XTEND, an Israeli defense drone company, and ParaZero, a struggling aerospace startup, announced a partnership on March 26 to build a net-capture drone interceptor called the Scorpio 1000. The press release uses the phrase "multi-domain autonomy" three times. The demo video, the companies acknowledged in fine print, is a computer-generated image.
The Scorpio 1000 weighs 5 pounds, flies at 44 miles per hour for 20 minutes, and has a range just over 3 miles, according to XTEND's own product page. Those are real specs. They are also the specs of a consumer-grade quadcopter, not a combat-proven interceptor. XTEND CEO Aviv Shapira said the partnership "accelerates our vision of a future where autonomous systems collaborate seamlessly across air, ground, and maritime domains" — a genuine ambition, if one that has almost nothing to do with a 5-pound drone with a 20-minute battery.
The partner, ParaZero Technologies, lost $5.4 million in 2025 on revenue of roughly $1.05 million, according to its own financial results filed the same day as the announcement. It had about $4.2 million in cash at year-end. ParaZero CEO Ariel Alon called XTEND "a leader whose drones are proven in real-world operations" — a characterization worth holding against the evidence.
What does proven look like? Utah-based Fortem Technologies is a useful benchmark. Its DroneHunter system — also a net-capture interceptor — has a three-year, $18 million contract with the U.S. Army, has been deployed operationally at the 2026 FIFA World Cup in Qatar, and has been used in Ukraine and East Asia, according to the company. Fortem is the only U.S. company authorized to deploy a kinetic drone-on-drone interceptor. It has contracts. It has deployments. It has a product that exists in the physical world.
The XTEND-ParaZero announcement has none of that. The fine print on the JFB Construction Holdings press release says the companies "plan demos for defense buyers" — demos, not deployments. The press release features a CGI disclaimer. There are no announced contracts, no confirmed Army evaluations, no operational deployments XTEND has independently confirmed.
The deal also arrives wrapped in political context worth noting. Eric Trump invested in the JFB-XTEND merger, which was announced on February 17. Eleven days later, the U.S. and Israel began strikes on Iran, according to Snopes. Donald Trump Jr. sits on the advisory board of Unusual Machines, a drone company that also invested in the merger. The companies put the implied acquisition value at $1.5 billion, based on the price paid in a concurrent private placement — not on what the market thought. JFB Construction Holdings, which trades on Nasdaq, saw its stock fall 35 percent on the day of the announcement, from $28.26 to $17.
XTEND claims 10,000 of its systems are deployed across more than 30 countries, validated in five combat zones — a figure the company self-reports and that has not been independently verified. Counter-drone interception in a live combat zone or a crowded stadium is not a software problem. It requires a drone fast enough to chase, maneuverable enough to cut across the intercept path, and reliable enough to be trusted near people. The Scorpio 1000's top speed is 44 miles per hour. Many commercial drones — the kind someone might fly near a stadium or a military base — are faster.
Net-capture interception is not science fiction. Fortem's DroneHunter has been doing it for years. But Fortem got there by deploying hardware, winning contracts, and publishing operational data — not by issuing a press release with a CGI demo and a CEO quote about maritime domains. The gap between the two stories is the actual story: a technology that works, a product that doesn't exist yet, and the premium that political adjacency apparently adds to the second one's price tag.
The Scorpio 1000 may yet become a real interceptor. ParaZero may yet find its footing. But right now, the gap between what the companies are promising and what they can show is the size of a 5-pound quadcopter with a 3-mile range — and that gap matters when the alternative is a system the Army is actually paying $18 million to field.
