85 16 2
1 1
Fig. 8. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=354
NUMBER OF FOUNDERS
In the ESM surveys up until this
point, in Austria, only the gen-
der of those who participated
in the survey was ascertained.
That makes it possible to get a
more nuanced picture of the
Austrian startup landscape in
this respect. Almost a quarter
of the surveyed startups (23%)
were built by mixed-gender
teams. In contrast, 6% of the
startups were founded (exclu-
sively) by women (including 4%
being single founders) and 71%
(exclusively) by men (including
15% being single founders). In
the case of 29% of startups, at
least one woman is a member of
the founding team. It is striking
that the relative share of single
companies being founded by
women is three times higher at
60% than is the case with single
companies being founded by
men (21%). In this regard, startup
teams consisting of only men
have more founding members
on the average than women
startup teams (average team
size: 2.9 vs. 2.3). Mixed gender
teams usually consist of three
team members. The proportion
of women in founding teams is
12%. This is an increase of 4.4%
compared to the ESM 2016. The
percentage of women in Austri-
an founding teams is still below
the European average of 15%.
Fig. 9. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=354
COMPOSITION
OF THE FOUNDING TEAM
IN PERCENT
14.5%
2.6%
Single male
founder
Female team
Single female
founder
Mixed team
Male team
3.7%
23.0%
56.3%

AGE OF
FOUNDERS
IN PERCENT
30 31
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
AGE OF THE
FOUNDERS
Startup founders are mostly under 40 years of age. The average age of the
participants of the ASM survey is 36.6 years old.
Fig. 10. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=327
up to 24
5.6%
25-29
18.5%
30-34
23.5%
35-39
19.8%
40-44
12.0%
45-49
11%
50+
9.6% At 24%, you will nd the most founders in
the age group between 30 and 34 years
of age. Those who are in the end of their
thirties aged between 35 and 39 make
up the second strongest group with
20%. Founders between the ages of 25
and 29 years old follow in third place at
19%. Furthermore, it is interesting that
around half of the participants built their
current startup before the age of 30.

32 33
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
EXPERIENCE AND
EDUCATION OF THE
FOUNDERS
Austrian startup founders are well-educated, seeing as three out of four have a
college degree. If you look at this group in detail, every second founder (49%) has
completed a master’s degree. The proportion of those who have a bachelor's degree
is 16%, and 10% hold doctorates, whereas 6% dropped out of university, as was clearly
indicated by the ASM Survey. Another 12% state the matura (high-school diploma)
as the highest educational achievement, 3% have successfully completed an
apprenticeship and 1% have taken a master craftsman’s examination.
Fig. 11. Source: ASM Survey (all founders), N = 327
EDUCATION
OF FOUNDERS
IN PERCENT
The ASM 2018 also brings an interesting detail to light: 42% of the participants had
already founded a company before their current startup, meaning that they are
serial entrepreneurs.
Concerning the number of startups, most (26%) had established another company
prior to the current one. In the case of 10%, it was two, for 2%. it was three, and more
than three companies were built up by 3% of the participants.
At 42%, the share of serial entrepreneurs is at a similar level as the results of the survey
conducted for the ESM 2016. At that time, the proportion was 41%.
MULTIPLE COMPANIES
FOUNDED
IN PERCENT
YES, MORE THAN 3 STARTUPS
2.7%
YES, 3 STARTUPS
2.4%
YES, 2 STARTUPS
10.0%
Fig. 12. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=322
YES, 1 STARTUP
26.4%
NO 56.1%
COMPLETED APPRENTICESHIP /
VOCATIONAL SCHOOL
3.1%
MASTER CRAFTSMAN’S EXAMINATION
1.2%
HIGH-SCHOOL DIPLOMA /
SCHOOL-LEAVING CERTIFICATE
11.8%
MUNIVERSITY/COLLEGE,
NO DEGREE
5.9%
BACHELOR’S
15.5%
MASTER’S
48.9%
PHD
9.9%
OTHER DEGREE
3.7%

34 35
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
NATIONALITY OF THE
FOUNDERS
The majority (86%) of survey participants have Austrian citizenship.
Approximately every seventh founder (14%) comes from abroad.
10% are EU citizens (incl. 7% German citizens) and
4% come from a non-EU country.
Fig. 13. Source: ASM Survey (total), N=531
NATIONALITY OF THE FOUNDERS
AUSTRIA
GERMANY
OTHER EU COUNTRIES
NON-EU COUNTRIES
454
37
17
21
ORIGIN OF THE
FOUNDERS
IN PERCENT
Austria 85.5%
Germany 7.0%
Other EU countries 3.3%
Non-EU countries 3.8%
Furthermore, the survey investigated if members of the
founding team moved to Austria to found their startup
here. The results show that this was the case for every
ninth startup (11%).
Fig. 14. Source: ASM Survey (total), N=527
460
57
No
Yes
87.3%
10.8% MOVED FROM
ABROAD
IN PERCENT

36 37
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
REASONS FOR FOUNDING
The central reason to found a startup for almost all (91%) participants is the ability
to realize one’s own idea or solve a problem. Austrian startup founders can mostly be
characterized as "opportunity driven entrepreneurs".
Also, a positive assessment of
the market opportunities plays
a role and was indicated by 56%
as a signicant trigger. A very
strong driving force (51%) is typ-
ically also the desire for profes-
sional autonomy and after that,
being one’s own boss. At some
distance behind, nancial inter-
ests follow. Financial success is
only a fundamental factor for
a little more than a third (38%).
Furthermore, it is interesting that
only 4% founded their com-
pany out of necessity because
they did not nd a suitable job
and wanted to create one for
themselves. The desire to con-
tinue a family tradition with the
startup was relevant only for 1%
of the surveyed entrepreneurs.
Fig. 15. Source: ASM Survey (total), N=463 (multiple answers possible)
I want to realize my
IDEAS / SOLVE A
PROBLEM
I did NOT FIND A
SUITABLE JOB
I see GOOD MARKET
OPPORTUNITIES
I would like to continue a
FAMILY TRADITION
I want to BE MY OWN BOSS
I would like to be
FINANCIALLY
SUCCESSFUL
419
17
260
5
237
175
REASONS FOR FOUNDING
I would like to realize my ideas / solve a problem 90.5%
I see good market opportunities 56.2%
I would like to be my own boss 51.2%
I would like to be financially successful 37.8%
I did not find a suitable job 3.7%
Other 2.8%
I would like to continue a family tradition 1.1%
REASONS FOR FOUNDING
IN PERCENT

38 39
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
LONG-TERM
PERSPECTIVES
When it comes to long-term perspectives, the desire for stability plays a crucial role.
The vast majority (73%) want to build up a solid and protable company and retain
ownership of it. This value coincides with the founding motives, because in nine out
of ten cases, a startup was created to make the founders’ idea a reality, or to solve a
specic problem. Every fth founder aims to sell the company and 6% want to launch
their startup onto the stock exchange.
LONG-TERM
DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVES
IN PERCENT
We want to build a solid
and protable company in the long
term and retain (partial) ownership
of the company.
73.2%
We are aiming to sell
the business.
20.4%
We want to take our
startup public
(stock market) .
6.3%
Fig. 16. Source: ASM Survey (total), N=454
The possibly of their company failing is a continuously present thought in the minds
of startup founders. The participants were also interviewed within the framework of
the ASM Survey concerning the following: What would you do if your startup fails? It
became clear that founders are characterized by a high degree of resilience: About
two-thirds (65%) would start a startup again in this case, 19% said they would change
sides and work as an employee in a company and 13% want to work as a freelancer
or consultant.
Fig. 17. Source: ASM Survey (total), N=450
ALTERNATIVE COURSES OF
ACTION IN CASE OF FAILURE
IN PERCENT
I would found
a startup again.
64.7%
I would work as
an employee
in a
company.
18.5%
I would work
as a freelancer /
consultant.
13.3%
I would like to be active as a
business angel/investor.
2.5%
I would no
longer work.
1.0%

40 41
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
Fig. 18. Source: ASM Survey (total), N=447
MANAGEMENT TASKS
The responsibilities of startup founders are extremely varied and extensive. They
not only include working at the companies (e.g., product development, customer
acquisition, recruitment), but also work on company development (e.g., fundraising,
organizational development, acquisition and maintenance of partnerships).
So how do founders allocate
their working hours across the
various elds of responsibility?
For the rst time, the ASM 2018
provides concrete empirical
insights in this regard: On aver-
age, product development and
operational involvement in the
company accounted for 25%
respectively. The other half of the
work time is primarily used for
management tasks (21%). Fund-
raising (acquisition of capital) at
12%, research (9%) and recruiting
(5%) account for considerably
less time.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF
FOUNDERS
IN PERCENT
9%
RESEARCH
12%
FUNDRAISING
21%
MANAGEMENT
25%
OPERATIONS (OPERATIONAL COOPERATION)
25%
PRODUCT
DEVELOPMENT
5%
RECRUITING
4%
OTHER
FAILURE AND LEARNING
Successful startups are typically characterized by a high degree of exibility,
adaptability and learning ability. In particular, in the early development phases
however, all are faced with the challenge of coping with several uncertainties,
so-called “known and unknown unknowns”.
True to the motto “fail early
to succeed sooner”, numerous
founders orient themselves on
experimental or agile models
and methods. With the aid of
consistent feedback loops,
for example, with customers
or partners, the company’s
assumptions concerning the
development of the company,
product or business model
are tested and rened until
a sustainable and protable
business model is established.
Failures and setbacks tend
to be the rule rather than the
exception along the way.
In order to learn from their own,
but also others’ mistakes, the
ASM 2018 asked the founders
what errors they made during
the development of their com-
pany from their own viewpoint.
The top 3 of the most import-
ant and most common errors
include: (1) “too little feedback
received from the market”
(23% of the mentions), “wrong
co-founder” (21%), as well as
“waited too long to re employ-
ees” (21%). Expressed in other
words, mistakes made during
the founding stage mostly trace
back to (a lack of) external
orientation, how well the found-
ing team works together and
diculties in HR management.
The wrong business model (14%),
an excessive "burn rate" (12%)
and the wrong market (10%) are
other sources of error.
Fig. 19. Source: ASM Survey (total), N=417
ERRORS DURING
STARTUP DEVELOPMENT
IN PERCENT
NOT ENOUGH MARKET FEEDBACK
22.9%
WRONG
CO-FOUNDER
20.7%
WAITED TOO LONG TO
FIRE EMPLOYEES
20.5%
WRONG
BUSINESS MODEL
13.8%
BURN RATE TOO HIGH
12.2%
WRONG MARKET
9.8%

