Nordic Life Science 1
Q&A // SARSIA MANAGEMENT “A COMPELLING COMPETITIV
E ADVANTAGE, TPP (TARGET PRODUCT PROFILE), VALUE PROPOSITION, AND STRONG FOUNDING TEAM ARE THE HIGHEST PRIORITY FOR INVESTORS RIGHT NOW.” competitive advantage, TPP (Target Product Profile), value proposition, and strong founding team are the highest priority for investors right now.” F rom your perspective, how has the life science sector developed since the COVID-19 pandemic? “We’ve had a greater adoption of digital health and there’s an increased global orientation today, with stronger pipelines and international partnerships. There are also more medtech startups, especially those focused on diagnostics and remote care. Finally, there are more national life science strategies, innovation funding, and public-private collaboration and crossborder cooperation.” Due to current global events, for example the new US administration, have you noticed a shift towards strategic near-shoring and a greater focus on the European (or Chinese) life science ecosystem? “Ever since COVID there's been an increasing tendency for near-shoring operations to increase supply chain resilience, not least also amid the current geopolitical uncertainty. There has been growing investment in local manufacturing, R&D, and clinical infrastructure within Europe and the EU is looking at greater self-sufficiency and regulatory unity. Companies are interested in China but are equally cautious due to regulatory, IP, and geopolitical risks. Some companies are also exploring South-east Asia and India for growth and production. Whilst, historically, collaboration with European and North American partners have been more attractive than China-centric strategies, it remains to be seen what impact the current geopolitical uncertainty will have on this picture.” How does the Nordic/European market compare to the US? “As usual, the US dominates global life science VC funding, with larger rounds, more late-stage capital, and faster exits, whilst the Nordics/Europe are seeing smaller funding rounds and more conservative valuations, but also growing interest from international investors due to strong innovation and lower burn rates. In the US there is a high concentration of life science hubs (e.g. Boston, Bay Area, etc), fast-paced product development, and wellestablished commercialization pathways whilst in the Nordics/Europe the strength lies in early-stage innovation, especially in precision medicine, digital health, and diagnostics. This is, however, accompanied by slower scaling due to regulatory and funding complexity.” “In the US one sees deep talent pools in biotech, business, and regulatory fields, and there is intense competition for talent and high salary expectations whilst in the Nordics/Europe one sees a strong scientific base (especially in Sweden and Denmark), more collaborative ecosystems, and an attractive work-life balance for R&D professionals. In the US there is a broad focus, with significant investment in oncology, cell and gene therapy, and AI in drug discovery whereas in the Nordics/Europe there is leadership in diagnostics, digital health, personalized medicine, and public-private partnerships. The US is a single large market with high potential returns but tough payer negotiations whereas Europe is a multicountry bloc with complex access dynamics often used as a testbed for health innovation and pilot programs.” NORDICLIFESCIENCE.ORG | 67