Invinity Energy Systems has used this trading update to make one thing very clear: the big job in 2026 is getting Endurium cheaper, faster, and easier to sell at scale. On that front, this is a genuinely encouraging announcement. The catch is that commercial timing still looks messy, and that matters a lot for near-term revenue.
For retail investors, the story is fairly simple. Invinity says its technology is improving, manufacturing costs are falling faster than expected, and the sales pipeline is building nicely. But some projects are still slipping, which means a stronger business on paper does not automatically mean smooth revenue delivery in 2026.
Invinity Energy Systems trading update: the key numbers that matter
| Metric | Figure | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Target product cost reduction vs VS3 | Minimum 66% | Lower costs should make Endurium more competitive and widen the market |
| Timing of cost reduction target | Within 2 years | That is 18 months ahead of previous management expectations |
| Number of cost reduction workstreams | Over 50 | Shows this is a broad programme, not a single tweak |
| Products manufactured or delivered year to date | Over 40 MWh | MWh means megawatt-hours, a measure of stored energy capacity |
| Total energy discharged by systems in service | More than 8.7 GWh | Useful proof that the technology is working in the field |
| Copwood project size | 20.7 MWh | Expected to be the largest vanadium flow battery project in Europe once commissioned |
| 2026 commercial revenue and project grant income outlook | £14 million | Made up of backlog and near-term contracts, with no development pipeline contribution |
| 2027 outlook | £49 million | Shows the company sees a bigger step-up next year |
| 2028 outlook | £234 million | Ambitious, but heavily dependent on pipeline conversion |
Endurium cost reduction programme could be the real game changer for Invinity
This is the strongest part of the update. Invinity says the majority of its enhanced cost reduction programme should be delivered by late 2026, with a target of at least a 66% reduction in product cost per kWh compared with the older VS3 product. A kWh is a kilowatt-hour, the basic unit used to measure battery energy capacity.
That target is now expected to be hit within 2 years, which is 18 months earlier than management had previously expected. In plain English, that is a serious acceleration. If achieved, it should improve margins and make Endurium more commercially attractive in more projects.
The company says over 50 separate workstreams are underway. These include better battery capacity within the same footprint, fewer and less complex components, lower-cost production methods, and supply chain and manufacturing efficiencies. That breadth matters because it suggests the savings are coming from several parts of the business, not one fragile assumption.
My view: this is a proper positive. Energy storage is a scale game, and cost per kWh is one of the numbers that can decide whether a project gets built or not. If Invinity can bring Endurium costs down this sharply without compromising performance, the addressable market should expand meaningfully.
Operational progress looks solid, with Copwood giving Invinity a useful shop window
Invinity also highlighted operational and technical progress, and this part reads well. It has manufactured or delivered over 40 MWh of products to project sites so far this year, and says its batteries have now discharged more than 8.7 GWh of energy in customer service. That growing field record is important because buyers of utility-scale storage care about proof, not just promises.
The standout project is the Invinity Copwood VFB Energy Hub in East Sussex. At 20.7 MWh, it is expected to be fully delivered later this week and, once commissioned, would be the largest vanadium flow battery project in Europe.
There is still one caveat. Invinity expects the battery to connect to the UK grid and begin generating revenue in H2 2026, subject to final confirmation from the local Distribution Network Operator. So the asset is close, but not fully over the line yet.
The company also says it is progressing initiatives to scale manufacturing globally, including setting up a US manufacturing facility later this year. That looks strategically sensible, especially given the North American opportunity, but the RNS does not disclose cost, capacity, or financial impact.
Invinity 2026 to 2028 revenue outlook: encouraging growth, but investors should read the small print
Invinity has laid out a commercial revenue and project grant income outlook for 2026 to 2028. The headline numbers are £14 million for 2026, £49 million for 2027, and £234 million for 2028. Those figures sound exciting, particularly the jump by 2028, but the mix matters.
| Revenue category | 2026 | 2027 | 2028 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Backlog | £8 million | – | – |
| Near-term contracts | £6 million | £27 million | £9 million |
| Development pipeline (risk weighted) | – | £22 million | £225 million |
| Total | £14 million | £49 million | £234 million |
The important phrase here is “risk weighted”. That means the development pipeline numbers are adjusted for the chance that projects convert, but they are still not signed revenue. In 2028 especially, the outlook depends overwhelmingly on that development pipeline becoming real orders.
So yes, the growth opportunity looks substantial. But no, investors should not treat £234 million as locked in. It is better viewed as evidence of commercial ambition and market opportunity than guaranteed turnover.
Hungary project delay is the main negative in this Invinity RNS
The weak spot in the update is Hungary. Back in January 2026, Invinity said it was awaiting final Notice to Proceed, or NTP, for two solar-plus-storage projects with Ideona Group. NTP is the formal go-ahead that lets a project move into execution.
Those contracts still exist, but Invinity now says NTP is unlikely to be received and management no longer expects those projects to contribute to 2026 revenue. That is plainly negative for this year. It does not mean the business is losing the relationship, but it does mean timing has slipped.
There is a partial offset. Ideona has amended the contract so the batteries can instead be deployed at an alternative site under development. That keeps the strategic relationship alive, but from an investor’s perspective, delayed revenue is still delayed revenue.
US DOE project progress is real, but it also shows how slow these contracts can move
Invinity uses US Department of Energy-funded projects as another example of why revenue timing is hard to predict. A 12 MWh PNNL project announced in December 2025 is now expected to be delivered in 2026 rather than earlier expectations for delivery in 2025.
That is frustrating, but there is some good news. Invinity says a further 3 projects have now completed the DOE award contracting process and can move into final contract negotiations, with delivery expected to begin in 2027.
This tells you two things. First, these opportunities are real. Second, they can take much longer than investors might hope.
What Invinity shareholders should watch next after this trading and commercial update
The next six months look important. Management says it is focused on converting the growing pipeline into significant contract wins, and it is looking ahead to decisions under the UK long-duration energy storage, or LDES, Cap and Floor scheme as well as tenders in Canada and India.
I think this update is more positive than negative overall. The cost story is stronger, the operational evidence is improving, and the commercial pipeline is clearly broadening across Europe, North America and Asia. But the market is likely to stay cautious until more of that pipeline turns into firm, revenue-bearing contracts.
One final housekeeping point: the audit for the year ended 30 December 2025 is said to be well advanced, and Invinity remains on track to publish its 2025 Annual Report and Financial Statements before 30 June 2026. No surprises there, but it is useful confirmation.
Bottom line: Invinity looks like a company getting better at the hard industrial stuff – product cost, manufacturing efficiency and technical delivery. That is exactly what it needed to show. Now it needs the commercial side to catch up quickly enough for investors to see the benefit in reported revenue.
