Strategics in Digital Health Index


Strategics in Digital Health Index

For healthcare startups seeking private investment, there are more sources than ever. But there is also more peril. Traditional routes, like venture capital and angel investors, are joined by corporate venture capital, a broader array of grant opportunities, venture philanthropy, crowdfunding and beyond.

Corporate venture capital has become particularly popular. But there isn’t as much critical information about corporate investors and their strategies. Which is the most trustworthy? Which is the best to partner with? Which one would you never do a deal with again? That’s why Lake Whillans partnered with MedCity News – the leading online news source for the business of innovation in healthcare – for independent research about corporates and their practices. MedCity News reached out to its 400,000 monthly readers, and more than 160 healthcare innovators familiar with corporate firms shared their insights.

Something fascinating happened when we dug into the “trust” responses in our survey. It seems the more someone worked with these organizations, the less they trusted them. For all respondents on the issue of trust, the mean rating (on our four-point scale) for corporate venture funds is 1.97.

However, for those who have firsthand experience, the average score is 1.82. On the other hand, for those who know these corporates by reputation alone, the average score is 2.06. It would appear that deeper familiarity does not correlate with positive perception.

What strategics provide:

“Exceptionally hard working, committed—they are the opposite of passive investors. They’re aggressive, smart, totally committed to creating value.”

“Very smart, aggressive team. They’re worth their weight in gold…very solid, smart people.”

“Exemplary insight.”

Future of Strategics

Generally speaking, innovators view individual corporate venture capital groups positively. But there are patterns emerging of organizations developing best-in-class approaches to dealing with startups while others are getting bad reputations.

Below is a list of corporate venture capital investment funds. Please select the response that best characterizes your perception of these funds as a potential investment partner. Please limit your responses to funds with which you are familiar.

Company Trustworthy Source
McKesson Ventures 2.91
BlueCross BlueShield Venture Partners 2.84
Cambia 2.78
GE Ventures 2.71
Google Ventures 2.64
Kaiser Permanente Ventures 2.58
Ascension Health Ventures 2.47
Comcast Ventures 2.19
Mayo Clinic Ventures 2.19
Intel Capital 2.19
GE Healthymagination Fund 2.17
Cleveland Clinic Innovations 2.12
Highmark 2.08
IBM Venture Capital Group 2.00
Qualcomm Life Fund 1.94
Humana Ventures 1.91
Aetna Ventures 1.89
athenahealth (More Disruption Please) 1.76
Samsung Ventures 1.72
Siemens Venture Capital 1.65
3M Ventures 1.65
Cerner Capital 1.65
Verizon Ventures 1.58
Clarian Health Ventures 1.48
Partners Innovation Fund 1.45
Hitachi Corporate Venture Capital Fund 1.39
Actua 1.38
Panasonic Venture Group 1.32
AMD Ventures 1.29
Vodafone xone 1.26

Note: Rating scale from 1-4, with 4 as the highest.

Who should you partner with? We asked respondents with first-hand knowledge of these funds who they should partner with, and here’s our results:

Company Name Satisfaction ScoreSatisfied 0-4 Scale Would you work with again in the future? % Yes
Comcast Ventures 3.91 100%
McKesson Ventures 3.87 79%
Cambia 3.63 80%
GE Ventures 3.20 100%
BlueCross BlueShield Venture Partners 2.80 71%

Note: Rating scale from 1-4, with 4 as the highest.

Contact Us

The best way for companies and their counsel to determine if litigation finance is an attractive option is to discuss it with us.