42 43
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
EMPLOYEES

44 45
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
EMPLOYMENT
With their innovative products, business models and ideas, startups drive economic
and structural change. They create jobs and can trigger dynamic eects in their
environment. An assessment of these two factors is only reliable if followed over a
longer period of time. For the ASM survey, we asked founders about their current and
planned numbers of employees and asked them to specify what challenges and
measures they can identify in the eld of human resources management.
EMPLOYMENT
Fig. 20. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=359
NUMBER OF FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES (>35 HOURS PER WEEK) 73.6%
The surveyed startups currently
employ around 3,000 people
according to the self-reported
data provided. On the average,
they employ 8.2 employees –
6 full-time and 2.2 part-time
employees (<35 hours per week).
Almost three quarters of the
sta are full-time (>35 hours per
week). If these values are extrap-
olated across the total number
of Austrian startups, this results in
considerably more than 10,000
employees in total. Therefore,
startups are gaining in relevance
on a labor-market-policy level.
The average employee numbers
are at a similar level to those in
the surveys carried out for the
ESM 2015 (7.5 employees) and
2016 (8.7 employees).
NUMBER OF PART-TIME EMPLOYEES (<35 HOURS PER WEEK) 26.4%

46 47
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
GENDER
OF EMPLOYEES
The gender ratio among the employees of startups
is 1:2. On average, 68% of employees are male and
approximately half as many (32%) are female.
Fig. 21. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=366
68.3%
31.6%
GENDER OF EMPLOYEES
ORIGIN
OF EMPLOYEES
A look at the origin of employees shows that the surveyed startups exhibit a high
degree of internationalization. Around every second startup (55%) employs sta from
abroad: 50% of the startups employ people from other EU countries and almost one
out of four startups (24%) employs people from non-EU countries.
Fig. 22. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=352
AUSTRIA
EU COUNTRIES
OUTSIDE OF THE
EUROZONE
NON-EU COUNTRIES
EU COUNTRIES
WITHIN THE
EUROZONE
314
38
86
138
88.7% 39.0% 10.7% 24.3%
EMPLOYEE ORIGIN
IN PERCENT

48 49
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
PLANNED
NEW RECRUITS
In the next 12 months, 87%, meaning nine out of ten startups, are planning on hiring
further employees. Extrapolated, this would mean that 1,300 jobs could potentially be
created by the startups surveyed for ASM 2018 alone.
This corresponds to an average
increase of 4 new employees per
startup and a planned em-
ployment growth of 48% in the
next year. If this is extrapolated
across the total population of all
1,500 startups, up to 5,000 jobs
could be created over the next
12 months.
NEW RECRUITMENT OF EMPLOYEES IN THE NEXT 12 MONTHS
Fig. 23. Source, ASM Survey (startups), N=333
86.8%
NEW RECRUITMENTS
PLANNED
13.2%
NO
NEW RECRUITMENTS
PLANNED
The greatest demand for
employees is in sales: Nearly
two-thirds of the startups (60%)
intend on hiring new employees
in this sector within the next 12
months. The demand is also high
in the elds of IT (51%), marketing
(49%) and product develop-
ment (42%). At a considerable
distance, design, production, re-
search and nance follow, areas
in which currently, only 10 to 17%
of the startups plan to recruit
new employees. The fact that
60% plan on expanding in terms
of personnel can certainly be
seen as an indicator for upcom-
ing growth spurts, which will also
become clear in the next chap-
ter, because “revenue growth” is
currently the key company goal
of the ASM startups.
SECTORS FOR
NEW RECRUITMENT
IN PERCENT
IT 50.7%
Sales 60.4%
Product
development
42.0%
Marketing
48.6%
Research
14.2%
Design
16.3% Production
15.3%
Finance
10.8% Other
9.7%
Unspecified
0.3%
Fig. 24. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=289

50 51
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
RECRUITING
Startups see searching for qualied employees as a major challenge. Almost half had
diculties in nding hires in the previous year (2017). Here, the ASM Survey presents
concrete gures: 23% of the surveyed startups assess recruiting as very dicult, 26% as
dicult. About 18% of the startups did not hire any new employees in 2017 and only 13%
stated that recruiting was not dicult or not dicult at all.
Fig. 25. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=335
RECRUITING
QUALIFIED STAFF
IN PERCENT
VERY DIFFICULT
22.7%
DIFFICULT
26.3%
MODERATELY
DIFFICULT
20.9%
NOT
DIFFICULT
9.0%
NOT AT ALL
DIFFICULT
3.6%
NO NEW
EMPLOYEES
2017
17.6%
For startups, the greatest chal-
lenge when it comes to recruit-
ing is in lling IT positions. Almost
every second surveyed startup
(45%) stated that nding em-
ployees in the eld of IT was the
dicult. Sales positions (30%)
and jobs in product develop-
ment (23%) are also dicult to
ll. Only 11% of startups face
challenges in nding sta for
the eld of marketing. It is even
simpler in the case of design, re-
search, production and nance.
Less than 10% of the respon-
dents indicated positions there
as being dicult to ll.
Fig. 26. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=359
CHALLENGES IN
ACQUIRING EMPLOYEES
IN PERCENT
IT 44.9%
Sales 30.3%
Product development
22.8%
Marketing
10.7% Research
9.3%
Design
5.6% Production
4.8% Finance
4.5%
Other
3.9% None
2.5%

52 53
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
INCENTIVES FOR
EMPLOYEES
In order to be successful in the competition for the best employees and
to keep them in the company, ASM startups use numerous incentives.
Allowing exible work hours, which is practiced by more than three quarters, tops the
list. In second place, 59% of the startups oer their employees the possibility to have
a say or co-decide.
Concerning nancial incentives,
35% of the startups give their
employees bonus payments and
in the case of 28%, these have
an investment in the company.
Half of the startups make wage
or salary payments via the col-
lective labor agreement.
Another popular “goodie” is
providing free food and drinks
at the oce - a tool which is
used by every third startup. On
average, two or three of these
incentives are oered in the
startups. The majority - more
than two thirds - even uses four
or more of the incentives listed.
INCENTIVES
Fig. 27. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=366
FLEXIBLE WORKING
MODELS
FREE FOOD AND
DRINK AT THE OFFICE EQUITY
HAVING A SAY /
CO-DECISION WAGES BY COLLECTIVE
LABOR AGREEMENT
BONUS
261
108 95
37
OTHER MATERIAL
INCENTIVES
203 171
121
INCENTIVES FOR EMPLOYEES
IN PERCENT
Flexible working models 75.9%
Having a say / co-decision 59.0%
Wages by collective labor agreement 49.7%
Bonus 35.2%
Free food and drink at the office 31.4%
Equity 27.6%
Other material incentives 10.8%

54 55
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
STRATEGY &
BUSINESS MODEL

56 57
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
COMPANY OBJECTIVES
When asked how they orient themselves when it comes to (further) company
development and what their most important company goals are, startups cited
one key aspect: Growth.
Among the surveyed startups, it
is the greatest priority. Revenue
growth is very important for 61%
of the companies, and import-
ant to another 19%. On the
average, the question was rated
4.3 on a 5-point scale from 1 (in-
signicant) to 5 (very important).
About half of the respondents
(56%) indicate that users or user
growth is an essential objective
for them. Here, the average
rating of 4.1 is also high and just
as signicant as product de-
velopment. This is classied as
important or very important by
48% of the startups. Protability
is in fourth place of the compa-
ny goals and is considered very
important (4.1) by 48%.
If the company goals are ana-
lyzed according to the develop-
ment phases, it has been shown
that strategic priorities change
depending on the startup’s
degree of maturity.
For startups in the seed stage,
product development closely
followed by user growth are
the two most relevant business
goals. In contrast, in the later
and steady stage, protability
becomes a top priority.
If the startups are in a later
development phase, there is an
increased inward focus. Much
greater attention is given to
tackling internal challenges,
such as organization devel-
opment (the development
of structures and processes),
employee motivation and sta
development, and strength-
ening corporate culture. Inter-
nationalization is classied as
“very important” by one third of
the participating startups and
particularly gains in importance
in the growth phase.
1
2
3
4
4,3
5
1
2
3
4
4,1
5
1
2
3
4
4,1
5
1
2
3
4
3,8
5
1
2
3
4
3,5
5
1
2
3
4
3,2
5
1
2
3
4
3,1
5
3,1
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
2,7
5
1
2
3
4
2,6
5
(1) insignificant to (5) very important
COMPANY OBJECTIVES
The common good Staff growth
Revenue growth Product development User growth Probability
Internationalization Strengthening corporate culture,
values, standards, etc.
Strengthening of employee motivation
and staff development
Organizational development, process-
es, structures, communication, etc.
Fig. 28. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=366
Furthermore, the survey also enquired whether startups primarily
pursue social or ecological goals. It was found that 27% of the
startups surveyed stated that social or environmental objectives
are very important to them.
UNSPECIFIED
Fig. 29. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=364
234
98
32
No
Yes
SOCIAL AND
ECOLOGICAL
OBJECTIVES
IN PERCENT
YES
26.9%
NO
64.3%
UNSPECIFIED
8.8%

