Epirus and Fortem Technologies are both hard-defeat counter-UAS companies, meaning they neutralise the drone rather than only detecting or jamming it, and both are backed by a major US defence prime. The split is the defeat mechanism. Epirus disables many drones at once with the Leonidas high-power microwave system, backed by General Dynamics. Fortem destroys or captures individual drones with the radar-cued DroneHunter interceptor, backed by Lockheed Martin and authorised for direct US Army sale. They represent the two physics the Pentagon is funding in parallel.
Side By Side
| Epirus | Fortem Technologies | |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2018 | 2016 |
| Headquarters | Torrance, California, USA | Lindon, Utah, USA |
| Status | Private | Private |
| Funding | $550 million+ ($250M Series D, 2025) | $79.3M pre-Series B plus Lockheed Martin $25M Series B tranche (2026) |
| Prime Backer | General Dynamics Land Systems (Series D) | Lockheed Martin (Series B) |
| Flagship | Leonidas high-power microwave | DroneHunter F700 interceptor with TrueView radar (SkyDome) |
| Defeat Method | Non-kinetic microwave; area effect | Kinetic interceptor; single-target net capture |
| Cost Per Engagement | No consumable munition per kill | Interceptor per engagement (recoverable design) |
| Effect Against Shahed-Class | Disables electronics within the beam (area) | DroneHunter F700 confirmed against the Shahed-136 |
| US Army Status | Counter-swarm programme positioning | Direct-sale authorised; $18M three-year contract (Feb 2026) |
MICROWAVE VS INTERCEPTOR
The case for Epirus is saturation economics: one Leonidas pulse can defeat multiple drones with no munition cost per kill, the capability conventional kinetic counter-UAS cannot match against massed raids. The case for Fortem is discrete-target certainty: the DroneHunter physically removes a specific threat, including the preprogrammed one-way attack drones that fly fixed routes and ignore both jamming and many soft-kill effects.
Neither fully substitutes for the other. Microwave struggles to deliver surgical, low-collateral effects around sensitive systems; a kinetic interceptor cannot match a directed-energy area effect against a true swarm. Layered counter-UAS architectures increasingly field both, which is why two different primes have each placed a bet on a different defeat physics.
CAPITAL AND PRIME ALIGNMENT
Epirus's strategic investor is General Dynamics Land Systems, signalling intent to integrate Leonidas into vehicle-mounted and fixed air defence. Fortem's is Lockheed Martin, whose April 2026 $25 million Series B tranche came alongside Fortem's US Army direct-sale authorisation and a $18 million Army contract.
For an investor or a procurement office, the choice is less about which company wins and more about which defeat physics a given mission requires. Both are credibly positioned as prime-integration partners for the FY27-era counter-autonomous-systems demand the US military is funding.
When To Choose
Choose Epirus if:
- Massed swarm defeat with no per-kill munition cost
- Vehicle-mounted or fixed military air defence
- General Dynamics integration path for directed energy
Choose Fortem Technologies if:
- Physical capture or kill of individual Group-3 and Shahed-class attack drones
- Integrated radar plus interceptor in a single stack
- US Army sole-source alignment and Lockheed Martin integration
Full Profiles
Epirus
Torrance, California, USA · Private
High-power microwave (HPM) counter-drone systems. Leonidas platform is the leading non-kinetic solution for defeating drone swarms at distance.
View profile →Fortem Technologies
Lindon, Utah, USA · Private
Counter-UAS platform combining radar detection (TrueView) and autonomous interceptor drones (DroneHunter). Lockheed Martin strategic investor; sole-source US Army counter-drone supplier.
View profile →Sources & References
Drone Intelligence, Comparison. Compiled from public filings, primary sources, and verified disclosures. Last updated 15 June 2026.
paul@droneintelligence.ai