Jessica Hou

Jessica - fellow ex-growth equity investor here (was at Treis in London). Noticed your focus on commercial-stage health tech at Montreux. Different geographies, but probably similar pattern recognition on what separates real SaaS from dressed-up services.

Quick observation from the build side: PitchBook will show you last year's revenue for a health tech company. But it won't show you their pricing model, customer switching costs, or implementation timeline. One tells you what happened. The other tells you what's happening. Most databases are great for finding companies, terrible for evaluating them.

Jessica, Saw you're leading healthcare growth at Montreux - quite the journey from traditional VC into growth stage health tech. Though I was in European growth equity, not the Bay Area scene. I'm sure you get emails like this all the time, but hopefully this one is a little different. At least because it is not ai. In a previous life I was deploying €30m growth tickets at Treis in London, but recently been building custom deal sourcing systems for growth investors. Working with folks like Axiom Equity UK (£60m+ tickets) and Noble Rock Software -> they've been mapping vertical saas markets & scoring companies on the metrics that actually matter. Figured I'd reach out because Montreux's focus on commercial-stage health companies ($5-50M revenue) is exactly where our system shines - finding those differentiated health tech players before they're widely shopped. It's not fancy, but it's powerful because we build it custom to you. Handles everything from sourcing companies matching your thesis to getting warm intros with founders & early investors, then pushes it all to your crm. Worth 15 mins to see if this could help with your pipeline? Best, Russ searchloop.ai www.linkedin.com/in/russellt23

Jessica, Been thinking about how growth funds actually spend their time. Most PE associates spend 80% of their week on work that can be 95% automated. The workflow looks like: Export companies from PitchBook → Open websites → Copy info → Score against thesis → Hunt for contacts → Draft outreach → Track in Excel. That's a $200K-$300K employee doing $25/hour data entry. For a fund writing $5-50M checks into commercial-stage companies, this matters. Your associates should be evaluating deals and building relationships with founders, not hunting for email addresses. The analysis stays the same. Just 25x faster. Worth a conversation? Russ

Jessica, PitchBook tracks funding rounds, employee count, basic financials for health tech companies. All backward-looking. What actually matters when you're writing growth checks: pricing models, customer benefit claims, switching costs, implementation timelines, compliance depth. For commercial-stage healthcare companies in your revenue range, those operational signals matter more than last quarter's ARR. They tell you if a company has real moats or just good marketing. We built automation that reads websites like a senior associate - extracting those signals at scale. Not fancy, but it's the difference between knowing what happened and understanding what's happening. Curious if this resonates with how you evaluate opportunities? Russ

Jessica, Here's what I keep seeing: growth funds lose deals because their associates are buried in manual sourcing work. By the time someone manually scores 100 health tech companies, finds the interesting ones, hunts down contacts, and drafts outreach - the best opportunities are already in conversations with other funds. It's not a people problem. It's a structural problem. Your team should spend their time on the 5 companies worth pursuing, not the 95 that aren't. Same analysis, just front-loaded and automated. Probably worth a 15-minute conversation to show you what this looks like in practice. Russ

Jessica, Timing might not be right. But if you ever want to see how to automate 80% of your associate workload while improving deal quality, I'm here. Russ