58 59
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
1
2
3
4
4,4
4,3
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
3,6
3,8
5
1
2
3
4
4,0
5
1
2
3
4
2,8
5
1
2
3
4
2,5
5
COMPANY STRATEGY
The young age of the company, the small size and the limited resources require
startups to implement specic corporate strategies in order to successfully establish
themselves in the market.
The ASM survey determined
what measures and strategies
startups apply in order to gain
and to sustainably maintain a
competitive advantage.
Establishing customer contacts
as well as speed with respect to
competitors are the key strat-
egies startups cited. Of the
surveyed startups, 60% indicat-
ed customer contacts and 59%
indicated speed as very import-
ant. The design and mainte-
nance of the partner network
is in third place and considered
very important by 45%. Con-
versely, secrecy as a competitive
strategy is very important to
only every fth startup (19%) and
a dicult imitability of the busi-
ness model is only considered a
decisive competitive factor by
13% of startups.
(1) insignificant to (5) very important
COMPANY STRATEGY
Customer contacts Timing advantage
over competitors Partner network
Complexity of the product or
service Design Confidentiality
Hard-to-imitate
business model
Fig. 30. Source: ASM Survey (startups) [without IP], N=366
BUSINESS MODEL
The vast majority of startups have a “digital” business model.
In addition to industry aliation
(see Chapter 2), the survey in-
vestigated what business model
best characterizes the activity of
the startups.
Eleven typical business model
categories were available to
choose from. According to the
results, most of the surveyed
startups (21%) describe their
business model as a “Software
as a Service” (SaaS). Product
sales (hardware) comes in
second place with a share of
15%, 9% oer IT / software de-
velopment and approximately
8% operate e-commerce, an
online marketplace, or mobile
or web-based applications. Not
far behind come online services
with 6%, followed closely by a 5%
share of engineering and licens-
ing respectively.
The ASM 2018 showed that a to-
tal of only slightly more than 4%
of startups have oline services
and location-based business
models.
Therefore, the ndings show
that the digital economy is the
preferred breeding ground for
of Austrian startups. In compar-
ison with the results of the ESM
2016, the proportion of SaaS
increased from 17% to 21%.
Fig. 31. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=366
BUSINESS
MODELS
IN PERCENT
E-commerce 7.7%
Engineering 5.2%
Hardware
(product sales) 15.0%
IT, software
development 8.5%
Licensing 4.9%
Mobile or web-based
Applications 7.4%
Offline services 2.5%
Online marketplace 7.7%
Online service portal
6.0%
Software as
a Service
21.0%
Stationary
wholesale and/or
retail 1.9%
Other
category
11.7%

60 61
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
USERS AND CUSTOMERS
The ASM survey dierentiates between users of an oering (possibly also being free
of charge) and customers who generate revenue. This dierentiation is particularly
important for companies in the digital economy since, in that space, users and
customers make a signicant dierence in the business model.
Concerning the range of
users, most of the Austrian
startups are active in the B2B
segment. 29% indicate that they
only address companies and
another 21% mainly do this. One
third of the surveyed startups
address both consumers and
companies and only every sixth
startup (17%) primarily or only
addresses consumers directly.
The proportion of those start-
ups who equally want to attract
consumers and companies rose
from 24% to 33% in comparison
to the ESM 2015.
Fig. 32. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=365
USER
SEGMENTS
IN PERCENT
ONLY COMPANIES
28.6%
MAINLY
CONSUMERS
13.5%
ONLY CONSUMERS
3.8%
MAINLY
COMPANIES
21.4%
COMPANIES AND
CONSUMERS TO THE
SAME EXTENT
32.7%
PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS
2.0%
The B2B segment is vastly more signicant when it comes to (paying) customers
than in the user-based model.
The percentage of startups that
generate their revenue only or
mainly from companies is 38%
and 27%, respectively.
Only 2% of the surveyed startups
generate revenue with public
organizations. Overall, approx-
imately two-thirds make their
revenue from B2B customers.
Conversely, only about every
fth startup makes its revenues
primarily (14%) or only (5%) from
consumers.
It is striking that a total of only
13% of the ASM startups, which
act as both B2C and B2B busi-
nesses in the case of users, also
make their revenues, in the case
of (paying) customers, from
consumers and companies alike.
Fig. 33. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=364
CUSTOMER
SEGMENTS
IN PERCENT
ONLY COMPANIES
38.9%
COMPANIES AND
CONSUMERS TO THE
SAME EXTENT
13.0%
MAINLY
CONSUMERS
13.8%
MAINLY
COMPANIES
27.0%
ONLY CONSUMERS
5.4%

62 63
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
INNOVATION

64 65
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
1
2
3
4
3,2
3,8
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
4,4
3,3
5
INNOVATION OF
PRODUCT, PROCESS, TECHNOLOGY,
AND BUSINESS MODEL
An essential characteristic of startups is their innovative character. But innovative
activities are diverse. Innovation may include new products and services, as well as
processes, technologies, and business models.
The development of new
products or services is the
most important form of
innovation, as the survey of
Austrian startups has shown. The
majority (around 86%) stated
about themselves that, when
it comes to innovation, their
startup is innovative or very
innovative. The average value
is very high up on a scale from 1
(not at all innovative) to 5 (very
innovative), being at 4.37. The
eld of product innovation is
followed by technology, which
has been classied as being
important or very important
by 61% (average 3.77). By their
own assessment, about half of
the startups are inventive and
resourceful in terms of processes.
On average, startups are more
frequently innovative in the
case of business models than
not innovative, however, this
area carries less weight on the
whole. That is associated with
the fact that the possibilities for
establishing innovative business
models are limited. The results
also showed that the majority of
surveyed startups (approximately
80%) are highly innovative in at
least one of the four mentioned
elds. In this regard, further
analysis showed that startups
are often highly innovative in
several elds. In order to be hard
to copy and obtain competitive
advantages, they often combine
innovation activities in a variety
of dimensions.
(1) not at all innovative, (2) rather not innovative, (3) rather innovative, (4) innovative, (5) very innovative
INNOVATION ORIENTATION
Business model Technology
Processes Product/service
Fig. 34. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=363
INNOVATION
EXPENDITURE
Startups are innovative. However, to what extent are the innovations (exclusively)
internally developed or made possible by third-party activities?
The survey found that 22% of the
total innovation-related expen-
ditures were associated with
third-party services. These were
to address challenges that arise
during product development or
transitions in production. In this
regard, startups not only provide
new momentum, but also
generate a demand for services,
both on a national and interna-
tional level. In comparison to the
results of the Community Inno-
vation Survey (CIS), where inno-
vative small and medium-sized
enterprises (10-50 employees)
were surveyed, this share is
considerably higher in the case
of startups today. The segment
surveyed by CIS only amounted
to around 8% in 2014.
Fig. 35. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=353
INNOVATION
EXPENDITURE
IN PERCENT
AWARD OF
CONTRACTS TO THIRD
PARTIES (EXTERNAL
DEVELOPMENT)
22%
IN-HOUSE COMPANY DEVELOPMENT
78%

66 67
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
PROPERTY RIGHTS
STRATEGIES
In order to develop innovation products and services and to persevere on the market
adequate strategies and mechanisms are necessary to protect ideas and expertise.
For the surveyed startups, the legal protection of trademarks has the greatest
importance followed by patents and copyright.
The signicance of dierent
competitive strategies, such as
speed (“time to market”), has
already been pointed out. In
addition to the non-disclosure of
ideas, legally protecting innova-
tive products also oers security.
According to the ASM Survey,
trademark protection has the
greatest relevance for startups
and is very important for almost
a third. This is followed by pat-
ents and copyright protection,
which is of very great concern
for 20% and 11%. Overall, around
40% of the surveyed startups
deem at least one of the three
legal protection mechanisms
very important.
Legally protecting inventions
and creative ideas plays a
greater role for startups than for
other companies. A comparison
with the group of all innovative
small and medium-sized enter-
prises, which were surveyed in
the Community Innovation Sur-
vey (CIS) in Austria in 2014, shows
that patents, copyright and
trademarks all have a higher
level of signicance. Trademark
protection has a disproportion-
ately high level of relevance
to startups.
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
2,6
3,4
5
1
2
3
4
2,3
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
2,6
3,4
5
1
2
3
4
2,3
5
(1) not significant to (5) very important
PROPERTY RIGHT STRATEGIES
Brands Patents
Copyright
Fig. 36. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=337

