Creating new medicines is a costly and uncertain process. For small biotechnology companies just starting out, it can take many years before they make any profit, if they ever do. Often, their success depends on how much money they can raise. This is where venture capitalists come in, investing millions of dollars in exchange for a share in these new companies. Young drugmakers rely on these private investors to keep them going until they reach important milestones, like starting clinical trials or going public. Over the past 20 years, more and more money has been invested in biotechnology, leading to the creation of hundreds of new companies. Tracking this investment can show us important trends, like which types of drugs or diseases are gaining or losing investor interest. To help understand this bigger picture, BioPharma Dive has created a database. We’ve focused on 26 venture capital firms that are very active in creating new drug developers. In the database below, we’ve gathered funding rounds involving these firms, and we’ll update it regularly. If you notice anything missing or have suggestions, please let us know. Jump to database Jump to methodology RA Capital, Arch are among the most active biotech investors Number of funding rounds involving each venture firm by year Editor’s note: The following visualizations compare full-year data from 2022-2024, as well as year-to-date figures for 2025, which will be updated as more venture rounds are added into the database. Editor’s note: Search by biotech or investor name in the text box at top left. Filter by specific year, series or stage of investment, as well as sort by round size using the drop-down menus. Clicking any underlined term in the main database at right will filter by that term. Click the down arrow at far right to expand the information displayed for each round. If the data do not display below, please try clearing your browser’s cache and reloading the page. If you still have issues, email BioPharma Dive editors for further troubleshooting. Loading… Methodology and limitations: For this database, BioPharma Dive gathered information on funding rounds for private biotechnology companies developing human medicines. We focused on rounds that involved at least one of 26 highly active venture capital firms involved in creating new companies. This group was chosen by comparing data from several sources that identified the most active biotech venture capital firms in recent years. We then removed firms that primarily invest in later stages. This left us with a list of 26 venture capital firms. While this group is narrow, their activity gives us a meaningful snapshot of investment trends in the industry. Over time, we plan to expand this database by adding more firms that meet our criteria. This database is also limited by time. We focused on rounds completed and announced on or after Jan. 1, 2022. This captures a period of downturn and recovery in the biotech sector. We also plan to add historical data from before Jan. 1, 2022 in later updates. For each round, we collected information on the company’s type of drug development, the area of medicine they’re focusing on, the company’s stage of development, and the lead investors, if not one of the core 26 firms. We generally used a company’s main program to determine these details. The only exceptions are companies that inherited a late-stage drug but prioritized an earlier one for funding. We categorized companies’ development stage by the latest stage they had begun at the time of financing. The types of drugs listed are broadly defined and may not precisely describe a company’s experimental drug(s). They were chosen to better show overall trends in investment activity. “Drug discovery,” as a category, includes companies exploring new areas of science broadly, rather than focusing on a specific type of medicine. Similarly, therapeutic areas cover a large number of diseases and, in some cases, overlap with others. Common diseases that didn’t fit in the categories listed were classified under “other.” When companies identified more than one therapeutic area with equal priority, we classified them as working on “multiple” therapeutic areas. Those that identified multiple areas, but prioritized one over others were classified under that priority area. The naming of venture capital rounds is fairly consistent, but some firms did not identify whether their round was seed or Series A, B, C, etc. In those cases, we classified the round as “undisclosed.” Extensions, expansions, or other add-on raises to an earlier Series round are noted, but not classified separately. Nearly all rounds were announced in U.S. dollars. A handful were priced in euros or other foreign currencies, which we converted to dollars using exchange rate data from the relevant country’s central bank on the day the round was announced. We organized rounds by the date they were announced, which in some cases is much later than when the round was actually raised if a company was initially operating in stealth. We did this for consistency, and to better match when a round’s existence was public knowledge. BioPharma Dive will update this database as rounds that meet our screening criteria are announced, but there may be some delay in when new rounds are added.