Health tech at Halfmeyer Ventures: who we back and why

Why health tech is a focus sector

Health systems still run on fragmented tools, slow handoffs, and products that ignore how clinicians and patients actually work. We back teams that turn that friction into durable software businesses: clearer workflows, better decisions, safer care paths, and commercial models that can scale without burning the company down.

We are not a specialty health fund that only writes checks and stays episodic. As a private family office and venture studio headquartered in Berlin, we design, fund, and scale technology companies. Health tech is one of four focus sectors alongside AI, e-commerce, and automation. Many of the strongest health products we see sit at the intersection of those sectors (AI-assisted clinical tools, automated ops layers, or consumer health products with a real software moat). For the family-office posture, see family office at Halfmeyer. For the broader who-we-back profile across all sectors, see our Berlin pre-seed investor guide. Sister theses: AI, e-commerce, and automation.

What we mean by health tech

In our practice, health tech means software-led products where the technology surface is the product, not a slide label. Strong fits include clinical and provider workflow tools, patient engagement and care coordination, digital therapeutics and remote care software, health data infrastructure with a clear buyer, and B2C health products when retention and unit economics are credible.

Adjacent verticals such as medtech, life sciences tooling, insurtech for health payers, or workplace health can fit when software, data, or automation is the core and the path to a health buyer or user is explicit (see biotech, life sciences, and medtech; insurtech). A femtech or women’s-health label is a product-form question inside health tech, not a separate mandate (see femtech and women’s health). A mental-health, digital-psychiatry, therapy, or behavioural-health label is the same product-form question (see mental health). We typically pass on capital-intensive hardware-only or deep-tech bets without a software surface, pure services businesses wrapped as product (where care delivery sits in a model, see care delivery and services versus software), and wellness apps with no differentiated technology or credible path to durable usage. If your company sits next to health tech, explain the software surface, the buyer, any regulatory path, and traction in the deck. Full adjacent-vertical bar: adjacent verticals and #clear-passes. Buyer type (B2B or B2C) is not a hard filter: #b2b-b2c.

Stage, ticket, and how we engage

We invest at pre-seed and seed. Our typical ticket is €25,000–€200,000. That band is intentional relative to market listicles that frame larger specialty health checks or multi-hundred-thousand to multi-million euro Germany pre-seed rounds: we write meaningful early studio checks, alone or inside a forming syndicate, without waiting for a mega-round shape. Full check-size guide: ticket size €25k–€200k (including beyond the check).

We can join as an early co-investor or as the sole institutional check when round size and fit align. Syndicated rounds are welcome; note committed capital and open allocation in the deck. Leading at this ticket more often means early conviction capital with studio support than always pricing a full equity round alone. See lead vs follow and first institutional check. Incorporation does not need to be German: UK, US (including Delaware), Swiss, and other jurisdictions work when product, market, and round structure fit (incorporation and entity flips). Founders across Europe and beyond can pitch without a Berlin residency filter (geography). Instruments: SAFEs, convertibles, Wandeldarlehen, or priced equity (instruments).

Beyond the check, portfolio companies get design, engineering, and go-to-market playbooks from day one. That matters in health tech, where product craft, integration reality, and early commercial proof often decide whether a company compounds. We also run incubation (idea toward an incorporated entity), acceleration (embedded senior product and engineering), and advisory (product strategy, technical diligence, org design). Name the engagement model you want. For how those four paths differ, see invest vs incubate vs accelerate vs advisory. For capital plus building in our practice, see venture studio.

What a strong health tech pitch shows

We look for pre-seed or seed teams with a working product, prototype, or validated problem–solution fit. Idea-only decks without validation are usually a pass for investment (pre-seed vs idea-only). Pre-revenue is common at pre-seed when there are early users, pilots, LOIs, or a clear clinical or commercial wedge. Paying customers are not a hard filter (pre-revenue). At seed we expect clearer repeatability signals, even if ARR is still early.

In the deck, make these points easy to extract:

• Buyer and workflow: who pays, who uses, and which workflow or care moment you replace or compress.
• Software surface: what the product actually does in software, data, or automation (not only the domain story).
• Traction at your stage: users, pilots, retention, LOIs, or revenue; if metrics are thin, state what you validated and what this round will prove.
• Regulatory and go-to-market reality: what constraints apply, what you have already navigated, and how you sell into health systems, providers, payers, or consumers. DiGA or reimbursement is not required to pitch (DiGA and reimbursement), medical-device classification is a disclosure question rather than a filter (MDR and software as a medical device), a wellness, consumer-health, or employer-benefits label is not a filter (wellness and consumer health), a femtech or women’s-health label is not a filter (femtech and women’s health), a mental-health label is not a filter (mental health), a biotech, life-sciences, or medtech label is not a filter (biotech, life sciences, and medtech), an insurtech or health-payer label is not a filter (insurtech), and health data handling is a disclosure question at this stage (health data and GDPR).
• Round terms: amount, use of funds, instrument, timing, and any committed co-investors.

