How HealthTech Works in the UK: What Early-Stage Companies Need to Know

A few weeks of being in London’s HealthTech ecosystem - across events, meetups, 1:1s with founders and clinicians helped me piece together how this system really works. Not in theory, but in practice. Especially for early-stage companies that are building something new and trying to find the right way in.

This post is a reflection of that. Less about hot takes, more about how things actually move.

‍

The UK isn’t just a HealthTech market. It’s a system.

‍

Most founders think of the UK as a place to launch. But it’s really a place to align. The NHS is not a customer in the traditional sense. It’s a layered, rule-bound institution. To operate here, you need to understand what you’re entering - how care pathways are structured, how decisions are made, how procurement works, and what “evidence” means in this context.

It’s not about chasing users. It’s about understanding how your product fits into the existing clinical and commissioning frameworks.

Until you can clearly answer that, traction here will stay out of reach.

‍

How early-stage HealthTech companies actually get started here

‍

Most early-stage companies follow a similar path, even if no one explicitly says it. It looks something like this:

1. They start with public or institutional capital.
   Grants from Innovate UK, SBRI Healthcare, or academic research funds are common. This is used for R&D, not GTM. Think prototyping, lab testing, regulatory planning.
   
2. They build something usable and safe.
   This includes risk assessments, internal clinical reviews, and sometimes soft pilots. But not yet at scale.
   
3. Then they hit a roadblock.
   Testing in the UK is expensive and slow. Private care isn’t cost-effective. NHS trials take time and relationships. And VC funding usually doesn’t land until there’s evidence.
   
4. So they go abroad.
   Founders often partner with hospitals or digital clinics in India, Sri Lanka, or Vietnam. These partnerships allow faster ethics approval, larger user cohorts, and lower cost per test. It’s not just for speed—it’s often the only viable way to generate data.
   
5. They return to the UK with stronger validation.
   Now the conversation with the NHS changes. There’s proof, there’s clinical data, and there’s a clearer case for adoption. This is also when investors start to lean in.

This approach isn’t a shortcut. It’s part of the system design. Most successful HealthTech companies I’ve seen here have followed a version of this path.

‍

What actually matters if you want to succeed here

‍

There are a few key things the system looks for - whether explicitly or quietly.

Clinical evidence: Not just engagement metrics. Actual outcomes. Are patients safer, healthier, better supported? Can clinicians back the results?

Regulatory clarity: Is your product classified correctly? Do you need UKCA or MHRA approvals? Have you planned for DTAC or DCB 0129/0160? These are table stakes.

Integration with NHS systems: Can your product work with EMIS or SystmOne? Do you use NHS-standard formats like SNOMED CT and FHIR? This matters more than you think, especially for anything that sits in or near clinical workflows.

Procurement readiness: Do you understand how G-Cloud, DPS, or HealthTech Connect work? Can your pricing and outcomes map to public sector budgets?

Co-design with patients and clinicians: Is this built in collaboration with the people using it? Or just assumptions? Real co-design makes a difference - clinically, commercially, and reputationally.

Validation geography: Have you tested with a broad enough population to show generalisability? If you validated abroad, have you translated the findings clearly back to the UK context?

‍

What’s different about the UK compared to the US or India

‍

Having worked across multiple markets, it’s obvious now that the UK needs its own strategy. You can’t reuse your playbook from elsewhere.

In the UK, trust and systems fit come first. The buyer is the NHS. Procurement is structured. Clinical risk is taken seriously. In the US, speed and sales matter more. You can often raise and grow before you fully validate. You sell to employers, hospital groups, insurers. In India, it’s about distribution, affordability, and access. Speed to market is critical. Clinical regulation is still evolving. Trust is built through service, not compliance.

Same product, very different conditions.

The UK is where you prove that your product belongs in healthcare. The US is where you grow it commercially. India is where you make it resilient and inclusive.

‍

If you're building for the UK

‍

Here’s what I’d focus on:

• Design the product with clinicians from day one
• Budget for compliance and documentation early
• Use international markets if you need to validate faster
• Think about procurement as part of your GTM
• Prioritise evidence over excitement
• Build trust before you pitch
  
  

The UK system will not accelerate you just because you're new and interesting. But if you build well, and show that you understand how health actually works here, there’s room for scale and longevity.

The founders I’ve met who are doing well in this space aren’t just good at product. They’re exceptionally skilled at navigating systems. They know the difference between building something helpful and building something the system can actually invest in and adopt.

‍