68 69
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
AUSTRIAN &
INTERNATIONAL
MARKETS

70 71
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
INTERNATIONALIZATION
PLANS IN THE
NEXT 12 MONTHS
IN PERCENT
Yes, into other EU countries
outside the eurozone 70.2%
Yes, into other EU countries
outside the eurozone 24.6%
Yes, in other European countries outside the EU 17.4%
Yes, to the Middle East 8.6
Yes, to North America 22.4%
Yes, to South America 6.1%
Yes, to Africa 4.4%
Yes, to Asia 13.0%
Yes, to Australia/Oceania 4.4%
No 14.4%
INTERNATIONALIZATION
Fig. 37. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=335
When it comes to startups and their future plans to internationalize, it became clear
that 76% are planning (further) internationalization eorts in the next 12 months.
Furthermore, 20% of respondents want to tap into foreign markets for the rst time
during the same time period.
The ASM Survey shows that 93%
or nine out of ten Austrian start-
ups are already internationally
active or will be in the near
future. For the surveyed startups,
the most important new
sales markets were within the
EU: 70% are planning to put their
next growth steps into motion
in other EU countries within
the eurozone, 25% in other EU
countries outside the eurozone.
In total, 17% will address
other European countries out-
side the EU for the rst time in
the next 12 months. Furthermore,
22% of the surveyed startups
plan to expand to North Ameri-
ca, 13% to Asia, 9% to the
81
22
47
16
52
22
16
254
89
63
31
No
Yes
INTERNATION-
ALIZATION
STRATEGY
IN PERCENT
One thing at a time.
We take on new markets
step by step.
58%
We are internationally
oriented right from
the start and want to
be present worldwide
as quickly
as possible.
42%
Fig. 38. Source: ASM Survey (Startups), N=361
Middle East, 6% to South Amer-
ica and 4% to Africa, as well as
Australia / Oceania respectively.
Advantage Austria’s range of
services is known by 70% of
startups that are planning (fur-
ther) internationalization steps
in the next 12 months and has
already been taken advantage
of by 43%.
What strategy is the international
expansion based on? What are the greatest
challenges in the process?
As the results show, the major-
ity of startups (58%) tap into
foreign markets step by step
as part of a sequential inter-
nationalization strategy. Those
who plan on an international
orientation and global market
since their founding and want
to be internationally present
can be referred to as “born
globals” and their share is 42%.

73
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
72 AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
CHALLENGES OF
INTERNATIONALIZATION
Differences in the legal framework conditions 45.7%
Differences in taxation 19.1%
Cultural differences 23.0%
Language barriers 19.4%
Adaptation of the product or the service to local (customer) requirements 28.5%
Finding networks/partners 58.4%
Financial resources 52.9%
Other 1.4%
Unspecified 9.1%
Fig. 39. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=333
However, the step towards internationalization poses a great deal of
challenges for startups.
The ASM Survey shows that
nding appropriate partners
and networks represents the
most signicant issue for 58%.
Also, 53% cite (a lack of) nancial
resources as a major obstacle,
and 46% think that the varying
legal frameworks are particularly
challenging. Less signicantly,
any necessary adjustment of
the product to dierent local
customer requirements (29%), as
well as cultural dierences (23%)
follow as inhibiting factors. Ap-
proximately 19% of startups have
to ght with language barriers
and dierences in taxation.
59,0%
27,5%
2,8%
1,2%
0,8%
5,1%
1,1%
0,4%
1,6%
0,7
CURRENT MARKETS
IN PERCENT
AUSTRIA
59.0%
OTHER EU COUNTRIES
OUTSIDE
THE EUROZONE
2.8%
OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRIES
OUTSIDE THE EU
1.2%
OTHER EU COUNTRIES WITHIN THE
EUROZONE
27.5%
MIDDLE EAST
0.8%
NORTH AMERICA
5.1%
SOUTH AMERICA
1.1%
AFRICA
0.4%
ASIA
1.6%
AUSTRALIA/OCEANIA
0.7%
CURRENT MARKETS
The ASM startups make the majority (59%) of their revenue in Austria. Approximately
three quarters (73%) of the surveyed startups have already tapped into international
markets and generate export revenues.
About 30% of the revenue is
generated from customers from
other EU countries. The revenue
share of EU countries within the
eurozone is ten times as high
with 28% as that outside of the
eurozone (3%).
Other European countries that
do not belong to the EU make
up approximately 1% and
North America makes up 5% of
revenue. Overall, 4% of the reve-
nue is made in other markets.
Fig. 40. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=355

74 75
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
COOPERATION

76 77
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
During their business development,
startups are reliant on coopera-
tion partners in various ways and very
consciously enter into strategic partner-
ships. The ASM survey found that 90% of
the startups cooperate with small and
medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), oth-
er startups, large companies, universities
as well as research institutions, public in-
stitutions or NGOs; 75% of startups also
cooperate internationally.
COLLABORATIONS
BETWEEN STARTUPS &
ESTABLISHED COMPANIES
Cooperation is the voluntary cross-company collaboration beyond pure
contract-related relationships. Of these, partnerships with small and medium-sized
enterprises (SMEs) have the greatest signicance. Nearly 80% of all surveyed startups
indicated that they partner with small and medium-sized enterprises.
In the case of cooperations
with small and medium-sized
enterprises, it also has to do
with cross-border partnerships
for more than half of the start-
ups. Collaborations with other
startups are relevant to ap-
proximately 65%. Approximately
64% of the surveyed startups
cooperate with large compa-
nies, nearly two-thirds of them
also with partners from abroad.
60% of the startups cooperate
with universities and research
institutions. However, in this
group, national partners, with
whom cooperations primarily
take place, are predominant.
Cooperation with public institu-
tions, especially on the national
level, are still of relevance for
almost half (46%). Approximately
27% of the companies enter into
partnerships with NGOs and
similar institutions. Only every
tenth startup has not become
involved in cooperations with
external partners; a total of over
75% cooperate internationally.
SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENT COOPERATION PARTNERS
only national
also cross-border
Fig. 41. Source: ASM Survey (startups), multiple answers possible, N=341
We partner with small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) 32.9% 46.2%
We partner with other startups 30.3% 34.2%
We partner with large corporations 20.5% 43.7%
We partner with universities and public institutions 36.6% 23.5%
We partner with public institutions 31.0% 15.2%
We partner with NGOs and similar institutions 15.6% 11.2%
We only have cooperation partnerships on a national level 12.8%
We do not have cooperation partnerships 10.3%

78 79
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
COOPERATION WITH
FORTUNE GLOBAL 500
While a total of almost two thirds of the surveyed startups cooperate with large
companies, 15% of the surveyed startups even collaborate with Fortune Global
500 companies, meaning the largest international corporations worldwide. These
provide access to global markets and enable growth.
COOPERATION WITH
FORTUNE GLOBAL 500
COMPANIES
IN PERCENT
Fig. 42. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=341
We cooperate with Fortune
Global 500 companies
14.7%
We do not cooperate with Fortune Global 500,
but with other large companies
49.6%
We won't cooperate with
large companies
35.8%
Access to
customers/
markets
Development
of products/
services
Access to
technology
Reputation/
image transfer
Boosting
innovation
ability
Fundraising Access to
production
capabilities
Access to data
(open data)
Exit
possibilities
OBJECTIVES OF THE
COOPERATION
The range of cooperation partners is wide. The goals that startups pursue through
cooperation with a wide variety of cooperation partners are equally complex.
A total of 76% of the surveyed
startups cooperate in order to
obtain access to markets, 66%
for the development of products
and 63% in order to gain access
to technologies. The dierences
are evident in the choice of co-
operation partner. With respect
to small and medium-sized
enterprises, two aspects are
key: access to markets (49%)
and developing products and
services (42%).
When cooperating with large
companies, the motives on the
part of startups are diverse. For
50% of the startups, access to
customers and markets is es-
sential. But also reputation and
image transfer carry weight, as
every third startup cites this as
an aim when cooperating with
large companies. In the case of
cooperating with other start-
ups, developing products and
services as well as increasing the
innovation capability are of the
greatest importance. In view of
universities and research institu-
tions, it is hardly surprising that
access to technology (34%) and
increasing the capacity for in-
novation (29%) are paramount.
This is not so in the case of public
institutions: Here, fundraising
(19%) is the most signicant.
OBJECTIVES OF THE COOPERATION
Fig. 43. Source: ASM Survey (startups), multiple answers possible, N=307
76%
49%
50%
28%
9%
18%
11%
66%
42%
29%
32%
23%
9%
6%
54%
19%
34%
19%
19%
17%
10%
42%
10%
23%
7%
4%
19%
4%
33%
10%
13%
11%
11%
11%
4%
63%
19%
20%
25%
34%
5%
2%
53%
20%
15%
27%
29%
7%
4%
39%
24%
22%
7%
4%
1%
1%
30%
7%
26%
5%
0%
1%
0%
All cooperation partners
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)
Large companies
Other startups
Universities and research institutes
Public institutions
NGOs and similar institutions