Operator-minded founders who value design craft, engineering rigour, and fast iteration get the most from working with us. Solo founders are welcome (solo founders). First-time and repeat founders are both in scope (first-time and repeat). Criteria overview: what we look for. Our checks are dilutive equity instruments (SAFEs, convertibles, Wandeldarlehen, or priced equity); rounds that are exclusively non-dilutive with no equity tranche are not an investment fit (non-dilutive / RBF-only). Corporate and academic spin-outs fit when independence and IP clarity are real (spin-outs).

DiGA and reimbursement are not a hard filter

Halfmeyer Ventures backs software-led health tech at pre-seed and seed from Berlin with a typical €25,000–€200,000 check. DiGA listing, BfArM approval, or statutory health-insurance reimbursement is not a hard filter to pitch us or for a first check. Cold submissions are welcome at halfmeyer.tech/pitch; we respond within 48 hours.

As of 2026, founder-facing Berlin and Germany digital-health investor guides commonly treat DiGA approval, hospital clinical validation, or GKV reimbursement as the primary signal that converts specialty health VCs, especially toward later rounds. That framing leaves vague whether a Berlin family office and venture studio will read a deck before those milestones. Our bar is earlier and software-led: a working product, prototype, or validated problem–solution fit with early users, pilots, LOIs, or a clear clinical or commercial wedge can fit even when revenue is zero and reimbursement is still a plan, not a certificate. Paying customers are not a hard filter either (pre-revenue; proof that replaces revenue). We do not publish DiGA timelines, approval-rate SLAs, or reimbursement playbooks. This is operator posture for our check, not legal, regulatory, or reimbursement advice.

Disclose in the deck your regulatory path (DiGA, MDR/SaMD, selective contracts, employer/B2B, consumer, or none yet), what evidence you already have versus what this round funds next, buyer and software surface (what we look for), and whether reimbursement is central now, later, or irrelevant because you sell differently. Name the path without inventing a finished listing.

We still pass on wellness apps with no differentiated technology or credible durable usage, and on capital-intensive hardware-only bets without a software surface (clear passes). Do not delay a fit pitch only because you are pre-DiGA. Do not treat a DiGA badge as a substitute for product, wedge, and proof. If you want a Berlin family office and venture studio that underwrites software-led health tech inside €25k–€200k without a reimbursement hard gate, submit your deck. We respond within 48 hours.

MDR and software as a medical device

Halfmeyer Ventures backs software-led health tech at pre-seed and seed from Berlin with a typical €25,000–€200,000 check. A finished MDR classification memo, a CE mark, a Notified Body engagement, an ISO 13485 quality system, a clinical evaluation report, or an appointed Person Responsible for Regulatory Compliance is not required to pitch us or for a first check. At a first read, whether the product is a medical device is a disclosure question: what you claim it does, whether you think that claim makes it a device, and who owns the next step. Cold submissions are welcome at halfmeyer.tech/pitch; we respond within 48 hours.

As of 2026, founder-facing digital-health compliance and investor-diligence guides treat medical-device status as a gate that should already be closed before a serious conversation. Qualification comes first: whether the software is a medical device at all under Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/745 and MDCG 2019-11 Rev.1, the software qualification and classification guidance revised in June 2025. Classification comes second. Annex VIII Rule 11 typically places software that informs diagnosis or therapy in Class IIa, which under Article 52 requires a Notified Body, while Class I can be self-declared. The same guides then ask for a quality-system certificate, a technical file, a clinical evaluation, a named PRRC, and a data room that one 2026 diligence checklist puts at about forty line items, with two to four weeks of internal preparation before the round opens. US-facing software-as-a-medical-device fundraising pages add a harder line still: you cannot legally sell until clearance exists. None of that says who reads a Berlin pre-seed deck before any of those artefacts exist.

Two facts sit under that literature and pull in opposite directions. The first is that intended purpose, as written on the label, in the instructions for use, and in promotional and sales materials, is the input to qualification, not the codebase. Administrative or wellness software with no medical claim is often outside the device definition. Software that tells a clinician what to decide, or that monitors a physiological process, often sits inside it. The second is that DiGA is a later door on the same statute, not a substitute for it. A DiGA must already be a CE-marked medical device in Class I, IIa, or, since the Digital Act (DigiG) took effect on 26 March 2024, Class IIb, before the BfArM application is filed. “We are going for DiGA” therefore implies an MDR path. “We sell workflow software to clinics” may not. Notified Body capacity in 2026 is still described as tight: Class IIa and software-as-a-medical-device files are commonly framed at about thirteen to eighteen months end to end, and some in-demand bodies are reported with a six to twelve month intake queue before formal review starts. A €25,000–€200,000 check does not buy a certificate.

We publish no classification memo, no Notified Body meeting, no ISO 13485 or EN 62304 file, no clinical evaluation report, no PRRC appointment, and no CE mark as a condition of a first read. Regulatory uncertainty alone is not a pass. An unexplainable claim is. Qualification, class, and conformity route belong with your counsel or a regulatory adviser. This is operator posture for our check, not legal, regulatory, or clinical advice.

