By Dennis Ford, CEO, LSN
LSN has been tracking the emergence of new investor categories in the life sciences arena, as well as the trends surrounding the activity of existing investor categories. The basic underpinnings of LSN’s view of the capital markets surrounding life sciences has been that the VC’s lack of funding (although that trend may be reversing) has left a void that is being filled by other emerging categories of investors. Among these emerging sources of capital are hedge funds and private equity, which are largely misunderstood by life science entrepreneurs, especially when it comes to early stage activity. This article will help readers who are seeking to raise capital understand how these investor types can be productive sources of investment. These three categories of investors have begun to blur the lines around their traditional definitions, and it is becoming increasingly important that biotech and medtech CEOs understand these investor groups.
Hedge funds are traditionally thought of as players active only in public markets. However, as fund managers have come under increased pressure to generate alpha (outsized returns), many managers have turned to more VC- and PE-like strategies, and have gotten more creative when it comes to making allocations. For example, some hedge fund managers maintain a portion of investable funds for private direct investment. This can either be in the form of one-off “side pocket” investments on an opportunistic basis, or as an integrated piece of an investment special situation strategy. There are a number of hedge funds that have begun to make this sort of “crossover investment” in the life sciences arena, and a quick glance at the list of investors in some of the largest private placements in recent history make that clear.
Private equity is also challenging the historical map – PE is traditionally thought of as the restructurers of larger, post-revenue companies. However, this is changing, especially in the life sciences space. Biotech and medtech opportunities have a highly compelling potential for returns, and PE firms have a higher tolerance for the long time horizon to commercialization. Many firms have therefore begun implementing strategies to aggregate assets and shepherd them through the pipeline. This portfolio of assets can then be passed to a large strategic partner as a one-stop solution to a pipeline gap, where a full portfolio of drugs is worth more than the sum of its parts.
To distill it down to a single idea: The lines are blurring between VC, PE, and hedge funds from a life science entrepreneur’s perspective, especially when the hedge funds admit and commit to the need to take a long term approach to the investment. To add to the topsy-turvy nature of the future life science investment, a deal might even have a combination of some – or even all – of these three entities in it. All of these players have begun orienting themselves (at least in part) towards early stage direct investments. This is good news, because these players have large capital reserves, and can bring a significant amount of investible cash back into the early stage marketplace. However, as these lines begin to blur, it is more important than ever for an entrepreneur to understand the landscape and exactly where to go when it comes to raising capital to move products and services forward.





Leave a comment