80 81
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
Access to
customers/
markets
Development of
products/services
Access to
technology
Reputation/image
transfer
Boosting
innovation
ability
Fundraising Access to
production
capabilities
COOPERATION &
DEVELOPMENT PHASES
During their business development, startups rely on cooperation partners in various
ways and very consciously enter into strategic partnerships.
Partnerships are of great impor-
tance to startups in all phases
of development. Starting in the
seed stage, the new companies
fall back on various cooperation
partners. However, dierences in
partnership choices are evident
beyond the phases of develop-
ment. The importance of coop-
eration with corporate partners
is great from the start, however,
it increases as the company
develops. This can be explained
by the increasing signicance of
market access after the initial
development phases. Universi-
ties and research institutions are
of similar importance across the
entire course of development.
The collaboration with public
institutions is strong in the seed
phase, in which fundraising rep-
resents a key goal, making these
institutions all the more relevant.
Fig. 44. Source: ASM Survey (startups), multiple answers possible, N=337
COOPERATION PARTNERS AND DEVELOPMENT PHASES
COOPERATION OBJECTIVES AND DEVELOPMENT PHASES
Seed phase
Startup phase
Growth
Seed phase
Startup phase
Growth
72%
63%
54%
67%
79%
71%
83%
74%
63%
60%
62%
59%
70%
60%
66%
59%
68%
54%
63%
42%
57%
56%
62%
45%
51%
48%
48%
51%
42%
46%
13%
52%
30%
41%
31%
35%
Small and medi-
um-sized enterprises
(SMEs)
Large companies Other startups Universities and
research
institutes
Public
institutions
NGOs and similar
institutions
38% 36% 32%
CHALLENGES WITH
COOPERATIONS
Startups deem it very important to identify suitable cooperation partners and form
partnerships with them. More than 90% of the analyzed companies have already had
experience with cooperation partners.
In practice, startups perceive
the dierence in speed (of
innovation) as very dicult.
On a scale from 1 (no problem)
to 5 (big problem), this aspect
was classied as particularly
severe at 3.7 and 57%, meaning
more than half, see this as a
(big) problem. Lack of exibility
is a (big) diculty for 39% of
startups and is rated at 3.1 on
average. Other challenges relate
to dierent corporate cultures
(2.6) and non-compliant busi-
ness processes (2.4). In contrast,
geographical distance or lack of
condence is assessed as being
less problematic.
Fig. 45. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=243
PROBLEMS WITH COOPERATIONS
no hardly a average problem great
problem problem problem problem
Different speed of the project partners (e.g.
when it comes to taking up new ideas and
implementing them)
Lack of flexibility
of the cooperation partners
Different
corporate culture
Non-compliant company processes Not complementary (enough)
(e.g. technology, business model, etc.)
Geographical distance (too) great
3.7 3.1 2.6
2.4 2.2 2.1
Lack of personal
confidence
2
1 2 3 4 5

82 83
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
REVENUE &
FINANCING

84 85
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
In addition, the startups were asked to indicate the rev-
enue they have made up until this point and oer pro-
jections for the future. On the average, the startups were
able to almost double their annual revenue from the pre-
vious year to this one: The results showed that startups
were able to almost double their annual revenue from
the previous year to this one with a revenue growth of
95%. Projections were characterized by optimism seeing
as the startups aspire to achieve a doubling of revenue
from this year to the next.
REVENUE AND
REVENUE GROWTH
77% of surveyed startups generated revenue in the previous year (2017).
Just under one fourth (23%) of
startups reached up to 50.000
euros in revenue. Another fourth
reached revenue between
50,000 and 300,000 euros (25%)
or between 300,000 and 3
million euros (25%). Almost every
tenth startup (9%) generated
more than one million euros in
revenue.
In Chapter 2 (Startups in Austria),
it has already been shown that
approximately 58% of the sur-
veyed startups are in the seed
or start-up phase. This result
coincides with the sales analy-
sis stating that, during the last
scal year, 62% of startups still
did not have any sales revenue
or revenue amounting up to
150,000 euro.
REVENUE
Fig. 46. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=363
No revenue 23.4%
€ 1 to € 50,000 23.4%
€ 50,001 to € 150,000 15.1%
€ 150,001 to € 300,000 10.1%
€ 300,001 to € 500,000 8.9%
€ 500,001 to € 1 million 9.8%
€ 1 up to € 3 million 5.9%
€ 3 up to € 10 million 2.4%
More than € 25 million 0.9%
+ 100%
+ 200%
50% of the startups the strongest growing quarter
expect growth over
expects growth over
REVENUE DEVELOPMENT
PROFITABILITY
Every sixth startup is already making a prot.
The participants of the ASM
survey were asked how long it
would still take until their startup
reaches protability. For one in
six startups (18%), this is already
the case. Another 14% indicated
that they will generate prots for
the rst time during the current
scal year. Accordingly, almost
every third startup has already
reached the break-even point
or is anticipated to achieve this
within a year. The largest group,
36% of startups, aims to be prof-
itable within one or two years.
In contrast, for 29% the break-
even point is at least two to
ve years away. Only 1% of the
startups surveyed stated that
the achievement of protability
is not a priority for them.
Fig. 47. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=363
PROBABILITY
IN PERCENT
Less than one year
13.6%
1 to 2 years
36.0%
2 to 5 years
29.2%
More than 5 years
2.5%
We are already
profitable
17.8%
Is not a priority to us
0.8%

86 87
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
SOURCES OF FINANCING
In many cases startups face long time stretches before the break-even point or
before generating any revenues, posing a fundamental challenge for startups:
nancing of company development. What nancing sources have been used so far?
The founder’s own savings is the
most frequent source of funding.
In the case of 81% or four out
of ve startups, the founders
invested their own nancial re-
sources to launch and develop it.
About a quarter of the surveyed
startups (23%) received nancial
support from their private net-
work (i.e. family and friends).
Public subsidies and grants are
in second place for the main
sources of funding for Austri-
an startups. Slightly more than
half (55%), have already taken
advantage of these. The per-
centage of funded startups has
remained constant compared to
the ESM 2016 (55%). On average,
every fourth startup (27%) was
nanced via public subsidies,
as reported by the ESM 2016.
In Germany, the percentage is
higher, namely 35%. A detailed
representation and distribution
of funding and grants can be
found on the following pages.
However, we do see a signicant
increase in nancing by business
angels. One in three Austrian
startups has already benet-
ed from this form of nancing.
Compared with the ESM 2016,
their share increased from 21%
to 33%, increasing by more than
half. Incubators and company
builders also play an important
role – 19% of startups received
nancial support from them.
Another 14% of Austrian start-
ups have raised venture capital.
About one-third nance them-
selves from cash ow (29%) and
every fth company (22%) is
funded by bank loans.
A doubling of the percentage
can be observed in the case of
crowdfunding or crowd invest-
ing. If it was even 5% of the
startups according the ESM
2016, it is already 10% or every
tenth startup according to the
ASM 2018. A small group (1%)
stated that they have made an
initial coin oering (ICO). ICO is
a relatively recent phenomenon,
however, it has gained increas-
ing importance. The startups
were therefore asked to give
their assessment on whether
ICOs will represent a relevant al-
ternative to the venture-capital
nancing in the future. This was
armed by around a quarter of
the surveyed startups (24%).
Alternative to VC
23.6%
85
No alternative
to VC FUTURE
SIGNIFICANCE
OF INITIAL COIN
OFFERING
OFFERINGS (ICO)
IN PERCENT
139
136
Unspecified
38.6%
37.8%
Fig. 48. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=360
Savings (financial means of the founders) 81.2%
Public subsidies and support 55.0%
Business angels 33.4%
Internal financing (cash flow) 29.3%
Family and friends 22.9%
Bank loan 21.8%
Incubator/company builder/accelerator 19.3%
Venture Capital (VC) 13.8%
Crowdfunding/crowdinvesting 9.9%
Other financial sources 6.9%
Other loans 2.8%
ICO Initial Coin Offering 1.1%
Fig. 49. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=365
SOURCES OF FINANCING

88 AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
EXTERNAL CAPITAL
A large portion (72%) of the surveyed startups have received external capital. In
detail, it has been shown that 27% were nanced with up to 150,000 euros. Every
tenth startup received sums between 150,000 and 300,000 euros. Only a little less
than half of the surveyed startups (45%) received up to 500,000 euros. In the case
of one out of eight startups, the funding volume is between half a million and one
million euros (13%). A total of 15% of the startups received more than one million euros.
A minority of 5% were able to successfully acquire more than three million euros.
Fig. 50. Source: ASM Survey (Startups), N=361
EXTERNAL CAPITAL
RAISED SO FAR
IN PERCENT
No external capital 27.8%
€ 1 to € 50,000 12.8%
€ 50,001 to € 150,000 14.5%
€ 150,001 to
€ 300,000 10.1%
€ 300,001 to
€ 500,000 7.5%
€ 500,001 to € 1 Million 12.5%
€ 1 up to € 3 million 9.3%
€ 3 up to € 10 million 4.3%
€ 10 up to
€ 25 million 0.3%
More than
€ 25 million
0.9%
89
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
Concerning future plans in terms of nancing, 69%, meaning more than two thirds
are planning a (further) round of nancing in the next 12 months. 5% plan on bringing
together seed amounts of up to 50,000 euros and 21% would like to collect between
50,000 and 300,000 euros. 14% are planning to raise venture capital between
500,000 and 1 million euros. Every fth startup surveyed (20%) intends to raise more
than one million euros.
Fig. 51. Source: ASM Survey (Startups), N=361
EXTERNAL CAPITAL
PLANNED TO RAISE
IN PERCENT
No round of financing
planned in the next
12 months 30.6%
€ 1 to € 50,000 4.7%
€ 50,001 to € 150,000 11.5%
€ 150,001 to
€ 300,000 9.7%
€ 300,001 to
€ 500,000 10.0%
€ 500,001 to € 1 Million 13.8%
€ 1 up to € 3 million 10.3% € 3 up to € 10 million 7.1%
€ 10 up to € 25 million 2.1%
More than
€ 25 million 0.3%

