Nautilus Labs

United States · www.nautiluslabs.com · 6 vendors

Resilience scores

Technology vendors

Services catalogue

1 service in catalogue across 1 category; runs on 6 sub-vendors.

Insights

Last updated 2026-09-12 · revision 2

6 direct vendors, 139 subvendors

Direct vendors by controlling owner country (sample)

Subvendors by controlling owner country (sample)

Migration Readiness: 7/10

Assessed by AI based on technology stack characteristics (cloud-native vs legacy, containerization, microservices), regulatory environment, data residency requirements, financial stability, and vendor lock-in risks. The score ranges from 0-10, where higher scores indicate better readiness for technology migration.

Nautilus Labs' migration readiness is assessed as medium-to-high, primarily due to the reported 'Total Vendors: 0'. Interpreting this literally, it indicates an absence of external vendor lock-in, which is a significant advantage for any migration effort, as it removes a major source of complexity and cost associated with disentangling from third-party services. This factor strongly contributes to a higher readiness score. However, a comprehensive assessment is hindered by substantial data gaps in other critical areas. There is no information available regarding the company's internal tech stack (e.g., cloud-native adoption, containerization, microservices), which is a fundamental determinant of migration ease. Similarly, details on the regulatory environment, specific data residency requirements, and financial stability (crucial for funding a migration) are all missing. While the lack of external vendor lock-in provides a strong foundation, the unknown state of the internal technology and other critical factors prevents a top-tier readiness score.

Compliance

9 in-scope frameworks identified; showing 3.

SOC 2 (source) — Assessment Required

While not legally mandated, a SOC 2 report is a common requirement for technology vendors in the B2B space, particularly those dealing with critical operational data. It provides assurance about the security, availability, and confidentiality of their systems.

As a B2B technology provider handling sensitive client data, a SOC 2 report is often a customer requirement. The lack of a publicly available report could be a competitive disadvantage. The risk is medium as it is a common industry expectation.

Evidence: https://nautilusdt.com/about-nautilus/compliance-and-certifications/

NIS2 (source) — Assessment Required

The maritime transport sector is covered by the NIS2 Directive. Nautilus Labs provides digital services that are critical for the operations of shipping companies, which could classify them as a provider of a key service. Their acquisition by the Danish company Danelec may also bring them into scope.

As a technology provider to the maritime transport sector, an 'essential entity' under NIS2, Nautilus Labs could be in scope. Non-compliance could lead to significant fines and business disruption. The risk is medium as their status as a 'key service' provider and size threshold are not definitively confirmed.

Evidence: https://www.maritimedatamanagement.com/resources/news/new-cybersecurity-act-effective-july-1-2026/, https://nautilus-ot.com/transportation-logistics/, https://www.danelec.com/newsroom/danelec-acquires-nautilus-labs-ai-technology-platform-to-gain-deeper-insights-within-sustainability-and-safety

EU AI Act (source) — Assessment Required

The company's platform uses AI and machine learning to provide voyage optimization and decarbonization solutions to the maritime industry. As they operate in the EU, their AI system will likely fall under the scope of the EU AI Act.

Nautilus Labs' core product is an AI-driven platform. Depending on the classification of their AI system under the EU AI Act, they could face significant compliance obligations. The risk is medium as the regulation is new and the classification of their system is not yet clear.

Evidence: https://www.ship-technology.com/contractors/computers/nautilus-labs/, https://www.shippinginsight.com/participants/nautilus-labs/, https://www.feroot.com/blog/ccpa-applicability-website-california-law/, https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/resources/business-law-today/2019-october/what-businesses-need-to-know/, https://www.epa.ie/our-services/licensing/climate-change/eu-emissions-trading-system-/emissions-trading-system---maritime-transport/, https://www.dnv.com/maritime/insights/topics/eu-emissions-trading-system/

Financials

Three-year financials

Financial Resilience Score: 5/10

Nautilus Labs is a privately held venture-backed maritime SaaS company that does not disclose audited financial statements, making a precise resilience assessment difficult. The most concrete public financial data points are approximately US$48-50M in disclosed venture funding, with the last confirmed round being a US$34M Series B in October 2020 led by Microsoft's M12. The company benefits from tier-1 strategic investor backing, structural regulatory tailwinds from IMO 2023 CII/EEXI rules, EU ETS extension to shipping, and FuelEU Maritime, and a SaaS recurring revenue model implying relatively predictable cash flows. However, as a small private company with no disclosed profitability, Nautilus Labs is likely still cash-burning and dependent on future funding rounds. The customer base is concentrated among a limited pool of large shipping firms, and the company faces well-funded competitors, notably ZeroNorth which is arguably better capitalized. Macroeconomic cyclicality in shipping IT budgets and the absence of a publicized funding round since 2020 add additional uncertainty about resilience during venture-funding slowdowns.

Key strengths: Backed by tier-1 strategic investor Microsoft's M12, Total disclosed venture funding of approximately US$48-50M, US$34M Series B raised in October 2020, Regulatory tailwinds from IMO 2023, EU ETS, and FuelEU Maritime, SaaS recurring revenue model with predictable cash flows, Anchor customers including Eastern Pacific Shipping, 'K' Line, Berge Bulk, and MOL

Risk factors: Small private company with no disclosed profitability, likely still cash-burning, Dependent on future venture funding rounds, Concentrated customer base among limited pool of large shipping firms, Competitive pressure from better-capitalized rivals like ZeroNorth, Bearing.ai, DeepSea Technologies, Macroeconomic cyclicality: shipping IT budgets contract during freight downturns, No verified new funding round publicly reported since 2020

Signed-in users can see whether their own company is exposed to this vendor's disruption, plus the full sub-vendor list and country breakdowns, every in-scope compliance framework plus gaps and next steps, and alerts when any of it changes.

View the full interactive report