Molten Ventures doubles but the NAV gap persists

What the FY26 numbers show

The trading update for the year ended 31 March 2026, published on 27 April, laid out a set of figures that would have seemed improbable when the stock languished around 250p to 280p in early 2025.

Gross portfolio value rose 11% to £1.5 billion, according to the company's filing. NAV per share climbed 13% to 760p, supported by upward revaluations in several core holdings and an ongoing share buyback programme.

Deployment from the listed balance sheet increased to £89 million, up from £73 million in FY25. A further £22 million was deployed through Molten's managed EIS and VCT funds. New investments during the period included General Index, Polymodels, MAIA and Duel, alongside follow-on Series B rounds in Modo Energy and Manna, as reported by BusinessCloud.

The firm also completed a secondary investment in Speedinvest Continuation Fund I, a structure that reflects the growing role of secondaries in European venture portfolios.

The NAV discount puzzle

Despite the rally, Molten's shares at 560p sit roughly 26% below the reported NAV per share of 760p. That gap is not unique to Molten. UK-listed venture capital trusts have broadly traded at steep NAV discounts since 2022. Peers such as Chrysalis Investments and Augmentum Fintech have faced similar structural headwinds around liquidity and investor sentiment toward illiquid, technology-heavy portfolios.

Molten's response has been a £38 million share buyback programme, representing approximately 7% of its current market capitalisation. Buybacks at a discount to NAV are, mechanically, accretive to remaining shareholders: the company retires shares for less than the underlying assets are notionally worth.

Whether buybacks alone can close the discount is another matter. Listed venture vehicles face a circular problem. Limited secondary-market liquidity depresses the share price; a depressed share price makes it harder to raise fresh equity; and without fresh equity issuance, the free float remains thin, reinforcing the liquidity discount. The result is a valuation that reflects market structure as much as portfolio fundamentals.

Some market participants argue that persistent discounts will only narrow when realisations convert paper marks into cash, which can then be returned to shareholders through special dividends or further buybacks. Molten's FY26 realisations suggest the firm is aware of that logic.

Exit window: Revolut, ICEYE and what comes next

The headline realisation figures are striking. Molten reported £120 million in total realisations at an average multiple of 3x on invested capital, according to the company's trading update.

The standout partial exits were in Revolut, the London-headquartered fintech, at 21x invested capital, and ICEYE, the Finnish-founded synthetic-aperture radar satellite company, at 12.9x. Full exits from Freetrade at 1.5x and Lyst at 0.7x were less dramatic but were completed at or above holding values, the company stated.

The Revolut partial exit is notable for its scale of return and for what it signals about the broader European venture exit environment. After several subdued years in which IPO markets were largely closed and secondary transactions were heavily discounted, partial sales at double-digit multiples suggest that at least some liquidity is returning for top-tier assets.

That said, concentration risk remains. Revolut is widely understood to be one of Molten's largest single positions by value. The firm's description of "significant upside still to be realised" implies substantial remaining exposure. How and when that exposure is monetised will be a material factor in future NAV calculations.

"The quality and maturity of the portfolio continue to provide Molten with a number of realisation opportunities," said CEO Ben Wilkinson, according to the company's trading update.

The portfolio's thematic exposure spans AI, space technology and what Wilkinson described as "European sovereignty", a term increasingly used in venture circles to describe the push for domestically controlled infrastructure in defence, data and energy.

Third-party capital and the shift in Molten's model

Perhaps the most strategically significant line in the trading update was Wilkinson's stated focus on "scaling the business and expanding our third-party co-investment structures."

This marks a deliberate evolution. Historically, Molten (formerly Draper Esprit) operated primarily as a listed fund, deploying capital from its own balance sheet. The pivot toward managing third-party capital, through co-investment vehicles alongside the listed portfolio, moves Molten closer to a hybrid model: part listed investment company, part asset manager.

The rationale is straightforward. A listed vehicle trading at a persistent discount cannot efficiently raise equity to fund new investments. Third-party co-investment structures allow Molten to increase assets under management, earn management and performance fees, and deploy into deals at a scale that its balance sheet alone might not support.

For the UK scale-up funding landscape, this shift matters. If Molten can attract institutional co-investors, whether pension funds, sovereign wealth funds or family offices, into European venture deals alongside its own capital, it effectively widens the pool of growth-stage funding available to UK and European technology companies. The EIS and VCT funds already serve a version of this function for earlier-stage, tax-advantaged capital.

The risk is execution. Building a third-party asset management business requires different capabilities from running a listed portfolio: investor relations, fund structuring, regulatory compliance and a track record that institutional allocators will underwrite. Molten's FY26 realisations, particularly the Revolut and ICEYE multiples, provide useful proof points, but the transition is far from complete.

The wider context

Molten's share price recovery should be read against the backdrop of a broader recalibration in technology valuations. The stock peaked above 1,000p in 2021, during a period of aggressive venture markups. The subsequent correction, which dragged shares below 300p, reflected both falling public-market comparables and a near-total closure of the IPO exit route.

The 100% gain over twelve months recovers much of that drawdown but does not erase it. Shareholders who bought at or near the 2021 peak remain underwater.

What the FY26 numbers do demonstrate is that Molten's underlying portfolio has continued to compound in value through the downturn, and that exit routes, while still selective, are reopening. Whether that is sufficient to close the NAV discount will depend on the pace and quality of future realisations, the success of the co-investment strategy, and broader market appetite for listed venture exposure in the UK.