90 91
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
VALUATION BY
INVESTORS
For the rst time, the ASM survey was able to ascertain how high startups were valued
during their respective nancing round. The results show four approximately equal-
sized groups for the 154 startups with external nancing that answered this question:
21% of the venture-capital-funded startups were appraised at up to one million
euros. Somewhat more than a fourth respectively got an appraisal of between 1
and 2.5 million euros (28%) and between 2.5 and 5 million euros (26%) during the last
nancing round. A quarter of the startups (25%) was appraised as being worth more
than 5 million euros.
Fig. 52. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=354
VALUATION OF
LAST FINANCING
ROUND
IN PERCENT
No external capital 32.50%
Up to € 1 million 20.8%
€ 1 up to € 2.5 million
27.9%
€ 2.5 up to € 5 million
26.0%
More than € 5 million 25.3%
ORIGINS OF
VENTURE CAPITAL
Startups that have been nanced by business angles or other venture capital were
asked about the origin of the venture capitalists within the scope of the ASM Survey.
They mostly come from Austria,
whereby 84% were nanced by
private domestic venture cap-
italists and 28% were nanced
by public venture capital (e.g.
aws Gründerfonds, tecnet, etc.).
Outside of Austria, Germany
still plays an important role: A
quarter of the funded startups
in the survey are supported by
investors from Germany.
For 22%, the venture capital
comes from other EU countries
(including the Great Britain). 13%
have investors from Switzerland
and 11% work with US venture
capitalists.
WHERE ARE YOUR
INVESTORS LOCATED?
IN PERCENT
Austria - public venture capital 27.9%
AUSTRIA
114
PRIVATE
VENTURE
CAPITAL
38
PUBLIC VENTURE
CAPITAL
34
GERMANY
18
SWITZERLAND
15
USA
15
OTHER EU
COUNTRY
12
OTHER NON-EU
COUNTRY
10
GREAT
BRITAIN
5
FRANCE
Germany 25.0%
Switzerland 13.2%
USA 11.0%
Other EU country 11.0%
Other non-EU country 8.8%
Great Britain 7.4%
France 3.7%
Fig. 53. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=256
Austria - private venture capital 83.8%
ORIGIN OF INVESTORS

92 93
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
PUBLIC SUBSIDIES
AND GRANTS
Public subsidies and supports are an extremely important source of nancing for
Austrian startups – also compared to the rest of Europe. The startups that have
received public subsidies (55%) were asked in the ASM survey what grants, funding
programs, subsidies and supports they have taken advantage of.
The ASM 2018 shows which
funding institutions play an
essential role for startups.
Funding from the Austria
Wiirtschaft Service (aws) and
the Austrian Research Promotion
Agency (FFG) are of great
importance. Furthermore, the
support by federal states or
communities is relevant – around
a third of startups (38%) received
funding from these sources. Every
eighth startup or 12% beneted
from EU subsidies. When it
comes to concrete initiatives
and programs, the following
emerged as favorites: More than
a third (36%) of respondents
received an Austrian Research
Promotion Agency (FFG) support
consisting of a grant and a loan
(e.g. Start-up-Funding and
General Programme) or an aws
grant (e.g. PreSeed or Impulse XS/
XL). Almost every third startup
took advantage of the research
premium (31%) or an Austrian
Research Promotion Agency
grant (Patent Check, Innovation
Check) (29%).
Almost one third (26%) of the
surveyed startups are or were
part of the university incubator
network AplusB. 15% were sup-
ported within the scope of the
internationalization initiative and
12% took advantage of the em-
ployment bonus. 17% of startups
have used aws guarantees (e.g.
double equity, other loan guaran-
tees) and aws indirect-labor-cost
subsidies. Furthermore, 12% of the
surveyed startups are or were in
the aws seed-nancing program.
PUBLIC SUBSIDIES AND SUPPORTS
Fig. 54. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=191
aws - Zuschuss (z.B. PreSeed, Impulse XL/XS,…) 35,9%
aws - Garantie (z.B. Double Equity, sonst. Kreditgarantien) 17,2%
aws - Lohnnebenkostenförderung 17,2%
aws - Seednancing 12,1%
aws - Sonstige 8,6%
aws -Patentservices 7,6%
aws - Kredit (ERP-Kleinkredit) 1,5%
FFG
AWS
FFG (total) 57.6%
aws (total) 57.6%
Funding from states and communities 37.7%
Research premium 30.8%
AplusB 26.3%
“go-international” 14.6%
EU funding 12.1%
Other 9.2%
Support consisting of a grant and
loan (e.g. BP-Start-Up
funding / basic programs)
36.4%
Grant funding (e.g., pat-
ent check, innovation
check) 28.8%
Pure loan subsidies
(e.g. Markt.Start) 5.6%
Grant (E.g. PreSeed, Impulse XL/
XS,...) 35.9%
Other 12.1%
Warranty (e.g. double equity, other
loan guarantees) 17.2%
Indirect labor-cost
support 17.2%
Seed financing 12.1%
Employment bonus 11.6%
Other 8.6%
Patent services 7.6%
credit (ERP microcredit) 1.5%
SUPPORT WHILE
RAISING CAPITAL
In order to be successful in fundraising, startups often get external support.
So, who do they turn to?
This question was posed within
the scope of the ASM Survey and
rated on a ve-point scale from
1 (no support) to 5 (signicant
support). Existing investors, such
as business angels, support
startups the most signicantly.
43% stated that existing
investors are important or very
important for further capital
acquisition. On the average,
this point was rated with 3.1.
Incubators/accelerators/com-
pany builders are in second
place in terms of the acquisition
of capital: 36% thought it was
important or very important
(average rating: 2.7), promotion
advisors were important or very
important to 32% (2.7) and the
startup community was
considered important or very
important to 31% (2.6).
Investors networks also play an
important role (2.5) for 29% for
the acquisition of capital.
In contrast, only every fourth
startup indicated that they had
been signicantly supported by
business consultants (24%) and
lawyers (23%).
SUPPORT DURING THE ACQUISITION OF CAPITAL
Fig. 55. Source: ASM Survey (startups), N=272
1
2
3
4
3,1
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
2,0
2,0
2,1
2,5
2,6
2,2
2,7
2,7
5
1
2
3
4
1,5
5
Existing investors,
e.g. business angels Promotion adviser Incubator/accelerator/
company builder
Startup community Investors’ networks Lawyer
Coworking space
Tax consultant Business consultant Bank
(1) no support to
(5) significant support

94 95
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
ENVIRONMENT &
DEVELOPMENT

96 97
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
CURRENT
BUSINESS SITUATION
The business climate depicts the overall mood, for example concerning revenue and
prot expectations. Thus, it is an important early indicator for showing companies’
perspectives and economic developments.
The assessment of the current
business climate suggests a
positive mood. In total, slightly
more than half of the partici-
pants of the ASM Survey assess
the current business situation as
being very good (18%) or good
(35%). However, 39% rate it as
satisfactory. Just about every
thirteenth startup rated the
current business situation as bad
or very bad. Today, the busi-
ness situation is rated as being
better overall compared to the
ESM 2016. At that time, 29% of
Austrian startups indicated an
at least good and 62% indicated
a satisfactory assessment.
Fig. 56. Source: ASM Survey (total), N=518
ESTIMATE
OF THE BUSINESS
SITUATION
IN PERCENT
Good 34.7%
Very good 18.3%
6.6% Bad
Very poor 1.0%
Satisfactory 39.4%
KEY
CHALLENGES
To gain a better understanding of the current situation of the startups, the
participants were asked to rate their biggest challenges.
These include sales and
customer acquisition, as well as
revenue growth. The responses
took place on a ve-point scale
from 1 (not a challenge) to 5 (a
great challenge). The average
rating for the two aforemen-
tioned elds is 4.2 and 4.2. These
topics are classied as being
very challenging by almost
half of the respondents. In third
place, product development
follows, and is deemed a huge
challenge for 28% (average: 3.5).
About a third of the startups
stated that managing liquidity
(3.4) protability, capital acqui-
sition and internationalization
(3.2 respectively) were currently
among their greatest challeng-
es. More internal problems such
as the design of processes and
organization (2.9) and team
development (2.7) are deemed
very challenging by approxi-
mately every tenth startup.
CURRENT CHALLENGES
1
2
3
4
4,2
4,2
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
3,2
3,2
3,4
5
1
2
3
4
3,5
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
2,9
3,2
5
1
2
3
4
2,9
5
1
2
3
4
2,7
5
(1) not challenging
to (5) very challenging
Sales/customer acquisition Revenue growth Product development
Cash flow/liquidity Probability Fundraising
Team development
Internationalization Recruiting Internal processes
and organization
Fig. 57. Source: ASM Survey (total), N=532