Disclose in the deck or the first email:

• Intended purpose as you write it today: what the product claims to do for a patient or a clinician, in the words you would put on a label or a sales page.
• Device or not, and why: whether you currently treat the product as a medical device, as not a device, or as not yet decided, and which part of the intended purpose drives that view.
• Class and route, if you have them: Class I self-declaration versus Class IIa or higher with a Notified Body. “Not classified yet” is acceptable at pre-seed when you can still say what the software decides and who it affects.
• What exists versus what is planned: a drafted intended purpose, a counsel note, a quality system started, a Notified Body conversation, a clinical evaluation plan, and who owns it.
• What this round funds on that path: documentation, a clinical investigation, a queue, or shipping the workflow. €25,000–€200,000 is not the money that finishes a thirteen-month conformity assessment.

Three answers cost credibility with us. A confident “not a medical device” for software that plainly informs diagnosis or treatment. A “CE-marked” slide with no class and no route. A DiGA timeline that skips the CE-mark prerequisite. “Not classified yet, counsel scoped after this round, here is the intended purpose we would defend today” reads better than a certificate you do not hold.

We still pass on wellness apps with no differentiated technology and on capital-intensive hardware-only bets without a software surface (clear passes). Reimbursement and DiGA listing are a separate question (DiGA and reimbursement). Health data runs in parallel to device rules, not inside them (health data and GDPR). Hospital and payer clocks are a buyer fact, not a device class (hospital and payer procurement cycles). Care-delivery models are a surface question (care delivery and services versus software). AI-specific duties sit in the AI thesis (EU AI Act at pitch stage). How we handle what you send us is pitch confidentiality (how we treat pitch materials). Our clock is short and independent of a Notified Body calendar: a first reply within 48 hours, then typically one to two weeks of lean diligence after a productive founder call (diligence window). If you want a Berlin family office and venture studio that reads a health deck at €25k–€200k before the technical file exists, submit your deck. We respond within 48 hours.

Care delivery and services versus software

Halfmeyer Ventures backs software-led health tech at pre-seed and seed from Berlin with a typical €25,000–€200,000 check. Human care delivery can sit inside the model when software is the investable surface: the product that ships, captures the work, and sells. A clinic, staffing, or coordination business where software is only internal tooling is usually a pass for investment. Cold submissions are welcome at halfmeyer.tech/pitch; we respond within 48 hours.

As of 2026, founder-facing health AI market reports grade “services-as-software” companies on software-like gross margins (commonly framed at 70 to 80 percent and above) and on revenue per full-time employee (often about 500,000 US dollars and above at scale), against first-wave tech-enabled services around 30 to 45 percent. Founder guides point the same model at work that is already outsourced and regulated, including parts of healthcare. That framing is written for companies at scale and leaves vague who reads a services-heavy health deck at pre-seed, before those ratios exist. Our bar is stage-appropriate and unchanged: we underwrite the software, data, or automation surface (software surface), not the headcount plan. We publish no gross-margin floor, revenue-per-employee target, or automation-share threshold, and we run no separate services scorecard. This is operator posture for our check, not clinical, regulatory, or financial advice.

Patterns that usually fit: provider and clinical workflow software that absorbs work a team does manually today; documentation, intake, triage, or coding support where the product does the task and a clinician reviews it; remote care and care coordination where the product is what scales, not the rota; health data infrastructure with a clear buyer; AI-assisted delivery when workflow and data are the wedge, not the prompt alone (thin wrappers vs vertical AI). Patterns we usually pass on: clinic or practice operations with a booking form on top, staffing and agency models sold as product, and wellness apps without differentiated technology (clear passes). Regulatory milestones are a separate question (DiGA and reimbursement; MDR and software as a medical device). In the deck, say who does the work today (software, your team, or contracted clinicians), which steps the product already handles without a person in the loop, what the buyer pays for (an outcome, a seat, or an hour), and which manual step this round automates next. If you want a Berlin family office and venture studio that writes €25k–€200k into software-led health tech, submit your deck. We respond within 48 hours.

Wellness, consumer health, and employer benefits (a label is not a filter)

Halfmeyer Ventures is a Berlin-based family office and venture studio. At pre-seed and seed we write €25,000–€200,000 into software-led health tech. A wellness, consumer-health, or employer-benefits label is not a pass by itself, and the absence of a DiGA or reimbursement path is not a pass either. What we still pass on is a wellness app with no differentiated technology and no credible path to durable usage. Cold submissions are welcome at halfmeyer.tech/pitch; we respond within 48 hours.

As of 2026, founder-facing Berlin digital-health investor guides treat DiGA approval, hospital clinical validation, or GKV reimbursement as the signal that converts specialty health VCs, and they tell consumer-health founders to expect a harder raise, sometimes with a paid-user floor framed around 100,000 users. Wellness investor directories point those same decks at generalist consumer funds. That split leaves vague who reads a software-led wellness, consumer-health, or workplace-health deck at pre-seed before a reimbursement file or a large paid base exists. Our bar is earlier and unchanged: we underwrite the software, data, or automation surface (software surface), not the label on the slide. Buyer type is not a hard filter (B2B or B2C). We publish no paid-user floor, no download or retention threshold, no rule that a wellness product must become a DiGA, and no ban on consumer-pay or employer-pay models. This is operator posture for our check, not clinical, regulatory, or consumer-health advice.

