Enzyme

Overview

Enzyme built an electronic quality-management system for life-science companies from 2017 until Greenlight Guru acquired it in July 2025. ^[7] The product joined document control, training, design controls, risk, audits, complaints, nonconformance, CAPA, and regulatory consulting in one system. Its first wedge was unusually concrete: connect the engineering tools a startup already used and turn the work into inspection-ready evidence. ^{[1] [6]}

Enzyme proved that small medical-device teams would buy a friendlier QMS, attracted a public-company majority shareholder, and survived into a strategic acquisition. ^[3] The constraint appeared after validation: regulated software creates an expanding obligation to maintain infrastructure, support, validation, and domain expertise. In that market, the installed base and operating capacity of a broader platform eventually mattered more than an independent product's elegance.

Image 1 / 2

Founding Story

Jared Seehafer and Jacob Graham had spent years doing the work Enzyme would later encode. Seehafer's background included product and regulatory roles at St. Jude Neuromodulation and Medtronic Diabetes. He held an MS in Medical Device Engineering from USC and a Regulatory Affairs Certification. ^[5] Graham spent more than a decade in medical-device engineering, design assurance, and quality systems at Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and a startup. ^[3]

Their complaints came from opposite sides of the same process. Seehafer had co-founded a consulting firm that helped companies prepare submissions. Graham had watched quality work fragment across disconnected enterprise systems. The company's public handbook described delays of weeks or months when people lacked access to one of those systems or used it too infrequently to work efficiently. ^[4]

In 2016, Seehafer approached his friend with the idea for one cloud application. Graham recalled: "I would routinely log into 4–6 different technology platforms for training, performance, compliance, and more, and I knew there had to be a more streamlined way." He said their backgrounds fit because his workflow knowledge complemented Seehafer's medical-device and software experience. ^[3]

Seehafer put the founding insight more bluntly in a 2018 TechCrunch interview: "You find you spend almost as much time documenting the work as you do doing the work." He followed it with the question that became the product thesis: "This is a multitrillion-dollar industry and I thought 'why isn't there software to automate the process?'" ^[2]

Enzyme launched in 2017 and joined YC's Summer batch. Refactor Capital said the founders' direct knowledge of the regulatory maze was central to its investment thesis. ^[10]

Timeline

• 2016: Seehafer brought Graham the idea for a unified, cloud-hosted quality system. ^[3]
• Summer 2017: Enzyme launched out of beta, integrated with Jira, Trello, and GitHub, and joined YC S17. ^{[1] [2]}
• January 2018: The company reported $1.85 million raised and about 10 customers. ^[2]
• 2022: Roivant Sciences became the majority shareholder; Enzyme remained independently operated. ^[3]
• July 2025: Seehafer left as CEO and Greenlight Guru acquired Enzyme; the announcement did not disclose a price. ^[7]

What They Built

Enzyme started with a useful distinction: engineering teams already produced much of the evidence regulators needed, but the evidence lived in tools built for shipping software rather than defending a quality system. Its early product connected Jira, Trello, and GitHub so a startup did not need to copy the same work into a separate compliance system. ^[2]

The product expanded into a modular eQMS. Its core covered controlled documents, training, electronic signatures, and integrations. Premarket work added design controls, risk management, and supplier records. Postmarket work covered audits, complaints, nonconformance, and corrective and preventive actions. Enzyme also listed an electronic trial master file module. Customers chose Core, Premarket, or Postmarket packages and paid according to both plan and user type; Lite users could view materials and sign off on training, while Full users operated the system. ^[6]