Who is making money in digital health now?

Is digital health finally becoming profitable?

Digital health is making real money now, especially in healthcare software, financial infrastructure and specialized treatment. But some of the industry's biggest names are still losing millions, even after reaching hundreds of millions in quarterly revenue.

Recent financial results show just how different the outcomes have become. HealthEquity earned $65.6 million in quarterly net income, Hinge Health made $43.7 million, and Doximity recorded $24.3 million. Meanwhile, Teladoc lost $38.9 million and Hims & Hers reported an $86.3 million loss despite growing rapidly.

The profitable companies have surprisingly little in common. HealthEquity manages healthcare savings accounts, Doximity connects pharmaceutical companies with doctors, and Hinge Health provides digital physical therapy. Their customers, costs and ways of making money are completely different.

That makes digital health a difficult industry to judge as a whole. Several companies have already proved they can turn healthcare technology into a profitable business. Others are still struggling with costs that rise almost as quickly as revenue.

Why did so many digital health startups lose money?

Many digital health startups lost money because patient adoption grew faster than their ability to deliver care profitably, particularly during the pandemic.

Teladoc's approximately $18.5 billion acquisition of Livongo in 2020 captured the optimism of that period. Investors expected virtual consultations, chronic disease management and remote healthcare to become enormous businesses. Two years later, Teladoc reported a $13.7 billion net loss, largely because of goodwill impairments related to earlier acquisitions.

The problem went beyond Teladoc. Virtual care providers had to pay clinicians, acquire patients, maintain technology and convince employers or insurers to renew contracts. Growing the customer base did not automatically make those costs disappear.

Today, Teladoc still generates more than $600 million in quarterly revenue, but sales are declining and GAAP losses continue. Meanwhile, companies focused on narrower services, including Hinge Health and Omada Health, have reached positive quarterly earnings.

Some early digital health businesses expanded before proving their economics. The companies doing better today generally have more focused products or revenue streams that cost relatively little to maintain as they grow.

If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest digital health market report.

Which digital health companies are profitable right now?

HealthEquity, Hinge Health, Doximity, GoodRx, Omada Health and Phreesia currently report positive quarterly GAAP net income, although their profits vary enormously.

We compared their latest reported revenue and net income to separate companies earning actual accounting profits from those reporting positive adjusted EBITDA. That distinction changes the picture considerably.

HealthEquity made $65.6 million on $350.7 million in revenue. Hinge Health earned $43.7 million on $212.8 million. GoodRx, by comparison, earned $8.5 million on $200.4 million.

Revenue size tells us surprisingly little about profitability. Hims & Hers generated more than three times Hinge Health's quarterly revenue but lost money, while Phreesia managed a small profit with substantially less revenue.

These are selected public companies rather than a complete ranking of digital health startups. Private businesses rarely publish comparable net income figures, making it difficult to know how many have already reached profitability.

Company	Quarterly revenue	GAAP net income	Net margin
HealthEquity	$350.7M	$65.6M	18.7%
Hinge Health	$212.8M	$43.7M	20.5%
Doximity	$156.6M	$24.3M	15.5%
GoodRx	$200.4M	$8.5M	4.3%
Omada Health	$88.0M	$5.0M	5.7%
Phreesia	$129.5M	$1.9M	1.5%
Tempus AI	$382.5M	$5.6M	1.5%
Teladoc Health	$606.9M	-$38.9M	-6.4%
Hims & Hers	$753.2M	-$86.3M	-11.5%

Is HealthEquity one of the most profitable digital health companies?

HealthEquity is currently one of digital health's most reliable profit generators, thanks largely to its healthcare savings account business.

The company administers health savings accounts, or HSAs, and other employee benefits products. It earns fees for managing accounts, revenue from payments and income linked to money held in those accounts. Serving another account holder generally does not require the same additional clinical spending as treating another patient.