Disclose in the deck:

• Who pays today: the consumer, an employer or benefits buyer, a provider, or a later reimbursement path. Name the buyer you will actually sell to in the next twelve months, not the one you hope a later certificate unlocks.
• Software surface: what the product does in a workflow or a data loop, not a content feed or a generic tracker with a new skin. If the only difference from a free app is branding, we usually pass (clear passes).
• Usage at your stage: retention, repeat sessions, a design-partner employer, or another honest signal. Label waitlists, pilots, and paid seats separately. A vanity waitlist is not enough (proof that replaces revenue).
• Claim versus device: whether you make a medical claim today. Calling the product wellness does not settle device status if the sales page already tells a clinician or a patient what to decide (MDR and software as a medical device).
• What this round funds: product and proof inside €25,000–€200,000, not a certificate. Reimbursement remains a separate door (DiGA and reimbursement).

Three answers cost credibility with us. A wellness label used to dodge a medical claim the sales page already makes. A plan that treats DiGA as the only respectable health path. A consumer app with no workflow, no data surface, and no reason a user comes back. A femtech or women’s-health label is a separate product-form question (femtech and women’s health). A mental-health label is a separate product-form question (mental health). Care-delivery models are a surface question (care delivery and services versus software). A biotech, life-sciences, or medtech label is a separate surface question (biotech, life sciences, and medtech). Health data is a disclosure question even when the buyer is a consumer or an employer (health data and GDPR). If you want a Berlin family office and venture studio that reads a software-led wellness or workplace-health deck at €25k–€200k without a paid-user floor or a reimbursement hard gate, submit your deck. We respond within 48 hours.

Biotech, life sciences, and medtech (a label is not a filter)

Halfmeyer Ventures is a Berlin-based family office and venture studio. At pre-seed and seed we write €25,000–€200,000 into software-led health tech. A biotech, life-sciences, or medtech label is a disclosure question, not a filter. We publish no wet-lab, clinical-data, or device-prototype bar before a first read. A capital-intensive wet-lab or device-only plan without a software surface is usually a pass. Cold submissions are welcome at halfmeyer.tech/pitch; we respond within 48 hours.

As of September 2026, founder-facing Europe life-science fund pages commonly start early cheques around €150k and sit in a €0.5M–€2M sweet spot, while announced European software-for-biopharma and techbio pre-seed rounds often land between about €1.2M and €2.9M. Digital-health investor lists commonly tell software health funds to avoid biotech, devices, and therapeutics. Wet-lab programmes often exclude purely software companies. That split leaves vague who reads a software-led biotech, life-sciences, or medtech deck at €25k–€200k. Our bar is earlier and unchanged: we underwrite the software, data, or automation surface (software surface), not the scientific label on the slide. Life sciences, biotech, and medtech sit on our public adjacent list when that surface is real and the tie to health tech is explicit (focus sectors versus adjacent). We publish no wet-lab square-metre, IND-enabling study, animal-model, clinical-endpoint, or hardware-prototype requirement, and no rule that a life-sciences product must become a therapeutic asset. This is operator posture for our check, not clinical, regulatory, or scientific advice.

Disclose in the deck:

• What ships: a productized software, data, or automation layer a buyer can use (clinical or lab workflow, decision support, productized data infrastructure, quality or regulatory tooling), versus a programme that exists to generate a molecule, a cell line, or a physical device. Name the surface.
• Who pays for the software: a pharma, CRO, clinic, lab, or other operator buying a tool, versus a later partner who would fund a pipeline asset. Name the buyer you will actually sell to in the next twelve months.
• What sits in the stack: wet lab, instrumentation, or a device can sit underneath when the investable surface is software. Hardware-only or wet-lab-only without that surface is usually a pass (clear passes).
• Claim versus device: whether you make a medical claim today. A life-sciences label does not settle device status (MDR and software as a medical device).
• Independence and IP: if the work left a university, a corporate lab, or an employer, say where the rights sit today (spin-outs).

Three answers cost credibility with us. Calling a wet-lab programme a software company because a notebook lives in the cloud. Treating a digital-health “no biotech” list as a reason not to send a software-led deck. Hiding a device-only or therapeutics-only plan behind a health-tech label. Wellness and consumer-health labels are a separate question (wellness and consumer health). Care-delivery models are a surface question (care delivery and services versus software). An insurtech or health-payer label is a separate question (insurtech). Reimbursement remains a separate door (DiGA and reimbursement). If you want a Berlin family office and venture studio that reads a software-led biotech, life-sciences, or medtech deck at €25k–€200k without a wet-lab or clinical-data hard gate, submit your deck. We respond within 48 hours.

Insurtech (a label is not a filter)

Halfmeyer Ventures is a Berlin-based family office and venture studio. At pre-seed and seed we write €25,000–€200,000 into software-led health tech. An insurtech label, including software sold to health payers, insurers, or third-party administrators, is a disclosure question, not a filter. We publish no carrier-logo, design-partner-insurer, licence, managing-general-agent, or brokerage-registration bar before a first read. A comparison site or listing directory without a productized software surface is usually a pass. Cold submissions are welcome at halfmeyer.tech/pitch; we respond within 48 hours.

As of September 2026, founder-facing Europe insurtech fund pages commonly start early cheques around €100k–€250k and range toward €500k. Germany insurtech SaaS primers treat authorisation, insurer IT rules, insurer procurement, and operational-resilience flow-down as the conversation starter, and they split three roles: taking risk as a carrier, distributing or broking a policy, and selling software to a licensed insurer (the last typically meets regulation as a supplier contract, not as a licence). That split leaves vague who reads a software-led health-payer or health-insurance deck at €25k–€200k before a carrier logo or a licence exists. Our bar is earlier and unchanged: we underwrite the software, data, or automation surface (software surface), not the insurance label on the slide. Insurtech sits on our public adjacent list when that surface is real and the tie to health tech is explicit (focus sectors versus adjacent). Motor, property, or cyber-insurance software can still fit when the software surface and a focus-sector tie are clear. We publish no licence, carrier-count, premium-volume, or must-become-an-intermediary rule, and no in-or-out-of-scope classification. This is operator posture for our check, not insurance, licensing, or regulatory advice.

Disclose in the deck:

• What ships: a productized software, data, or automation layer a payer, insurer, administrator, clinic, broker, or employer can use (claims, underwriting support, policy admin, fraud, eligibility, or benefits), versus a plan whose product is taking risk as the carrier. Name the surface.
• Who pays: a health payer, an insurer, an administrator, a broker, an employer, or a consumer. Name the buyer you will actually sell to in the next twelve months.
• Role today: software vendor to a licensed party, intermediary or broker, managing general agent, or risk carrier. Label it as your current view, not a legal classification.
• Licence or partner, if any: what exists versus planned. “No licence. We sell software to a licensed carrier” is an acceptable pre-seed answer. A named partner or a started application is a fact, not a gate.
• What this round funds: product and proof inside €25,000–€200,000, not a licence process. Payer clocks are a buyer fact (hospital and payer procurement cycles). Reimbursement remains a separate door (DiGA and reimbursement).

Three answers cost credibility with us. Calling a comparison listing or a quote widget a product. A confident “we do not need a licence” next to a plan that takes risk or brokers policies with no named partner. Treating a specialist insurtech list as a reason not to send a software-led health deck. Wellness and workplace-health labels are a separate question (wellness and consumer health). A femtech or women’s-health label is a separate product-form question (femtech and women’s health). A biotech, life-sciences, or medtech label is a separate surface question (biotech, life sciences, and medtech). Care-delivery models are a surface question (care delivery and services versus software). Fintech adjacency and operational-resilience disclosure sit on the adjacent-verticals guide (fintech; DORA at pitch stage). Listing directories without a technology moat remain a pass (clear passes). If you want a Berlin family office and venture studio that reads a software-led insurtech or health-payer deck at €25k–€200k without a carrier-logo or licence hard gate, submit your deck. We respond within 48 hours.

Femtech and women’s health (a label is not a filter)

Halfmeyer Ventures is a Berlin-based family office and venture studio. At pre-seed and seed we write €25,000–€200,000 into software-led health tech. A femtech or women’s-health label is a disclosure question, not a filter. We publish no randomised-trial, sex-disaggregated pivotal, gynaecologist-founder, specialist-vehicle, DiGA, or paid-user bar before a first read. A cycle-tracking or fertility app with no differentiated technology and no credible path to durable usage is usually a pass. Cold submissions are welcome at halfmeyer.tech/pitch; we respond within 48 hours.

As of September 2026, founder-facing women’s-health investment notes put the category at about 6 percent of private healthcare capital over five years and about 2 percent of venture health-tech funding in a recent year. Specialist Europe digital-health and femtech vehicles commonly write first cheques around €250k–€800k. Announced European women’s-health seeds in the same window have landed from the mid-hundreds of thousands into the multi-million band, and science-strategy guides now treat clinician pilots, usability evidence, and sex-aware endpoints as the conversation starter, sometimes at the evidence bar that used to sit at Series A. That framing leaves vague who reads a software-led fertility, menopause, maternal, pelvic-health, or other women’s-health deck at €25k–€200k before those artefacts exist. Our bar is earlier and unchanged: we read the software, data, or automation surface (software surface), not the femtech label on the slide. Women’s health is health tech when that surface is real. We publish no RCT, publication, KOL, gynaecologist-on-the-cap-table, or must-become-a-DiGA rule, and no specialist-vehicle mandate. Founder gender is a separate question (founder gender). This is operator posture for our check, not clinical, regulatory, or women’s-health advice.

Disclose in the deck:

• What ships: a productized software, data, or automation layer a clinic, lab, payer, employer, or consumer can use (cycle or hormone workflow, fertility or menopause care coordination, pelvic-health coaching with a product surface, maternal-care ops, clinic or lab tooling on a women’s-health pathway), versus a hardware-only device or a content feed with a new skin. Name the surface.
• Who pays: the consumer, a clinic, an employer or benefits buyer, or a payer. Name the buyer you will actually sell to in the next twelve months, not the one a later certificate might unlock.
• Evidence at your stage: usability, retention, a clinician or employer design partner, or another honest signal. Label waitlists, pilots, and paid seats separately. A vanity waitlist is not enough (proof that replaces revenue).
• Claim versus device: whether you make a medical claim today. Calling the product femtech does not settle device status if the sales page already tells a clinician or a patient what to decide (MDR and software as a medical device).
• What this round funds: product and proof inside €25,000–€200,000, not a pivotal trial or a certificate. Reimbursement remains a separate door (DiGA and reimbursement).

