Capped Out: 10 Common Problems for HealthTech Founders with Venture Capital backed Cap Tables
NA
HealthTech founders, while navigating the complex healthcare landscape, often find themselves facing unique challenges related to their venture capital-backed cap tables. A cap table, or capitalization table, details the equity ownership of a company. When VCs enter the picture, it introduces a new dynamic that can lead to significant problems if not managed carefully.
Here are 10 common problems for HealthTech founders with VC-backed cap tables:
1) Excessive Founder Dilution, Especially Early On
Problem: Founders, particularly in early rounds (pre-seed, seed), sometimes give away too much equity for modest investments, often due to inexperience or a lack of alternative offers. This leaves them with too little ownership by Series A or B, diminishing their motivation and making it less attractive for future VCs who want founders to remain significantly incentivised.
HealthTech Nuance: HealthTech often has longer development and regulatory cycles, requiring more funding rounds. If founders dilute too much early, their ownership can dwindle to unsustainable levels over these extended periods.
2) Unplanned Employee Stock Option Pools (ESOPs) and Their Dilution
Problem: Not setting aside a sufficient ESOP early enough means that when the time comes to grant options to key hires, this pool often dilutes only the founders and existing shareholders. VCs typically insist that the ESOP is funded before their investment, effectively shifting the dilution burden to pre-existing equity holders.
HealthTech Nuance: HealthTech requires highly specialized talent (clinical, regulatory, deep tech). Attracting and retaining these individuals often necessitates competitive equity packages, making a well-planned and sufficiently sized ESOP even more critical.
3) Complicated or "Messy" Cap Tables
Problem: Disorganized, error-filled, or overly complex cap tables with too many small shareholders (e.g., numerous angel investors from crowdfunding or early rounds without SPVs) deter future investors. VCs want a clear, manageable ownership structure.
HealthTech Nuance: Given the potentially longer timelines and multiple funding rounds, the cap table can become convoluted quickly. Managing numerous small investors, especially if they have disparate interests or are spread across different jurisdictions, adds complexity.
4) Misaligned Investor Expectations and Short-Term Focus
Problem: VCs typically seek significant returns within a 5-7 year timeframe. This can create pressure on founders to prioritize rapid growth and a quick exit (IPO or acquisition) over a longer-term vision, sustainable profitability, or deep clinical validation, which is often crucial for HealthTech.
HealthTech Nuance: The inherent slowness of healthcare adoption, regulatory hurdles, and the need for rigorous clinical evidence can clash with VC demands for fast returns. This misalignment can lead to strategic disagreements and undue pressure on founders to make decisions that might not be best for the long-term health of the company or its mission.
5) Loss of Control and Undue Investor Influence
Problem: As VCs invest, they acquire board seats and often demand consent rights over key decisions (e.g., future fundraising, executive hires, M&A). Founders can find themselves with limited operational autonomy.
HealthTech Nuance: In a sector requiring deep domain expertise and a nuanced understanding of patient care and clinical workflows, VCs who lack this specific background can push for strategies that are financially driven but clinically or operationally unsound. This can lead to tension and potentially suboptimal outcomes for the product or patient.
6) Punitive Anti-Dilution Provisions for Early Investors
Problem: While standard, some anti-dilution clauses (especially "full ratchet") can severely penalize founders and later investors in a down-round (a funding round at a lower valuation than the previous one). This can disproportionately increase early investors' ownership at the expense of others.
HealthTech Nuance: Down-rounds are more common in a tightening economic climate, and HealthTech, with its longer time-to-revenue, can be more susceptible. Such clauses can make it extremely difficult to raise subsequent rounds or maintain founder equity.
7) Valuation Traps and Unrealistic Expectations
Problem: Raising at an inflated valuation in a hot market can lead to a "down-round" in subsequent, more conservative funding environments, triggering anti-dilution clauses and significantly diluting founders and earlier non-protected investors.
HealthTech Nuance: The "hype cycles" around certain technologies (e.g., AI, digital therapeutics) can lead to overinflated valuations. When the reality of long sales cycles, regulatory burdens, and slow adoption sets in, these valuations can become unsustainable, leading to painful adjustments.
8) Vesting Schedule Issues
Problem: Lack of proper vesting schedules (e.g., 4-year vesting with a 1-year cliff) for founders and key employees means that if someone leaves early, they still walk away with unearned equity, unnecessarily fragmenting the cap table.
HealthTech Nuance: Given the interdisciplinary teams and the critical role each early team member plays, clear vesting schedules are essential to ensure long-term commitment and prevent valuable equity from being tied up by inactive parties.
9) Difficulty Attracting Future Investors Due to a "Broken" Cap Table
Problem: A cap table where founders are too diluted, too many small investors exist, or there are problematic investor rights can scare off future institutional investors who seek a clear, well-structured ownership.
HealthTech Nuance: The "deep tech" nature of many HealthTech solutions means they often require significant, sustained investment. If the cap table isn't appealing, it can impede critical follow-on funding, risking the company's ability to reach commercialization.
10) Lack of Liquidity Planning and Secondary Sales
Problem: Founders often focus solely on the next funding round or exit, neglecting the importance of potential secondary sales of their shares. Without a clear strategy or clauses in investor agreements, it can be difficult for founders to achieve any personal liquidity before a full company exit, even after years of work.
HealthTech Nuance: Given the longer timelines to IPO or large M&A exits, HealthTech founders might need options for partial liquidity earlier in the journey to manage personal finances or motivate continued commitment. Without proper planning in the cap table, this can be challenging to facilitate.
Managing a VC-backed cap table in HealthTech requires a sophisticated understanding of equity dynamics, legal terms, and investor relations. Founders need to be proactive, seek expert advice early, and carefully balance fundraising needs with long-term control and value creation.
Nelson Advisors > Healthcare Technology M&A
Nelson Advisors specialise in mergers, acquisitions and partnerships for Digital Health, HealthTech, Health IT, Consumer HealthTech, Healthcare Cybersecurity, Healthcare AI companies based in the UK, Europe and North America. www.nelsonadvisors.co.uk
Founders for Founders > We pride ourselves on our DNA as ‘HealthTech entrepreneurs advising HealthTech entrepreneurs.’ Nelson Advisors partner with entrepreneurs, boards and investors to maximise shareholder value and investment returns. www.nelsonadvisors.co.uk
Nelson Advisors LLP
Hale House, 76-78 Portland Place, Marylebone, London, W1B 1NT