Life Science Capital Markets Investment Volume On Track For Biggest Year Yet

Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston are emerging life science markets.

Investment volume in life science capital markets is poised to log its best year ever, with first-half 2021 numbers hitting north of $9 billion and aided by Blackstone’s recent $3.45 billion acquisition of Brookfield’s Cambridge portfolio. 

New research from Newmark reveals that the sector has benefited from investors looking to diversify and adjust portfolio risk in the wake of COVID-19. Nationally, pricing remains above average, and June numbers show that pricing surpassed $500 per square foot. Newmark predicts that groups like Alexandria, Blackstone/BioMed Realty, Boston Properties and IQHQ will continue to drive capital markets activity for the rest of this year.

Boston, San Francisco and San Diego remain the ‘epicenter’ of life science activity nationally, accounting for a combined 16.6 million square feet of lab space under construction and under renovation with another 54.5 million square feet proposed.  The supply of existing product in Boston can’t keep pace with the demand for nearly 6 million square feet of lab requirements, particularly in Cambridge where vacancy approached 1% this year.  San Francisco is the largest market on a square foot basis, logging more than 30 million square feet in close proximity to Silicon Valley VCs, and San Diego has recently seen its life science community grow beyond traditional submarkets near the University of California San Diego and into the city’s downtown core.

Newmark also cites Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston as emerging life science markets. And cities like Dallas, Miami, Pittsburgh, Salt Lake City, and Atlanta stand out as non-traditional life science markets which rely on education and research institutions to develop life science ecosystems, according to the firm.

“Compared to the prominent clusters, emerging life science markets can offer comparatively attractive  opportunities for investors to transact at more favorable  pricing (combined with lower land and development  costs), with potentially less competition in the bidding  process from well-capitalized life science groups,” the report notes.