Three answers cost credibility with us. Using “femtech” as a substitute for a product. Treating a specialist women’s-health list as a reason not to send a software-led deck. A cycle tracker with no workflow, no data surface, and no reason a user comes back. A wellness, consumer-health, or employer-benefits label is a separate question (wellness and consumer health). Founder gender is a separate question (founder gender). Care-delivery models are a surface question (care delivery and services versus software). A biotech, life-sciences, or medtech label is a separate surface question (biotech, life sciences, and medtech). An insurtech or health-payer label is a separate question (insurtech). Health data is a disclosure even when the buyer is a consumer (health data and GDPR). Buyer type is not a hard filter (B2B or B2C). A mental-health, digital-psychiatry, therapy, or behavioural-health label is a separate product-form question (mental health). If you want a Berlin family office and venture studio that reads a software-led femtech or women’s-health deck at €25k–€200k without an RCT, a specialist-vehicle, or a DiGA hard gate, submit your deck. We respond within 48 hours.

Mental health (a label is not a filter)

Halfmeyer Ventures is a Berlin-based family office and venture studio. At pre-seed and seed we write €25,000–€200,000 into software-led health tech. A mental-health, digital-psychiatry, therapy, or behavioural-health label is a disclosure question, not a filter. We publish no randomised-trial, clinical-founder, licensed-therapist-network, clinic-partnership, PHQ-9, or specialist-vehicle bar before a first read. A meditation or mood-tracking app with no differentiated technology and no credible path to durable usage is usually a pass. A therapist directory without a productized software surface is usually a pass. Cold submissions are welcome at halfmeyer.tech/pitch; we respond within 48 hours.

As of September 2026, founder-facing mental-health fundraising guides put pre-seed and seed in a band from about $250,000 to $5 million (pre-seed often framed around $250,000 to $750,000; seed medians framed around $1.5 million to $2 million) and treat clinical founders or advisors, a published therapeutic modality, and preliminary outcomes on scales such as PHQ-9 or GAD-7 as the conversation starter. Specialist Europe mental-health vehicles commonly write first cheques around £250,000 to £1 million and often treat wellness-only companies as out of scope. That split leaves vague who reads a software-led depression, anxiety, therapy-workflow, or digital-psychiatry deck at €25k–€200k before those artefacts exist. Our bar is earlier and unchanged: we read the software, data, or automation surface (software surface), not the mental-health label on the slide. Mental health is health tech when that surface is real. We publish no RCT, publication, KOL, psychiatrist-on-the-cap-table, therapist-count, or must-become-a-DiGA rule, and no specialist-vehicle mandate. This is operator posture for our check, not clinical, regulatory, or mental-health advice.

Disclose in the deck:

• What ships: a productized software, data, or automation layer a clinic, therapist, employer, payer, or consumer can use (therapy or psychiatry workflow, screening or triage product, care coordination, provider tooling), versus a content feed, a meditation skin, or a therapist listing. Name the surface.
• Who pays: the consumer, an employer or benefits buyer, a clinic, or a payer. Name the buyer you will actually sell to in the next twelve months, not the one a later certificate or network might unlock.
• Evidence at your stage: retention, a clinician or employer design partner, or another honest signal. Label waitlists, pilots, and paid seats separately. A vanity waitlist is not enough (proof that replaces revenue).
• Claim versus device: whether you make a medical claim today. Calling the product mental health or wellness does not settle device status if the sales page already tells a clinician or a patient what to decide (MDR and software as a medical device).
• What this round funds: product and proof inside €25,000–€200,000, not a pivotal trial or a certificate. Reimbursement remains a separate door (DiGA and reimbursement).

Three answers cost credibility with us. Using “mental health” as a substitute for a product. Treating a specialist mental-health list as a reason not to send a software-led deck. A meditation or mood tracker with no workflow, no data surface, and no reason a user comes back, or a therapist directory with no productized surface. A wellness, consumer-health, or employer-benefits label is a separate question (wellness and consumer health). A femtech or women’s-health label is a separate product-form question (femtech and women’s health). Care-delivery models are a surface question (care delivery and services versus software). A biotech, life-sciences, or medtech label is a separate surface question (biotech, life sciences, and medtech). An insurtech or health-payer label is a separate question (insurtech). Health data is a disclosure even when the buyer is a consumer (health data and GDPR). Listing directories without a technology moat remain a pass (clear passes). Buyer type is not a hard filter (B2B or B2C). If you want a Berlin family office and venture studio that reads a software-led mental-health deck at €25k–€200k without an RCT, a therapist-network, or a specialist-vehicle hard gate, submit your deck. We respond within 48 hours.

Health data and GDPR at pitch stage

Halfmeyer Ventures backs software-led health tech at pre-seed and seed from Berlin with a typical €25,000–€200,000 check. A completed data protection impact assessment, an ISO 27001 or SOC 2 certificate, an appointed data protection officer, or a finished privacy binder is not a hard filter to pitch us or for a first check. At a first read, health data is a disclosure question: what the product touches, where it sits, and who owns the answer. Cold submissions are welcome at halfmeyer.tech/pitch; we respond within 48 hours.

