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.

When the IPO window opens, nearly every stakeholder—from bankers and lawyers to VCs and management—is financially motivated to go public. This collective "irrational exuberance" can lead to a rush of mixed-quality companies, perpetuating the industry's historical boom-bust IPO cycles.

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.

Traditional private equity models are built on extracting cash from stable businesses. They are ill-suited for public companies like ClearPoint or Twist that are still in a "business builder" phase, requiring significant investment before they generate predictable free cash flow.

Early-stage biotech companies are vulnerable to short selling in public markets because their experiments run for 12-24 months, creating long periods without news flow. With no catalysts to drive buying ("no bid"), hedge funds can short the stocks until data is released, highlighting a structural disadvantage of being public too early.

Astute biotech leaders leverage the tension between public financing and strategic pharma partnerships. When public markets are down, pursue pharma deals as a better source of capital. Conversely, use the threat of a public offering to negotiate more favorable terms in pharma deals, treating them as interchangeable capital sources.

Unlike in tech where an IPO is often a liquidity event for early investors, a biotech IPO is an "entrance." It functions as a financing round to bring in public market capital needed for expensive late-stage trials. The true exit for investors is typically a future acquisition.

A successful biotech IPO isn't about attracting the public; it's about securing commitments from crossover investors beforehand. These investors must "bring their own beer to the party" by participating in the IPO. Their presence validates the company, stabilizes the offering, and is essential for attracting generalist funds later.

The trend of companies staying private longer and raising huge late-stage rounds isn't just about VC exuberance. It's a direct consequence of a series of regulations (like Sarbanes-Oxley) that made going public extremely costly and onerous. As a result, the private capital markets evolved to fill the gap, fundamentally changing venture capital.