evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Almi Företagspartner — Sweden's State-Owned SME Growth Bank, Independently Evaluated

Sweden · Stockholm · See the Sweden profile · See the Stockholm profile

Evidence: Quasi-experimental Top 42% 71/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Sweden's state-owned Almi Företagspartner runs loans, equity and advisory across 16 regions; government counterfactual studies found Almi-financed firms grew revenue by SEK 3–9 million and added 3–4 jobs more than matched non-financed firms.

SEK 1.79 billion
Loans disbursed, 2024 (2024)
2,443
New loans issued, 2024 (2024)
117 companies
Equity investments made, 2024 (2024)
SEK 7-9 million more
Revenue gain, growth-loan recipients vs matched firms (2024 study)
+3-4 employees
Employment gain, growth-loan recipients vs matched firms (2024 study)
SEK 3-4 million more
Revenue gain, equity co-investment recipients vs matched firms (2024 study)
up to 13 years
Evaluation tracking period
Almi Företagspartner — Sweden's State-Owned SME Growth Bank, Independently Evaluated

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
Almi Företagspartner AB
Period
1994–present
Keywords
SME finance, business advisory, venture capital, public sector

Context

Almi Företagspartner AB is Sweden's national, wholly state-owned network for SME financing and business development, founded in 1994 and structured as a parent company over 16 regional subsidiaries plus a venture-capital arm (Almi Invest) and an advisory unit (IFS Rådgivning).

Objectives

Almi combines business loans, growth loans, equity co-investment and free advisory services aimed at raising SME growth and productivity.

Activities

In 2024 alone Almi disbursed SEK 1.79 billion across 2,443 new loans and made equity investments in 117 companies. Sweden's Tillväxtanalys tracked Almi-financed firms for up to 13 years against a matched control group (2019 study); IFN economist Roger Svensson used a similar before/after-versus-control design in 2024.

Results

Tillväxtanalys (2019) found Almi's lending increased net revenue and labour productivity on average, with employment gains concentrated in established firms near major cities. Svensson (2024) found growth-loan recipients grew revenue by SEK 7-9 million more and added 3-4 more employees than comparable firms, while equity co-investment recipients grew revenue by SEK 3-4 million more with a similar employment gain; standard loans and microloans showed smaller, less consistent impact.

Conclusions

Both evaluations describe the effects as real but uneven across instrument type. Sweden's Riksrevisionen has separately audited equity in Almi's lending, including gender balance and support for foreign-born entrepreneurs, indicating these remain live policy concerns rather than settled achievements.

Implementation
Indicative cost
High (€500k–€5M) — State-owned national financing institution; SEK 1.79 billion disbursed in loans in 2024 alone plus equity co-investment capital, funded through the Swedish state budget.
Time to results
Long (> 3 years) — Operating continuously since 1994 (30+ years); impact evaluations have tracked financed firms for up to 13 years post-financing.
Staffing & skills
16 regional Almi subsidiary teams, Almi Invest venture-capital staff, IFS Rådgivning advisors, Independent government evaluators (Tillväxtanalys, Riksrevisionen, IFN)

Conditions for success

  • Pairing loan/equity capital with free advisory services rather than finance alone
  • Independent government evaluation capacity to track effectiveness and equity over long horizons
  • Nationwide regional presence across all 16 Swedish counties

Common failure modes

  • Impact is uneven by instrument - standard loans and microloans show smaller, less consistent effects than growth loans or equity
  • National audits (Riksrevisionen) find persistent gender and foreign-born-entrepreneur lending gaps that remain unresolved

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful