At the center of the discussion is a dramatic imbalance between the cost of attack and the cost of defense.

Iran’s widely used Shahed-series drones are estimated to cost between $20,000 and $50,000 per unit, making them relatively inexpensive weapons that can be produced in large numbers.
By contrast, many air-defense systems used to intercept them rely on missiles such as the Patriot interceptor, which can cost several million dollars each.

This imbalance has created what defense analysts call a “cost-asymmetry problem.”

In practice, a swarm of dozens or even hundreds of low-cost drones may force defenders to launch multiple high-value interceptor missiles to ensure successful interception. In some cases, two interceptors are fired at a single target to increase the chance of destroying it.

Recent estimates suggest that in several Middle Eastern countries, air-defense operations have already cost billions of dollars, far exceeding the estimated price of the incoming Iranian weapons.

Some experts believe Iran may intentionally mix real attack drones with decoys or low-value targets. This tactic could compel defenders to fire their most advanced missiles even when the threat is minimal.

The goal may not always be to penetrate defenses but to drain interceptor stockpiles and impose financial pressure on opposing forces.

However, U.S. officials say the strategy has limitations. American and allied air defenses have intercepted the majority of incoming drones and missiles, while new technologies—including electronic warfare and low-cost interceptor drones—are being developed to counter swarm attacks.

As drone warfare rapidly evolves, the conflict highlights a new reality of modern combat: the economics of war can be just as decisive as firepower.