Radek Horváth's career evolved from academic research to building the company GeneProof, which supplied cutting-edge diagnostic tests to 60 countries worldwide during the pandemic. Together with his wife, he now seeks projects with clear real-world applications as an investor in the 22 Hor Invest fund. The company is known for providing so-called “smart money,” meaning that in addition to financial investment, it supports promising talents with know-how, market expertise, and practical experience. In the inaugural edition of the Clara Young Innovator Award, he serves not only as the general partner of the competition, but also as a member of the jury evaluating the submitted projects and selecting the winner.
As a member of the jury, how much did you rely on your “business mindset” when evaluating the submitted projects? Was commercial potential one of the main factors in your decision-making?
I took this aspect into account when evaluating the projects. But no more than the impact of the project on progress leading to improved healthcare and dementia prevention. I considered the reality of putting it into practice to be very important.
From an investor’s perspective, which of the finalist or winning projects do you see as having the greatest potential, and what makes it stand out to you?
Of course, the winning project is interesting, although from a commercial perspective it would already face significant competition. However, I also consider the project by the author Sonu Kumar Yadav (Deep Neural Network and ChemFET Based Digital Sensors for Early Detection of Diseases through Human Breath) to be very promising. If it were well adapted for the diagnosis of neurodegenerative diseases and if it were refined into a usable method, it would still have a very demanding certification ahead of it. But on the other hand, the method has the potential for standardization and that is why, in my opinion, it is a promising project also from a commercial perspective.
What caught your attention the most about this year’s submissions? Was there anything that genuinely surprised you?
I was surprised by the large number of projects focused on wearable devices and AI. I was positively surprised by projects focused on the use of sensors or objective stress detection. I was negatively surprised by some unoriginal projects, especially in the area of using AI.
HOR 22 Invest is known for offering not just financial backing, but also so-called “smart money” — hands-on know-how and market experience. In your view, what is the most valuable kind of support for young innovators and start-ups in the early stages?
We prioritize projects that we consider beneficial for improving healthcare and that we also evaluate as feasible for commercial solutions. We understand the field of biomedicine and play the role of an active investor in the projects we invest in. We are very familiar with the processes of commercialization of an idea, business plan and related “calculations”, processes of product development, production, product life cycle, marketing and trade, as well as legislative and certification barriers. On the other hand, the vast majority of scientists starting start-ups are not familiar with these things at all. We always respect the personality of the founder and also require mutual “good chemistry” in the team.
What do early-stage start-ups most commonly underestimate?
Most projects do not have a calculated business plan or are completely unrealistic and are often "overvalued" from the beginning. Most founders perceive the idea as identical to a finished company and consider their idea to be a product. However, most of the work on the product itself is still ahead of them. They often do not even consider the most important thing - whether there is interest in their product on the market.
How do you at HOR 22 try to pass on the kind of experience and practical insight that cannot simply be learned from textbooks?
If a scientist wants to apply their results in business, it is essential to understand what commercialization means. And what methods of commercialization are appropriate for a given case. I mentioned the projects that are most interesting to us above. However, some other projects could also have commercial use. On the other hand, some of the projects are very similar to existing ones that we often encounter when evaluating applicants for investments in startups. And then it is too late for commercialization. Moreover, not every commercially interesting project is suitable for investment as a start-up and/or with venture capital. A start-up requires an extreme final evaluation of the investment. Such potential is possessed by projects with completely groundbreaking ideas and with enormous scaling potential. Such projects are quite exceptional even in a global context. The vast majority of them end up in the USA, where they are implemented and where they bring economic and social benefits. On the other hand, quality projects may have the potential “only” to build a company that will bring less dramatic breakthroughs, contribute to improving health, bring investors and founders double-digit growth and decent profits. But also job opportunities, cooperation between the academic and commercial spheres. And it will stay here in the Czech Republic.The difference is significant and the mathematics is uncompromising. And we can also provide orientation in all this to founders.
In your opinion, what needs to happen for us to retain young talent locally and prevent brain drain abroad — or, on the other hand, attract talented people from abroad to build their careers here?
Not drowning talents in the boredom of our education system. At all levels. Providing them with a chance to learn from inspiring personalities. Limiting subsidy support and especially their widespread and often negative impact, dramatically increasing competition. Transferring funds to top projects, institutions and top personalities. Limiting support for average and canceling support for below-average. Canceling subsidies for companies.
Talents need to go abroad, it is very beneficial for them. But supporting exceptional ones can attract them. They will stay or return when they know that support for their scientific work will depend more on their actual results and abilities and not on their ability to navigate the grant system and be able to write a project in a way that appeals to the evaluators, does not irritate them and fits into their ideas and into the appropriate boxes so that they do not stand out.
I am convinced that the current economic growth is also connected to the growth of self-confidence of our companies and society. And that the combination of growing companies and social confidence, along with a better-managed education system, will bring talent to us on its own. But it won't happen right away, and I don't think there are any shortcuts on this path.