13 October 202611 min read

What UK Early-Stage Investors Say They Want in 2026: We Read 41 Fund Websites

We read the websites of 41 UK pre-seed and seed investors and recorded what each one says it backs. Health is named more often than AI, only 29% state a cheque size, and only 20% say they lead.

Before founders pitch a fund, most of them read its website. The website is where a fund says what it invests in, at what stage, and how much. So we read them too.

In October 2026 we went through the websites of 41 UK investors that back pre-seed and seed companies. For each one we recorded the stages it names, whether it says it leads rounds, its cheque size, the sectors it names as a focus, and whether it mentions SEIS or EIS. This post sets out what we found and what it means if you are building an investor list.

All figures come from each fund's own website, checked on 11 and 12 October 2026. Quotes are reproduced word for word. Funds update their sites often, so check before you pitch.

TL;DR

Health and life sciences are named as a focus by 32% of the funds, slightly more than AI at 27%.
About a quarter (24%) describe themselves as generalist or sector agnostic.
Half (51%) say they invest at pre-seed, and 68% name seed.
Most websites leave out the basics. Only 29% state a cheque size, only 20% say they lead rounds, and only 56% show any dated activity from 2025 or 2026.
SEIS and EIS are mentioned by 22% of funds, mostly EIS managers and regional investors rather than the best-known London VCs.

How We Did It

We started with 60 well-known UK early-stage investors: London generalists, sector specialists, regional funds, university-linked investors and SEIS/EIS managers. We kept the 41 whose websites say they invest at pre-seed, seed or early stage. The other 19 were left out because their site states no stage at all (not even "early stage"), focuses on later rounds, is based outside the UK, could not be read, or no longer belongs to the fund.

We counted a sector only when the fund's own wording names it as a focus. A fund that has backed an AI company but does not say it focuses on AI was not counted as an AI investor. That keeps the numbers conservative. This is a group of well-known funds rather than a random sample of every UK investor, so treat the percentages as a picture of this group, not of the whole market.

Finding 1: Health Is Named More Often Than AI

Across the 41 funds, this is how often each sector is named as a focus:

Health and life sciences: 13 funds (32%)
AI: 11 funds (27%)
Climate and sustainability: 10 funds (24%)
Fintech: 9 funds (22%)
Deep tech and frontier tech: 8 funds (20%)
B2B and SaaS: 6 funds (15%)
Consumer: 4 funds (10%)

Health shows up in several forms: life sciences at Oxford Science Enterprises and Scotland's Archangels, "healthy ageing" at Ada Ventures and Northstar Ventures, and healthtech at AlbionVC and Parkwalk.

The funds that do name AI tend to be specific about it. Firstminute says it backs founders "to define technology across AI and deep tech". MMC describes itself as "Funding early-stage AI and data companies across Europe". Connect Ventures backs founders "building at the intersection of AI, hardware, and automation". Superseed focuses on AI in the physical world, and Episode 1 calls itself "an AI/infra fund".

AI being named by only about a quarter of funds does not mean the rest avoid it. Many of the generalist funds back AI companies without saying so on their sites. For founders, the useful point is this: if you are building in health, climate or fintech, there are more specialist investors than the AI headlines suggest, and a specialist will usually understand your market faster.

Finding 2: A Quarter Call Themselves Generalist

Ten funds (24%) describe themselves as generalist or sector agnostic. Seedcamp says "We are sector agnostic in our approach". Hoxton Ventures describes itself as "deliberately anti-thematic". LocalGlobe, Playfair, Concept Ventures, Moonfire, Ascension, SFC Capital, Jenson Funding Partners and Blackfinch Ventures also describe a broad focus.

Generalist rarely means anything goes. Playfair, for example, calls itself a generalist fund but lists sectors it does not invest in, including adtech and martech, crypto, ecommerce, fashion, gaming, and medical devices. Check for an exclusion list before you assume a generalist fund will look at your company.

Finding 3: Pre-Seed Is Well Covered, but Stage Language Is Loose

Half of the funds (21, or 51%) say they invest at pre-seed, and 28 (68%) name seed. A few make pre-seed their whole identity. Playfair is "Investing exclusively at pre-seed in the UK & Europe", Concept Ventures calls itself "Europe's largest pre-seed fund", and Connect Ventures describes itself as pre-seed specialists.

Another 10 funds (24%) name no specific stage at all, using phrases like "early stage" or "we back founders early". Those funds may still invest at pre-seed, but you will need to check their recent deals to find out.

Finding 4: Most Sites Leave Out What Founders Need

This was the clearest pattern in the data. The three facts a founder most needs to qualify an investor are often missing.

Cheque size: stated by 29%

Only 12 funds give a cheque or round size. Those that do give a useful sense of the market:

Playfair: an average ticket of £700k to £1m, ranging from £100k for angel rounds to £1.5m for the largest pre-seed rounds
Ada Ventures: £250k to £1m in a first round
Episode 1: £250k to £2m
Blackfinch Ventures: £200k to £2m
Firstminute Capital: £1m to £3m
Triple Point Ventures: up to £5m when leading
In US dollars: Seedcamp $350k to $1.25m first cheques, Concept Ventures up to $1.5m, Cocoa $500k, Emerge $500k to $2.5m, and Backed, whose site gives an "average ticket size $500K - $5M". Connect Ventures gives a round size rather than a cheque: it leads or co-leads rounds of $500k to $5m.

