Foundation says its humanoids are headed for the battlefield as questions mount over contracts

On a late February morning at Foundation’s San Francisco headquarters, a Phantom MK-1 humanoid robot posed for Time holding a revolver, a pistol, a shotgun and a replica M-16 rifle. The magazine added that during the visit “more than once a Phantom crumpled with an almighty crash.”

Foundation Future Industries says it holds $24 million in U.S. military research contracts, has tested two robots in Ukraine and plans to build 50,000 machines by the end of 2027. Published accounts differ on each of those. A search of federal spending data for this article found about $3.2 million in prime awards, all to a company Foundation acquired. Ukraine’s defense ministry declined to comment to CNBC on the trials, and the Army’s humanoid competition named five winners in September without Foundation among them.

Who runs Foundation and who backs it

Chief executive Sankaet Pathak previously led Synapse, a fintech firm that declared bankruptcy in 2024. He started Foundation with Arjun Sethi, formerly chief executive of Tribe Capital, and Mike LeBlanc, a co-founder of Cobalt Robotics, according to CNBC. Time describes LeBlanc as a 14-year Marine Corps veteran. Pathak told TechCrunch in 2024 that the company had raised $11 million in pre-seed funding, and Euronews lists Stripe and the venture firm Define among its investors.

In June 2024 CNBC reported that a Foundation fundraising document claimed a committed investment and a targeted $300 million order from General Motors. GM told the network it had no agreement with the startup, and LeBlanc said he was embarrassed that the materials overstated the relationship.

Eric Trump, the president’s son, is an investor and chief strategic adviser, a link Time first reported in March. Senator Elizabeth Warren alleged the firm’s government contracts were “corruption in plain sight,” CNBC reported. Benzinga framed the concern as Trump family stakes in companies seeking government business while Donald Trump is president. Foundation and the White House both denied to The Independent that his involvement brought any unfair advantage. Foundation said he is not paid. His spokesperson told the paper, “Eric has no role in management and absolutely no decision making with the day-to-day operations.”

The robot, the weapons and the production targets

Foundation’s product page lists Phantom at 5 feet 9 inches, 176 pounds, a 44-pound payload and 19 degrees of freedom. Those are company figures. The BBC reported in June that the MK-1 it was shown had no battery, was not dustproof or waterproof and could not get up after a fall. Pathak told Euronews the MK-2 will carry about 80 kilograms, and told the BBC it will run about six hours. Time reported in March that the MK-2 was due in April; in August Fox News reported it was expected in the coming months.

The company’s published plan sets it apart from “most humanoid companies in the U.S. that have committed to non-weaponization.” LeBlanc told Time the aim is for Phantom to wield “any kind of weapon that a human can.” Pathak told WIRED in July, “We have some kinetic things we’re exploring,” and The Washington Post described company footage from May of a Phantom loading a mortar. Time reported that Foundation intends a human to approve any engagement; Pathak told CNBC the robots would need to decide autonomously in some time-critical situations.

Pathak’s plan, as told to Forbes, was 40 robots in 2025, 10,000 in 2026 and 40,000 in 2027; he gave it a “non-zero chance.” Benzinga, citing Reuters, said a factory with capacity for 5,000 robots a year would open in October and that Foundation named no customers or confirmed orders. A September Wall Street Journal photo caption put robots deployed so far at around 10. Journalist Craig S. Smith, in an August Eye on AI episode, described the San Francisco site he visited in April as a research lab making about one robot a day.

What the contract record shows

Fox Business reported in April that the Pentagon had awarded Foundation a $24 million contract. Time had described research contracts worth a combined $24 million across three services, and NBC Bay Area reported at least $18 million, based on federal contracting data and documents Foundation supplied. WIRED asked for details and was given two contracts inherited from Boardwalk Robotics, which Foundation acquired, and three that came through the Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition. It concluded, “The company doesn’t appear to have independently secured new dough from the government.”

A search of USAspending.gov on October 11 returned no prime awards under Foundation’s name. It returned four to Boardwalk Robotics: a $1.8 million Air Force award, Army awards of $1.1 million and $167,000, and a $156,000 NASA award. The database also lists an Office of Naval Research humanoid contract with a potential value of $24.8 million, awarded in August 2025 to the Florida institute. Such a search would miss unreported subcontracts and other agreements, so it does not settle the question.

Robotics writer Mike Kalil, who first challenged the figures in July, wrote in September that a Foundation pitch deck claimed more than $73 million in military contracts, while “government contract databases only show awards Foundation inherited through Boardwalk.” He later reported receiving a cease-and-desist letter for Foundation asserting that the deck contained trade secrets, and said Pathak answered on X that the platform had done more than $70 million of work across prime and subcontractor relationships. The Defense Department did not respond to CNBC’s inquiry. On border work, the Department of Homeland Security told Fox News it “currently does not have any non-contractual agreements, pilots, or active prime contracts with Foundation.”

Ukraine, source by source

Time reported that two Phantoms were sent to Ukraine in February, initially for frontline reconnaissance support. Business Insider described a closed pilot demonstration at an undisclosed location and said Pathak did not want to “overstate” it. CNBC said the tests were backed by the U.S. government, conducted with Ukrainian officials and focused on logistics.

The Ukrainian outlet Militarnyi headlined its account as showing limited suitability for battlefield use, citing a payload of about 20 kilograms, no waterproofing and a cost of about $150,000 per robot. It attributed the description of the tests to Pathak and named no Ukrainian unit or official. RBC-Ukraine, citing Militarnyi, went further and said the robots delivered ammunition to positions under fire, a detail absent from the Militarnyi article.

Smith’s account conflicts with the company’s. The Eye on AI episode notes say he went to Kyiv in January for a delivery, then add: “The robots were stopped at the Polish border and never arrived.” They say he spent months trying to confirm battlefield tests and could not. Sources also differ on weapons: NBC Bay Area was told the robots sent would be unarmed, while Pathak told the BBC that weaponization is part of the Ukraine testing.

What a buyer should ask

Rodney Brooks, professor emeritus at MIT, told WIRED that “going from a solid lab demo to initial deployment in robotics is always at least 10 years.” Robert Griffin of the Florida institute told the BBC such systems cannot yet handle open-ended uncertainty. The Army’s own competition rewarded power systems, tactile sensors and control software alongside one complete humanoid, the institute’s Alex.

A program office weighing Phantom can ask for contract numbers and whether Foundation is the prime awardee, a subcontractor or the successor to an acquired firm’s award. For Ukraine, the relevant documents are dated test reports naming the host unit and location. On hardware, measured results for the MK-2 matter more than targets: runtime under load, ingress protection, falls per hour on rough ground and the share of each task performed under teleoperation.

Foundation was not contacted for this article, which relies on published reporting, the company’s own pages and public records.