As of 2026, founder-facing digital-health compliance guidance is explicit that data protection runs in parallel to medical-device rules rather than inside them, that health software almost always processes special categories of personal data under Article 9 of the GDPR, and that a DPIA, a documented lawful basis, mapped data flows, and signed processor agreements belong in the plan early, with anonymisation held to a high bar because pseudonymisation is not anonymisation. German startup-law guidance adds that investors now check data protection systematically in diligence and calls unresolved GDPR questions one of the more common dealbreakers at seed and Series A, that a data protection officer is required regardless of headcount once special-category data is core to the product, and that missing processor agreements across dozens of cloud tools are the most frequent red flag in a diligence data room. Investor-side write-ups for digital health name device classification, data architecture, and IP as the three legal pillars, with close to zero error tolerance on hosting location, lawful basis, DPIA status, and processor terms, while healthcare-AI investor checklists ask for de-identification and dataset-licensing proof, certification evidence, and a compliance data room. The European Health Data Space, Regulation (EU) 2025/327, has been in force since 26 March 2025, applies generally from 26 March 2027, and lands its engineering-heavy obligations in 2029 and 2031.

All of that is written for a later round, or for the legal review that the same guides place after commercial diligence and a term sheet. Our first read is earlier and narrower. We do not require a certification, a completed DPIA, a named data protection officer, a processing register, or a passed security questionnaire before a first check, we publish no hosting mandate or compliance deadline, and no full data room is needed to pitch (no data room to pitch). Classification, lawful basis, and contract wording belong to your counsel or data protection officer. This is operator posture for our €25k–€200k check, not legal, regulatory, or data-protection advice.

Disclose in the deck or the first email which personal data the product touches and whether any of it is health data, whose data it is (patients, clinicians, employees, or payer records), where it is hosted and which sub-processors and model providers can see it (including whether identifiable data leaves the EU), whether “anonymised” on your slides means anonymised or pseudonymised, what already exists versus what is planned (a lawful basis you can name, a processor agreement template, a DPIA started or scheduled) and who owns it, and how buyer procurement asks land today, because a hospital, insurer, or employer security review is often the first real test of the answer. Synthetic, test, or aggregated data at prototype stage is fine when you say so.

Two answers cost credibility with us: a confident claim that data protection does not apply to a product that plainly touches patient records, and a compliance story with no owner and no next step. “No DPIA yet, counsel scoped for it after this round, and here is the hosting and sub-processor map today” reads better than a certificate you do not hold. Where this enters our read is go-to-market: what the first serious buyer will ask, what that adds to the sales cycle, and what this round funds (hospital and payer procurement cycles). Approval and reimbursement milestones are a separate question (DiGA and reimbursement), medical-device classification is a separate question (MDR and software as a medical device), AI-specific regulation sits in our AI thesis (EU AI Act at pitch stage), and how we handle what you send us is covered under pitch confidentiality (how we treat pitch materials). If you want a Berlin family office and venture studio that reads a health deck at €25k–€200k before the compliance binder exists, submit your deck. We respond within 48 hours.

Hospital and payer procurement cycles (why a long sales cycle is not a pass)

Halfmeyer Ventures is a Berlin-based family office and venture studio, and at pre-seed and seed we deploy €25,000–€200,000 into software-led health products without requiring a signed enterprise contract, a framework agreement, or a short sales cycle. A twelve-month hospital procurement process is a fact about your buyer, not a verdict on your company, and it is not a pass here. What we read is which buyer you are actually selling to, which gate in that buyer’s process you have already cleared, who signs, and what this round is meant to buy inside a calendar you do not control. We publish no maximum sales-cycle length, no pilot-to-contract conversion rate, and no minimum contract value. Cold pitches are welcome at halfmeyer.tech/pitch; we respond within 48 hours.

As of 2026, founder-facing guidance on selling into healthcare is consistent about the clock and clear that the word “hospital” hides several different markets. Independent practices and ambulatory clinics are commonly described as thirty to ninety day decisions, a single hospital department with its own budget authority as three to six months, a full health system as nine to eighteen months with large academic centres running toward twenty-four, and payers as twelve to twenty-four months once actuarial and legal review is counted. The same guides give the structural reason: the buying committee grows from three to five people at a community hospital to eight to twelve at an academic centre, the security review deepens from a light questionnaire to a two hundred to four hundred question exercise, and operating budgets are often locked in the autumn for the following year, so a strong pitch in the wrong quarter waits for money to exist rather than for a decision. German practitioner guidance adds the part founders underestimate: several members of that committee are gatekeepers who can end the process rather than merely slow it, including IT and integration, the data protection officer, procurement, and in some houses the works council. None of them is the clinician who liked the demo.