Leading rounds: stated by 20%

Only eight funds say outright that they lead: Seedcamp, Episode 1, Playfair, Connect Ventures, Ada Ventures, Notion Capital, Triple Point Ventures and Backed. Ada says it leads more than 70% of its investments. This matters because a pre-seed round usually needs a lead to set terms before others commit. If a fund does not say it leads, ask early.

Recent activity: visible for 56%

Just 23 of the 41 sites show a dated investment, announcement or programme from 2025 or 2026. The others may well still be investing actively, but you cannot tell from their site. A fund near the end of its investment period may only be making follow-on investments, so recent new deals are one of the most useful things to check.

Finding 5: SEIS and EIS Sit Mostly With EIS Managers and Regional Funds

Nine funds (22%) mention SEIS or EIS: Haatch, SFC Capital, Love Ventures, Northstar Ventures, PXN, Deepbridge Capital, Jenson Funding Partners, Parkwalk and Blackfinch Ventures. Most are EIS fund managers or regional investors. Most of the best-known London VCs in our group do not mention SEIS or EIS on their sites at all. If your round depends on SEIS or EIS, these funds and angel networks are where to start.

Finding 6: There Is Real Early-Stage Money Outside London

Just over half of the funds (23 of 41, or 56%) say they are based in London, and 11 do not give a location. The remaining 7 are based elsewhere in the UK, and several have a clear regional focus: Northstar Ventures in the North of England, PXN across the North of England, Northern Ireland and Scotland, and Archangels in Scotland. Oxford Science Enterprises, based in Oxford, backs companies built on Oxford science, and the Development Bank of Wales invests in Welsh companies. Location is not the only route: London-based Parkwalk invests in spinouts from universities across the UK. Blackfinch Ventures, based in Cheltenham, says it invests UK-wide, "not just London".

Investor Lists Go Out of Date Quickly

Checking 60 websites also showed how fast the market changes. In our starting list alone:

Hambro Perks now redirects to Salica Investments, its new name.
Par Equity and Praetura Ventures have merged to form PXN.
Mustard Seed MAZE now gives Lisbon as its office location.
One investor's web address now leads to a page offering the domain for sale.

An investor list built from a spreadsheet you downloaded a year ago is likely to contain funds that have renamed, merged, moved or stopped making new investments.

What This Means for Founders

Treat the website as a starting point. Most sites will not tell you cheque size, whether the fund leads, or whether it is still making new investments. Check recent announcements and portfolio additions too.
Look beyond AI-first funds. If you are in health, climate or fintech, there are specialist investors who name your sector directly.
Read the exclusions. Generalist funds often list sectors they will not touch.
Find your lead first. Only a minority of funds say they lead. Identify those early and approach followers once you have one.
Keep your list current. Recheck every fund on your list before you contact it.

Questions to Ask a Fund Before You Pitch

Are you making new investments from your current fund, or mainly follow-ons?

What is your typical first cheque at our stage, and do you lead?

What have you invested in recently that is closest to us?

Can you invest under SEIS or EIS, if that matters for our round?

Founder Checklist

For each fund on your list, record stage, cheque size, lead or follow, sector focus and exclusions.
Note where each fact came from, and mark anything you could not confirm.
Check for a dated deal or announcement from this year or last year.
Separate funds that lead from those that only follow.
Add sector specialists and regional funds, not just the well-known London names.

FAQ

Which UK funds say they invest at pre-seed?

In our group, 21 funds name pre-seed on their websites, including Seedcamp, Playfair, Concept Ventures, Connect Ventures, Episode 1, Firstminute Capital, Ada Ventures, Crane Venture Partners, Superseed, Moonfire, 7percent Ventures, Triple Point Ventures, Emerge, Bethnal Green Ventures, Octopus Ventures and Oxford Science Enterprises.

Do UK funds that do not name AI still invest in AI startups?

Many do. Generalist funds often back AI companies without listing AI as a focus. Check a fund's recent investments rather than relying on its stated themes alone.

How can I tell if a fund is still making new investments?

Look for new portfolio companies or announced deals in the past year, and check when its current fund was raised. If you cannot find either, ask directly in your first message.

The 41 Funds We Reviewed

7percent Ventures, Ada Ventures, AlbionVC, Amadeus Capital Partners, Archangels, Ascension, Backed VC, Bethnal Green Ventures, Blackfinch Ventures, Cocoa, Concept Ventures, Connect Ventures, Crane Venture Partners, Deepbridge Capital, Development Bank of Wales, Emerge, Episode 1, Firstminute Capital, Haatch, Hoxton Ventures, Jenson Funding Partners, Kindred Capital, LocalGlobe, Love Ventures, MMC Ventures, Moonfire, Northstar Ventures, Notion Capital, Octopus Ventures, Oxford Science Enterprises, Parkwalk, Pi Labs, Playfair Capital, PXN (Par Equity and Praetura Ventures), Salica Investments (formerly Hambro Perks), Seedcamp, SFC Capital, Stride.VC, Superseed, Triple Point Ventures and Twin Path Ventures.

If you run one of these funds and something has changed, get in touch and we will update the post.

Where to Go From Here

Closing Thought

Fund websites tell you what an investor wants to be known for. They rarely tell you whether it is writing new cheques this quarter, how big those cheques are, or whether it will lead. Founders who check those three things before reaching out spend their time on investors who can actually say yes.

Research Investors Without Reading 60 Websites

Platvix does this research for you, and keeps it up to date:

Tracks UK and European investors' theses, news and recent activity
Researches which firms are likely to back a company with your stage, sector and profile
Analyses your deck against what those investors look for

Start your investor research on Platvix →