98 99
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
SUPPORT BY
PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS
Concerning the topic of public authorities, two questions are particularly relevant to
startups: How does the collaboration and support by public institutions work? What
do they expect from policy-makers with regard to their entrepreneurial activity?
The evaluation was carried out
on a scale of 1 (very negative) to
5 (very positive).
The majority cite negative expe-
riences: 33% of the participants.
They evaluated the cooperation
with 2.9 on a scale of 1 (very
negative) to 5 (very positive).
Only a quarter have good things
to very good things to report
concerning public institutions
and have stated that they have
had positive experiences with
them. Here, it must also be taken
into account that the results
were not analyzed in detail nor
were did the survey inquires as
to the causes (e.g. little atten-
tion to programs). The current
range of digital services (e.g.
Corporate Service Portal, Online
Patent Registration) is rated as
satisfactory by 34% of respon-
dents and as good by 26%, and
has an average rating of 2.8.
In this context, startups’ as-
sessment of the interest of the
Austrian federal government
in the situation of startups is
important: Only 12% or every
eighth participant is of the
opinion that the government
has a serious interest in support-
ing startups. Around one fourth
(26%) are undecided and the
majority (62%) state that they
have the impression that the
federal government has little or
no serious interest in supporting
startups.
Participants were also asked
about experiences at the EU
level, beyond national borders.
Results showed that the experi-
ences with EU institutions were
rated a bit worse than national
ones (2.5 vs. 2.9), however, par-
ticipants saw the EU institutions
as having a greater interest in
supporting startups than the
Austrian federal government
(2.6 vs. 2.2)
How positive would you rate your
experiences with public authori-
ties/institutions?
How to find the current range of
digital services (e.g. corporate
service portal,
online
patent registration etc.)?
How positive would you rate your
experiences with EU
institutions? Do you think that the federal
government has a serious interest
in supporting
startups?
2.9 2.8 2.5 2.2
Very negative Average Positive Very
Negative positive
1 2 3 4 5
COLLABORATING WITH
PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS
Fig. 58. Source: ASM Survey (total), N=532
EXPECTATIONS TOWARDS
POLICY MAKERS
The startups were asked about their specic wishes or expectations from the political
sphere in this context. These results should serve as impulses for the future design and
development of policies to improve the Austrian startup ecosystem.
According to analysis, reducing
indirect labor costs is the top
priority for startups. This was
stated by 75% of the participants
as a concrete expectation from
policy makers. A large majority
(70%) also wants to remove
bureaucratic and regulatory
hurdles. More than half indicated
that they saw a need for tax cuts/
breaks (55%) or generally a better
understanding (54%) of
the special characteristics
of startups.
In turn, 51% would like to improve
the framework conditions for
venture capital investment and
44% seek improved conditions for
acquiring of capital. In addition,
with regard to their entrepreneur-
ial activity, startups have more
expectations of policy-makers
and see decits: Improving the
image of entrepreneurship in
society (39%), improving commu-
nication between policy-makers
and startups (38%), establishing
entrepreneurship in the educa-
tion system (37%) and bettering
the support for founders (e.g.
local support and consultation)
(36%). These ndings correspond
with the economic barometer of
the Austrian Economic Chamber
conducted every six months.
EXPECTATIONS OF WHAT POLICY-MAKERS SHOULD DELIVER
Reduction of indirect labor costs
Less regulatory and bureaucratic hurdles
Better understanding of the needs of startups
Tax reductions/breaks
Better framework conditions for venture capital
Better framework conditions during the acquisition of capital
Improvement of the position of entrepreneurship in society
Improved exchange between the political realm and startups
Establishment of entrepreneurship within the education system
Better support for founders (e.g., local support and consultation)
Easement in the case of recruiting of non-EU citizens
Improved exchange between the political realm and established companies
Improving the availability of qualification measures for employees
74.5%
69.7%
54.8%
54.4%
50.9%
43.8%
39.3%
37.5%
36.7%
36.0%
28.9%
13.0%
12.0% Fig. 59. Source: ASM Survey (total), N=532

100 101
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
INNOVATION &
TECHNOLOGY TRENDS
How do startups rate the future potential of current technological trends?
The top three technology trends
based on a ve-point-scale
rating from 1 (no potential) to 5
(very great potential) include:
articial intelligence (4.5), big
data (4.2) and autonomous
vehicles (4.1). These three tech-
nologies are ascribed “enormous
potential” by more than half of
the startups respectively. The
elds of robotics (4.0) smart
medical devices (3.9) and
quantum technology (3.9) are
also deemed to be promising.
POTENTIAL OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY TRENDS
1
2
3
4
4,5
4,2
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
3,9
3,9
3,9
5
1
2
3
4
4,1
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
4,0
4,0
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
3,8
3,8
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
3,7
3,7
3,7
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
3,4
3,5
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
3,0
3,0
3,0
5
1
2
3
4
3,6
3,6
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
(1) no potential to (5) very great potential
Artificial intelligence (AI) Big data Autonomous vehicles Robotics
Internet of Things Smart medical devices Personalized health Quantum technology
3D printing AgriTech Human microbiome Virtual/augmented Reality
NanoTech GreenTech Blockchain Genome engineering
EdTech Drones Bots/conversational UI Wearables
Fig. 60. Source: ASM Survey (total), N=532
Furthermore, startups were
asked what innovation topics
are (still) given too little atten-
tion in Austria in their opinion.
Here, this results in an over-
lapping, because the results
showed that those technologies
with the greatest potential are
also those that receive too little
attention from the participants’
perspective. More than a third
of the startups (39%) are of the
opinion that articial intelli-
gence does not receive enough
attention, 27% indicate that this
is the case with autonomous
vehicles, followed by big data
(22%), blockchain (21%) and the
Internet of things (20%).
Artificial intelligence (AI) 38.8%
Autonomous vehicles 26.8%
Big data 22.4%
Blockchain 21.3%
Internet of Things 19.5%
GreenTech 19.2%
EdTech 18.4%
Personalized health 18.4%
Robotics 15.5%
AgriTech 14.9%
Smart medical devices 14.9%
Quantum technology 13.7%
Virtual/augmented reality 13.4%
NanoTech 12.8%
3D printing 12.2%
Human microbiome 10.8%
Drones 9.9%
Genome engineering 9.0%
Wearables 9.0%
Bots/conversational UI 8.2%
Other 7.0%
Fig. 61. Database: Survey (total), multiple answers, N = 511
LACK OF ATTENTION FOR
INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY TRENDS

102 103
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
VIRTUAL/AUGMENTED
REALITY (AR/VR)NANOTECH 3D PRINTING HUMAN MICROBIOME
DRONES GENOME ENGINEERING WEARABLES BOTS/
CONVERSATIONAL UI
46
34
44
31
42
31
37
28
INTERNET OF THINGS GREENTECH EDTECH PERSONALIZED HEALTH
ROBOTICS AGRITECH SMART MEDICAL
DEVICES QUANTUM TECHNOLOGY
67
53
66
51
63
51
63
47
ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE (AI) AUTONOMOUS
VEHICLES BIG DATA BLOCKCHAIN
133 92 77 73
CONTRACTING
ENTITIES &
PROMOTERS

104 105
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
VIENNA
BUSINESS AGENCY
As a rst point of contact for
national and internation-
al companies, the Vienna
Business Agency oers
wide-ranging services with
grants, real estate, dis-
cussions and workshops. It
supports startups and young
companies with a series of
free and multilingual
initiatives.
www.wirtschaftsagentur.at
AUSTRIAN RE-
SEARCH PROMOTION
AGENCY (FFG)
The Austrian Research
Promotion Agency (FFG) is
Austria’s national support
institution for company
research and development. It
was founded on
September 1, 2004 and is
fully owned by the Republic of
Austria. Supporting organiza-
tions including the
Federal Ministry of Transport,
Innovation and Technology and
the Federal Ministry for Digital
and Economic Aairs. The aim
is to strengthen Austria as a
prime location for research and
innovative business.
www.g.at
AWS
BMDW & BMVIT
The Austria Wirtschaftsservice
Gesellschaft mbH (aws) is the
Federal business development
bank. It supports innova-
tive startups from the initial
idea all the way to achieving
international market success.
The aws provides low-inter-
est loans, guarantees, equity
capital and grants. In addi-
tion, startups are supported
by a variety of coaching and
consulting services.
www.aws.at
The Austrian startup Monitor
was supported by the Fed-
eral Ministry for Digital and
Economic Aairs and the
Federal Ministry for
Transport, Innovation and
Technology.
The nancing of the Austrian startup Monitor was carried out by the following institutions:
FEDERATION OF
AUSTRIAN
INDUSTRY
The Federation of Austrian
Industry (IV) is the voluntary
and independent interest
group for Austria’s industrial
sector and sectors associated
with it. A federal organization,
nine state groups and the
Brussels IV Oce represent
the concerns of their cur-
rent 4,400 members, from
the elds of production, the
banking and insurance sector,
infrastructure and indus-
try-oriented services. Member
of the Federation of Austrian
Industry represent more than
80% of domestic production.
www.iv.at
VIENNA ECONOMIC
CHAMBER
The Vienna Economic
Chamber (WKW) currently
represents around 110,000
members in the
nation’s capital, Vienna.
The focus is on promoting
Vienna as a business loca-
tion. Among other things, the
Vienna Economic Chamber
is committed as an advoca-
cy for entrepreneur-friendly
economic and tax policy.
www.wko.at/service/w/
wirtschaftskammer.html
AUSTRIAN FEDERAL
ECONOMIC
CHAMBER
The Austrian Federal
Economic Chamber (WKO)
is the nationwide interest
group for business owners.
Their main concern is active-
ly shaping of the framework
conditions for businesses
in Austria. For more than
517,000 member companies,
it oers a comprehensive
range of training and services
and its actions are based on
the principles of the social
market economy.
www.wko.at
AUSTRIAN COUNCIL
FOR RESEARCH AND
TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
The main task of the Council
for Research and Technology
Development (RFTE) is providing
fact-based and independent con-
sulting for the federal government
in the eld of research, technology
and innovation policy. The aim is to
promote a future-ready RTI policy.
The strategies drawn up by the
Council represents a crucial basis,
such as the current “Strategy 2020.”
www.rat-fte.at

106 107
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
The following multipliers have supported the project and, in particular, motivated
startups to take part in the survey.
The following partners provided prizes for the participants of the survey:
The implementation of the Austrian Startup Monitor was also supported by the
Centre for Entrepreneurship and Applied Business Administration of the
Karl-Franzens-University in Graz.
THANKS AND
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Special thanks also go to the following people: Lara Agneter,
Benjamin Braun, Johanna Einsiedler, Georg Fürlinger,
Lukas Leimgruber, Kevin Oczon, Christoph Pokorny,
Elisabeth Sabeditsch, Sebastian Stumpf,
Remo Taferner, Lukas Vasold.

