Biotech venture capitalists are embracing risk again, signaling a reversal from the past few years.
VCs are placing more bets on flashy new biotech opportunities in the first quarter of 2026. About 65% of investments by a group of the most active private biotech investors went into new portfolio companies, according to a quarterly report from bankers at William Blair.
It’s a stark contrast from the previous several years of belt-tightening, in which investors’ dollars were focused on existing portfolio bets — a lower-risk strategy.
“The quality of deals we’re seeing now, the level of innovation, it’s as high as I’ve seen it in the last couple years,” Samsara BioCapital’s Mike Dybbs said in an interview. “And the deals that we’re seeing are reasonably and very attractively priced. It’s that combination of ‘OK, portfolio is in good shape’ and this flood of really interesting, exciting companies.”
Samsara has opened its checkbook to Colorado obesity biotech Ambrosia Biosciences, antibody-drug conjugates startup Sidewinder Therapeutics, and protein degrader EpiBiologics so far this year. Dybbs said he and other investors feel like they can’t keep up with the deal flow. It’s a stark contrast to last year, when “a lot of funds were in sort of survival mode.”
Money is also returning to investors on the strength of more than
$31 billion
in biopharma acquisitions in the first quarter. Drugmakers have already laid out more than $6 billion in M&A
deals
in the
first week
of the second quarter.
“We do see people recycling money from those M&A proceeds into new deals, and as a result, for top-tier deals and highly sought-after deals, you see higher valuations, so larger step-ups from previous rounds,” Forbion’s Wouter Joustra said. The Dutch firm made five new investments and backed one existing portfolio company in the first quarter, he said.
Sanofi Ventures’ Jason Hafler sang a similar tune, noting he’s seeing more competition among investors vying to get in on new biotech funding rounds. The industry is also moving back toward “that normal status quo,” Hafler said in an interview.
“Institutional investors still need to deploy capital over three to four years, so you’re seeing people who have been waiting to see what the world looks like go back to deploying capital,” Hafler said.
Sanofi Ventures operates a bit differently in that it doesn’t have the same investment cycles that are expected from a traditional VC. The firm reports to its pharma parent, and not a cadre of limited partners who want their initial checks turned into bigger payouts.
Sanofi Ventures backed 14 companies last year, Hafler said. The pace will likely slow down this year as corporate VC firms historically step up during a downturn to fill gaps left by traditional VCs. With the biotech industry on the upswing, CVCs tend not to have the same deal cadence.
While private biotech startups currently have a healthier outlook than in the past few years, not everybody is in the clear.
There’s still a “haves and have nots” dichotomy, SR One leader Simeon George said in an interview. Companies with experienced management teams, a pharma partnership under their belt, and a good bench of investors in place are feeling relatively secure. But those without a partnership and a product-market fit are continuing to run into hurdles.
SR One has made a suite of investments lately, including in AI-driven Charm Therapeutics, cardiovascular startup Immutrin, China-derived COPD biotech AirNexis and another China-associated company called Corxel, which is creating an oral GLP-1.
For companies with a “much clearer sense of what the path forward is,” investors are crowding around the deal table. George noted an “element of FOMO that’s creeping in a little bit.”
Joustra said Forbion’s large investment peers in the US and Europe are very active on new biotech deals right now as well, and that’s leading to competition among check writers looking to get in on the most attractive biotech startups.
“One of the reasons why we have to lead a lot of our deals [is] because otherwise it’s difficult to get allocation,” Joustra said. “If we are [the] lead investor, we are pretty much controlling the syndicate and the term sheets.”
Some biotechs are benefiting by getting “quite heavily oversubscribed” funding hauls, Joustra said, meaning the companies raised more than they initially sought.
Those oversubscriptions, and a continuing tide of $100 million-plus rounds, are enabling private biotechs to get to clinical data before an IPO.
“These aren’t 2021 deals where we’ve got some really cool science out of MIT, we’re going to fund this to an IPO, [and] they’re preclinical and someone else will take it from there,” Dybbs said.
Some more advanced clinical-stage companies are starting to line up for IPOs, though, as the waters have warmed up a bit.
SR One-backed Avalyn Pharma, in Phase 2 with inhaled versions of approved pulmonary fibrosis pills,
filed for its Nasdaq listing
on Wednesday night. Another SR One portfolio company, hair growth biotech
Veradermics
, went public earlier this winter.
“We have a couple others potentially that are thinking about this path over the next number of months,” George said.