For the fiscal year ended January 2026, HealthEquity generated $1.31 billion in revenue and $215.2 million in net income. Profit increased 123% from $96.7 million the previous year, even though revenue grew only 9%.

Its annual net margin consequently increased from approximately 8.1% to 16.4%.

The latest quarterly results continued that pattern. Revenue grew 8% to $350.7 million, net income reached $65.6 million, and adjusted EBITDA margin climbed to 48%.

HealthEquity also reported $37.9 billion in HSA assets, up 14%. Custodial revenue alone contributed $175.9 million, approximately half its quarterly revenue.

That's a major advantage, although it also makes HealthEquity sensitive to interest rates and the returns available on custodial balances. Its impressive profits come partly from financial services economics that conventional telehealth companies cannot easily replicate.

Has Hinge Health proved that digital physical therapy can make money?

Hinge Health has become one of the strongest profitable digital treatment companies, combining rapid growth with margins that many traditional healthcare providers would struggle to match.

The company provides digital musculoskeletal care, including physical therapy and programs for people experiencing joint, back and other forms of physical pain. Employers and health plans pay for access to these services.

In the second quarter of 2026, revenue increased 53% to $212.8 million. Hinge Health also generated $43.7 million in net income and approximately $100 million in free cash flow, more than three times the amount reported a year earlier.

Its gross margin reached approximately 86%. For a business involved in healthcare delivery, that is an unusually strong figure.

The margin reflects Hinge Health's ability to combine technology with clinical services without increasing delivery costs at the same rate as revenue. Its quarterly gross profit grew approximately 88% year over year, considerably faster than sales.

Hinge Health also reported $78.8 million in net income for the first half of 2026. Comparisons with 2025 need care because the previous year's losses included substantial stock-based compensation associated with its public listing.

Another development is the company's agreement to acquire Cylinder Health, which provides gastrointestinal care. Hinge Health is looking beyond musculoskeletal treatment while its existing business is producing substantial cash.

For now, Hinge Health has one of the clearest financial records supporting the idea that focused digital treatment can become a profitable healthcare business.

If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest digital health market report.

Is Omada Health making money from diabetes and chronic care?

Omada Health is now making a quarterly profit from digital chronic disease management, an important milestone for a business that delivers ongoing care rather than one-off consultations.

Omada offers programs addressing diabetes, hypertension, obesity and related conditions. It primarily reaches patients through employers and health plans, which pay for healthcare services intended to improve outcomes and manage long-term medical costs.

Second-quarter 2026 revenue increased 43% to approximately $88 million, while membership grew 45%. The company also reported $5 million in net income, compared with a $5 million loss a year earlier.

Gross margin improved from 66% to 73%. That seven-percentage-point gain is particularly encouraging because Omada is adding members without a corresponding rise in the proportion of revenue consumed by direct delivery costs.

Revenue and membership also grew at almost the same rate. This suggests that improved profitability came more from operating efficiency and lower relative delivery costs than from sharply increasing revenue per member.

Omada is still much smaller than established healthcare technology companies, and one profitable quarter does not establish a long history of consistent earnings. Nevertheless, its progress gives chronic care startups a credible example of what successful economics can look like.

Why does Doximity make so much money from doctors?

Doximity is highly profitable because its business centers on a professional network and digital services for doctors, with pharmaceutical companies and healthcare organizations paying much of the bill.

The platform provides tools used by medical professionals, while commercial customers pay for marketing, recruitment and other services that help them reach healthcare providers.

In its fiscal first quarter ended June 2026, Doximity generated $156.6 million in revenue, $24.3 million in net income and $74.8 million in adjusted EBITDA.

Its adjusted EBITDA margin was approximately 48%, far above what many companies delivering clinical services directly can achieve.

However, Doximity's latest results also exposed some weakness. Net income fell from $53.3 million a year earlier, adjusted EBITDA declined 6%, and free cash flow dropped from $60.1 million to $39.6 million. Revenue increased only 7%.