108 109
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
TEAM
AIT AUSTRIAN INSTI-
TUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
The AIT is the largest applied
research organization in Austria.
The Innovation Systems & Policy
Center has more than 25 years
of experience in the eld of
innovation research and has
conducted numerous innovation
policy studies at national and
international level. A major focus
of the Center is the longer-term
analysis of the development of
companies and the analysis of
startup ecosystems. The AIT is the
academic lead partner of the
Austrian Startup Monitor.
AUSTRIANSTARTUPS
AustrianStartups is Austria's
leading think tank for innovative
entrepreneurship. The non-prof-
it platform collaborates with
more than 30,000 supporters
to promote a future in which
entrepreneurship is as sec-
ond-nature as skiing in Austria.
AustrianStartups combines the
experience of successful start-
ups with an extensive network of
experts, helping to demonstrate
and guide the way to establish-
ing a company-friendly climate
in Austria.
VIENNA UNIVERSITY
OF ECONOMICS (WU)
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
CENTER
The WU Entrepreneurship Center
Vienna was established in June
2015 as a WU center of excel-
lence and represents a consis-
tent continuance of activities to
promote entrepreneurship and
interdisciplinary networking. The
WU Entrepreneurship Center
has been a scientic partner of
the Europe-wide project since
the rst implementation of the
European Startup Monitor in
2015 and carries out the national
survey and evaluation.
UNIV.-PROF. DR. KARL-HEINZ
LEITNER, studiedbusiness infor-
matics and is a senior scientist
in the Center for Innovation
Systems & Policy at the Austrian
Institute of Technology. In addi-
tion, he is Professor of innovation
management and public insti-
tutions at the Center for Entre-
preneurship and Applied Busi-
ness Studies at the University of
Graz. His work there focuses on
foresight, entrepreneurship and
innovation models. Karl-Heinz
Leitner has executed numerous
consulting projects for compa-
nies, public institutions and the
European Commission.
MARKUS RAUNIG M.SC. is the
managing director of Austri-
anStartups and the author of
the Austrian Startup Agenda.
Furthermore, he is a lecturer of
the Vienna University of Eco-
nomics and Business and is a
passionate founder himself.
During his studies, he specialized
in the eld of entrepreneurship
and researched innovation
clusters and potential barriers in
the adoption of articial intel-
ligence. He actively supports
startups as a mentor in various
competitions and programs
such as the Pioneers Festival,
the Agro Innovation Lab or the
Social Impact Award.
DR. RUDOLF DÖMÖTÖR is
director of the WU Entrepre-
neurship Center and the ECN
(Entrepreneurship Center Net-
work), as well as senior scientist
at the WU. He is a co-founder
of Entrepreneurship Avenue, the
largest entrepreneurship event
series with a focus on students
in Europe. He has been actively
involved in the Austrian startup
scene and founded the consult-
ing agency “innovationsmotor
e.U.”. He studied business admin-
istration at the WU as well as at
the University of Technology in
Sydney and completed courses
at the George Washington Uni-
versity and at the University of
Canterbury (New Zealand) over
several months respectively.
ASM 2018 AUTHORS
The Austrian Startup Monitor is produced by the AIT Austrian Institute of Technology,
AustrianStartups and the Entrepreneurship Center of the WU Vienna.

110 111
AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR AUSTRIAN STARTUP MONITOR
LIST OF FIGURES
1 Number of startups in Austria ..........................................18
2 Number of startup companies in Austria,
2004 bis 2017 ...............................................................................18
3 Representative study results ..............................................19
4 Development phase of startups .....................................20
5 Type of business formation of startups ........................21
6 Industry .........................................................................................22
7 Size and composition of the
founding team .......................................................................... 27
8 Number of founders ..............................................................28
9 Composition of the founding team ..............................29
10 Age of founders ....................................................................... 30
11 Education of founders..........................................................32
12 Multiple company foundations ....................................... 33
13 Origin of founders ...................................................................34
14 Moved from abroad ..............................................................35
15 Reasons for founding ...........................................................36
16 Long-term development perspectives .....................38
17 Alternative courses of action in the case of
failure .............................................................................................39
18 Responsibilities of founders .............................................. 40
19 Errors during startup development ................................41
20 Employment .............................................................................44
21 Gender of employees ...........................................................46
22 Employee origin ....................................................................... 47
23 New recruitment of employees in the next
12 months.................................................................................... 50
24 Sectors for new recruitment .............................................49
25 Recruitment of qualied sta ......................................... 50
26 Challenges in acquiring employees ...............................51
27 Incentives ....................................................................................52
28 Company objectives .............................................................56
29 Social and ecological objectives .................................. 57
30 Business strategy ....................................................................58
31 Business models .......................................................................59
32 User segments ........................................................................60
33 Customer segments ...............................................................61
34 Innovation orientation .........................................................64
35 Innovation expenditure .......................................................65
36 Property right strategies .....................................................66
37 Internationalization plans in the next
12 months ...................................................................................70
38 Internationalization strategy ............................................71
39 Challenges of internationalization ................................ 72
40 Current markets ...................................................................... 73
41 Signicance of dierent
cooperation partners ............................................................77
42 Cooperation with Fortune Global
500 companies ........................................................................78
43 Objectives of the cooperation ........................................79
44 Cooperation partners and development phases,
cooperation objectives and development
phases .......................................................................................... 80
45 Problems with cooperations ..............................................81
46 Revenue ........................................................................................84
47 Protability .................................................................................85
48 Importance of
Initial Coin Oering (ICO) .................................................. 86
49 Financial sources ..................................................................... 87
50 Raising external capital up to this point .................... 88
51 External raising of capital planned .............................. 89
52 Assessment during the last nancing round? ......... 90
53 Origin of venture capitalists ...............................................91
54 Public subsidies and supports ..........................................92
55 Support during the acquisition of capital .................93
56 Assessment of the business situation ...........................96
57 Current challenges ................................................................. 97
58 Collaborating with public institutions......................... 98
59 Expectations of what policy-makers should
deliver ............................................................................................99
60 Potential of innovation
and technology trends .....................................................100
61 Lack of attention for innovation
and technology trends .......................................................101
REFERENCES
German Startup Monitor 2017 (GSM 2017) Bundesverband Deutsche Startups e.V. and KPMG (publisher),
http://deutscherstartupmonitor.de/leadmin/dsm/dsm-17/daten/dsm_2017.pdf
European Startup Monitor 2015 (ESM 2015). Kollmann, T., Stöckmann, C., Linstaedt, J. and Kensbock, J. /
German Startups Association (publisher), http://europeanstartupmonitor.com/leadmin/presse/down-
load/esm_2015.pdf
European Startup Monitor 2016 (ESM 2016). Kollmann, T., Stöckmann, C., Hensellek, S. and Kensbock, J.
/ German Startups Association (publisher), http://europeanstartupmonitor.com/leadmin/esm_2016/
report/ESM_201.pdf
Statistik Austria (2016): Innovation. Ergebnisse der Innovationserhebung CIS 2014, Statistik Austria (Statis-
tics Austria), Vienna.
WKO (2018): Unternehmensneugründungen 1993 – 2017. Vorläuge Ergebnisse, Wirtschaftskammer
Österreich (Austrian Federal Economic Chamber), Vienna.
WKÖ (2018): WKÖ Wirtschaftsbarometer, Aussichten für 2018, Wirtschaftskammer Österreich (Austrian
Federal Economic Chamber), Vienna.

Startups create the markets of tomorrow
and are the key factor to developing
dynamic economies.
The Austrian Startup Monitor 2018 provides
an analysis of the status, perspectives and
environment of Austrian startups based on a
broad investigation of the ecosystem. This is the
rst analysis of its kind, oering a well-founded
database of the Austrian startup sector for the
interested public, policy makers and the start-
up community. The topics addressed range from
comparing characteristics of founder teams
to the business models they persued and their
nancing strategies as well as their plans for the
future and their assessment of the ecosystem’s
current circumstances.
ISBN: 978-3-200-05768-5