The 2020-2021 biotech "bubble" pushed very early-stage companies into public markets prematurely. The subsequent correction, though painful, has been a healthy reset. It has forced the sector back toward a more suitable, long-duration private funding model where companies can mature before facing public market pressures.

During market downturns, biotech companies lose the ability to raise capital simply when it's convenient. Financing becomes tied to specific events. The key is timing a fundraise immediately before or after the release of significant clinical data that de-risks the company and attracts new investors.

The current fundraising environment is the most binary in recent memory. Startups with the "right" narrative—AI-native, elite incubator pedigree, explosive growth—get funded easily. Companies with solid but non-hype metrics, like classic SaaS growers, are finding it nearly impossible to raise capital. The middle market has vanished.

Unlike the 2020-2022 bubble, the expected wave of biotech IPOs features mid-to-late-stage companies with de-risked assets. The market's recent discipline, forced by a tough funding environment, has created a backlog of high-quality private companies that are better prepared for public markets than their predecessors.

The focus in advanced therapies has shifted dramatically. While earlier years were about proving clinical and technological efficacy, the current risk-averse funding climate has forced the sector to prioritize commercial viability, scalability, and the industrialization of manufacturing processes to ensure long-term sustainability.

With fundraising rounds closing in weeks instead of months, investors can no longer conduct exhaustive diligence on every detail. The process has become more efficient by treating the current business model as table stakes and focusing limited time on underwriting the core thesis for future, non-obvious growth.

Chet Pipkin advises that a lack of cash is not always a bad thing for a new venture. Financial constraints force founders to focus on the essential aspects of their business and identify a genuine, pressing customer problem, which is more critical for success than having abundant capital.

The path for biotech entrepreneurs is a long slog requiring immense conviction. Success ("liftoff") isn't just a clinical trial result, but achieving self-sustaining profitability and growth. This high bar means founders may need to persevere through years of market indifference and financing challenges.

VCs are incentivized to deploy large amounts of capital. However, the best companies often have strong fundamentals, are capital-efficient, or even profitable, and thus don't need to raise money. This creates a challenging dynamic where the best investments, like Sequoia's investment in Zoom, are the hardest to get into.