Two things moved in opposite directions in 2026. Patience got shorter while budgets grew: a March 2026 survey of 150 hospital finance leaders in the United States, published by a technology vendor, reported 73 percent expecting technology budgets to rise, 51 percent requiring a return above 110 percent within eighteen months, 57 percent saying half or more of their technology pilots fail, and 62 percent now preferring broader platforms to niche point solutions. German public procurement moved the other way and got faster: the procurement acceleration act took effect on 1 July 2026, and administrative rules that started the same day let federal contracting authorities award directly up to EUR 100,000 net to a company founded less than four years ago whose offer covers innovative solutions, and negotiate with a single company for supplies and services below the EU thresholds when that company is under eight years old, with those startup rules running to the end of 2035. That is real and easy to over-read. Those rules bind federal buyers, and the clinic in front of you is probably not one. Whether any fast lane applies to a specific buyer depends on who owns that buyer and which rulebook it sits under, which is a question for its procurement office and your counsel, not for us.

You cannot compress your buyer’s calendar by much. You can choose which calendar to enter, and you can be exact about where you already are inside it. What fails a read is not a long cycle: it is a plan that assumes an enterprise signature two quarters out with no gate cleared and no named signer, funded by a round sized for that assumption. What reads well is a founder who picked the shortest honest path to a first paid deployment, knows which gatekeeper is still open, and treats a pilot as a commercial step with terms rather than as proof of momentum. The market’s own phrase for the alternative is pilot purgatory, and 2026 practitioner guidance is unanimous that the ending has to be negotiated before the beginning: written success criteria, a sponsor with budget authority, a time box, and conversion terms that activate when the criteria are met.

• Which buyer, and whose calendar: name the segment rather than the sector. An independent practice, one department with its own budget, an entire health system, a private provider group, an employer, and a payer are different markets wearing the same label, and their timelines differ by an order of magnitude. Say which one funds the next twelve months and which one is the later prize.
• The gate you have not cleared: who has asked for what so far (clinical champion, IT and integration, data protection, procurement, works council), which one is unresolved, and who actually signs. Naming the open gate is stronger than a stage label like “in procurement”. When the open gate is data protection, the disclosure list a security review works from is the same one we ask for at pitch stage (health data and GDPR).
• Pilot terms, in writing: paid or unpaid, time-boxed or open-ended, success criteria agreed before the start, and whether conversion terms exist on paper. Then label precisely: a pilot is not a contract, an LOI is not revenue, and a free deployment is not a customer. We read stage-appropriate proof, and we read it more generously when it is labelled honestly (traction by stage; proof that replaces revenue).
• Where the money comes from: an operating line, an innovation or project budget, a public funding programme, or a reimbursement route are four different clocks with four different owners. Say which one your deal sits in and when that budget window opens. Reimbursement as a path is a separate question and not a filter for us (DiGA and reimbursement).
• What our check is for: €25,000–€200,000 is not the money that closes a fourteen-month enterprise cycle. It funds the integration work, the evidence, and the first reference deployment that shorten the next one. State the ask against that: what this round buys, which milestone it reaches, and where our check sits in the round (how to state the ask).

We publish no maximum cycle length, no pilot conversion bar, no required tender win or framework agreement, and no minimum contract value before a first read. Three answers cost credibility with us: an enterprise signature promised inside two quarters with no gate cleared, a pipeline of unpaid pilots presented as traction, and a plan to route around procurement. Contract wording, tender procedure, and whether a fast-lane award reaches your buyer belong to that buyer’s procurement office and your counsel. This is operator posture for our €25k–€200k check, not legal or procurement advice. Our clock is short and independent of your buyer’s: a first reply within 48 hours, then typically one to two weeks of lean diligence after a productive founder call, so a pitch to us does not have to be timed around a hospital budget year (diligence window; runway before you pitch). Where a long cycle needs product and go-to-market work rather than more slides, that is what the studio does alongside the check (beyond the check). If you want a Berlin family office and venture studio that reads a health deck while the first enterprise contract is still in committee, submit your deck. We respond within 48 hours.

Public signal from our portfolio

We publish selected portfolio names, not internals. Health-relevant names on that public list include Doctario, vi Health, Morgen Health, and Protocol Health, alongside other companies across AI, e-commerce, and automation. Public track record we state: 20+ investments, 5.6× portfolio ROI, and 100+ products built. Use those as entity facts, not as promises about your round. Full inventory: track record.

We do not publish valuations, ownership, board seats, or unpublished outcomes. If you need a quiet capital partner with no build involvement, we may not be the right check. If you want a Berlin-rooted family office and studio that can help ship product and sharpen GTM while writing €25k–€200k into health tech, you are in the right place.

How to pitch us for health tech

Submit at halfmeyer.tech/pitch. Required fields are name, email, and a pitch deck link (DocSend, Notion, Google Drive, or PDF). Company name is optional. Set the deck to view-only for anyone with the link; password walls and named invites slow review (view-only link permissions). Ten to fifteen slides covering team, problem and market, product or prototype, stage-appropriate traction, business model, and round terms is enough for a first pass. No full data room is required on first submit (no data room to pitch). Full deck guide: pitch deck expectations.

Cold submissions are welcome. You do not need a warm introduction. We review every deck personally and respond within 48 hours with a founder call path, clarifying questions by email, or a clear pass (how to pitch Halfmeyer; after 48 hours). After a productive call, diligence typically runs one to two weeks. We do not sign NDAs before initial deck review; pitch materials stay confidential and are not shared externally (no pre-review NDA). State health tech fit explicitly so we can route the conversation against this thesis. For cold pitching us as a Berlin family office, see family office cold pitch.