In an interview with Vestbee, Jan Habermann, Founding Partner of Credo Ventures, shared insights on the firm’s investment in ElevenLabs, lessons from two decades in CEE venture capital, and what it will take for the region to produce more breakout successes.
Jan, let’s start with your investment in ElevenLabs. What drew Credo Ventures to the company so early, and how did the deal come together?
Deals like that are incredibly rare. Over the 15 years we’ve been doing Credo, we’ve had only two that stand out like this: UiPath and ElevenLabs.
The way we got into the deal reflects how our positioning worked perfectly in that moment. We heard about ElevenLabs from people in London, the founders were based there and connected to the local VC scene. When some later-stage funds saw that the founders were Central European, Credo immediately came to their minds. They told us, “You should look at these guys.”
That referral clicked with our strategy: we're an early-stage fund focused on strong Central European founders. Our Polish General Partner, Maciej Gnutek, had some connections with the team, which helped us validate them further. The founders stood out immediately; they were exceptional in communication and interaction and showed a clear understanding of what they were building.
Some funds passed on the deal at that stage, probably because validating deeptech at the pre-seed level is extremely difficult. But for us, everything lined up: the geography, the team, the technology. Even though we couldn’t fully verify the tech, it felt differentiated. What’s more, it was one of the very few cases where our entire GP team unanimously voted yes. That never happens. Everyone was excited.
You mentioned the deal ticked all the boxes for Credo. What exactly are those boxes?
Well, first, there was a strong Central European founding team, which fits our focus. The referral path made sense. Then there was the team itself; Mati Staniszewski and Piotr Dabkowski were clearly exceptional. The technology seemed to offer a competitive edge, even if we couldn't verify everything at that stage.
The market wasn’t immediately obvious; initially, they were targeting long-tail content creators, which didn’t sound very exciting. But we saw potential for the product to expand into other areas. That was enough for us at the pre-seed stage. Altogether, it just fit.
Do you think Eleven Labs could follow the same trajectory as UiPath? Or even surpass it?
At the moment, it’s growing faster and feels more dynamic. If you look at revenue growth, for instance, it’s ahead of where UiPath was at a similar stage. We love founders who move at the speed of light, and this team certainly does.
Let’s zoom out a bit. From your experience, what are some early signs that a startup might grow into a breakout company, maybe even a unicorn, especially before any real traction? Do you have a framework or playbook?
That’s the billion-dollar question, I wish I had a clear answer. I don’t think anyone in the world can predict it with 100% certainty. Over time, each investor develops their own criteria or, more accurately, their taste. I can’t easily verbalize mine. There's no single factor that makes me say yes or no. It’s always a combination of things.
But what helps is that we don’t invest as individuals. At Credo, we make decisions as a team. Even when we disagree, there’s deep trust. That helps us build a diversified portfolio. Every deal we see or make helps fine-tune our collective sense of what works.
We do have a sense of what a “Credo deal” looks like. Not that we stick to it rigidly, sometimes we go outside of that when something feels exceptionally strong. But no, there’s no universal checklist.
Have you ever made a deal that didn’t align with your instincts but turned out to be a big win, or the opposite?
Definitely, both cases. As VCs, we say no to deals 99% of the time. Saying no to good deals gets easier over time, but it’s still hard to distinguish signal from noise. Of course, we’ve missed deals we regret. One example is a Czech company, Mews, which we saw three times in different rounds and passed each time. They’ve done incredibly well. It would’ve been amazing to have them in our portfolio.
We’ve also made investments that didn’t work out. We currently have over 80 companies across four funds. We’ve had two exceptional outcomes and maybe ten more that are solid VC successes. The rest haven’t made it to the expected level of VC returns. That’s just the reality of the business.
You’ve been active in this space for 15 years. How do you think the CEE ecosystem has evolved in terms of producing unicorns?
It’s come a long way, but maybe not as far as I had hoped. When we launched our first fund in 2010, our thesis was that there was almost no early-stage capital in the region, but that great companies would emerge and look for funding. We believed if we were there, we’d get a chance to invest in them. And to some extent, that worked.
But if you ask me today, I’d say I expected more exceptional companies by now. We’ve seen a massive influx of capital that is no longer the limiting factor. There's more capital than great opportunities, and the competition, both local and international, is intense.
Back then, we’d process maybe a few hundred deals a year. Now, it's in the thousands. The number of deals that match our criteria has gone up, too, but not at the same pace.
In terms of outcomes, I’d say the region has produced two truly exceptional companies, UiPath and Eleven Labs. Then maybe 10-15 others that are strong from a VC perspective, like Productboard, Docplanner, Rohlik, or Mews. But that’s it. And now there are hundreds of VC firms competing for those few outcomes.
What would need to change in the ecosystem to see more companies like that emerge?
I think it just takes time. Look at Silicon Valley, it started forming in the 1970s and took 30 years to mature. Our ecosystems are maybe 10 years old. Add to that the historical lack of entrepreneurial culture, it's a slower build.
Good examples lead to more success stories, and more success stories inspire more founders. I don’t think there’s a quick way to accelerate that. Some governments try, in Poland, for instance, the approach has been to pour money into the ecosystem. I’m not convinced that’s the right way. I think making it easier to start and run companies is more impactful than flooding the market with capital.
Speaking of Poland, Credo has been more active there recently. Could you share more about the fund’s current strategy and future plans?
We’re currently investing from our latest fund, and the strategy hasn’t changed much. What has changed is the competitive landscape; there’s more money, and some investors can outbid us simply because they have deeper pockets.
That’s pushed us to look at even earlier-stage deals, where we think we have an edge due to our local presence and understanding of the context. It’s a natural shift, and one we’re comfortable with.
As for the future, we typically revisit our strategy toward the end of a fund’s deployment. We lock ourselves in a room and ask whether anything needs to change. So far, we’ve always concluded that our approach still fits, both with market realities and with who we are as investors. Maybe next time we’ll see a need to evolve, but I can’t say yet.
Finally, what advice would you give to ambitious founders in CEE who want to build the next unicorn?
Do I have to? [laughs] Honestly, they know better than I do. If someone chooses to be a founder, they already have the passion and drive to create something.
We, as VCs, don’t build unicorns. Founders do. Our role is to hopefully offer the right support at the right moment, maybe help avoid some mistakes. But we’re not in the driver’s seat.
