One of the hardest challenges in biotech investing is separating a compelling scientific hypothesis from an investable opportunity. One recurring challenge is evaluating programs before a development candidate has been nominated.
At this stage, the biology may be compelling, the target well validated, and the development strategy thoughtfully designed. But many of the assumptions that ultimately determine a program’s value have yet to be tested.
Some investors are willing to invest based on the strength of the team, the underlying biology, or compelling early discovery data. Others prefer to wait until a development candidate has been nominated, when many of the key scientific uncertainties have been addressed.
Without a development candidate, critical questions often remain unanswered. Can the desired potency and selectivity be achieved? Is there an acceptable safety profile? Does the molecule have properties that make it practical to develop and manufacture? These uncertainties make it difficult to assess both the probability of technical success and the capital required to reach meaningful value inflection points.
Having a development candidate is an important inflection point that allows investors to analyze and underwrite the opportunity with greater conviction.
The observations shared in this series are generalized lessons from reviewing early-stage life sciences companies. Company identities, specific technologies, and other confidential details have been omitted or modified to protect confidentiality. The views expressed are my own and are intended for educational purposes only.