The professional network remains profitable, but earnings are under pressure despite continued revenue growth.

Doximity shows how much money can be made from healthcare technology without operating a large-scale patient treatment business. Its recent earnings decline also shows that strong margins alone do not guarantee future growth.

Is Veeva making more money than most digital health startups?

Veeva Systems operates at a much larger scale than most digital health startups, showing how profitable healthcare-related software can become when pharmaceutical companies are the customers.

Veeva sells cloud software used in pharmaceutical sales, clinical development, regulatory work and other important business processes. Its customers depend on these systems to manage complex operations, which helps support recurring subscription revenue.

In its fiscal second quarter ended July 2026, Veeva generated $928 million in revenue, up 18% from $789.1 million a year earlier. Subscription revenue reached $766.8 million, accounting for approximately 82.6% of total sales.

That recurring revenue gives Veeva a very different business from a consumer telehealth provider that needs patients to keep booking consultations or purchasing treatment.

There is a classification issue here. Veeva is primarily a life sciences enterprise software company, rather than a digital healthcare provider treating patients directly.

Still, leaving businesses like Veeva out of the discussion would overlook one of the most successful parts of healthcare digitization. Pharmaceutical companies have long been willing to pay substantial amounts for specialized software, and Veeva has built a large business around that demand.

Is Hims & Hers profitable despite its huge growth?

Hims & Hers is currently losing money under GAAP accounting, even though its revenue and subscriber base continue to grow quickly.

The company's second-quarter 2026 revenue reached $753.2 million, up 38% year over year. Subscribers increased 19% to approximately 2.9 million.

Yet Hims & Hers reported an $86.3 million net loss, compared with a $42.5 million profit in the corresponding quarter of 2025. Adjusted EBITDA also declined from $82.2 million to $60.3 million.

One of the clearest warning signs is gross margin. It fell from 76% to 64% in a year, meaning that direct costs consumed a substantially larger share of every dollar earned.

The geography of growth also deserves attention. U.S. revenue increased 16%, while international revenue rose from $7.5 million to $131.4 million, contributing almost 60% of the total year-over-year revenue increase. Much of the company's growth is now coming from a different geographic mix than a year earlier.

At the same time, free cash flow remained negative at $68.2 million, despite positive adjusted EBITDA.

Hims & Hers has demonstrated impressive demand for its direct-to-consumer healthcare services. The current financial results are less impressive: sales are expanding, but the company's bottom line has deteriorated sharply.

If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest digital health market report.

Is GoodRx still making money from prescription drugs?

GoodRx remains profitable, although its overall revenue has largely stopped growing and the company is relying on newer services to improve its business.

GoodRx helps consumers find lower prescription prices and also operates subscription, pharmaceutical marketing and direct medication-related services.

For 2025, it generated $796.9 million in revenue and $30.4 million in net income, a profit margin of approximately 3.8%.

Second-quarter 2026 revenue reached $200.4 million, with net income of $8.5 million and adjusted EBITDA of $63.7 million.

Some parts of the business are growing much faster than the headline numbers suggest. Pharma Direct revenue increased 76% and subscription revenue grew 39% year over year.

Yet GoodRx's full-year revenue guidance of $790 million to $805 million pointed to approximately flat overall sales compared with 2025.

Those newer activities are growing from smaller bases while other revenue streams face pressure. For GoodRx, improving the business mix currently looks more promising than expecting another period of explosive company-wide growth.

The company has already proved that digital prescription services can be profitable. Finding meaningful new growth is now the harder challenge.

Why is Teladoc still losing money after becoming so big?

Teladoc is still losing money because its virtual healthcare businesses have very different economics, and the continued decline of BetterHelp is weighing heavily on the group.

In the second quarter of 2026, Teladoc generated $606.9 million in revenue, down 4% year over year, and recorded a $38.9 million net loss.

Integrated Care, which serves employers and health plans, increased revenue approximately 1% to $394.3 million. BetterHelp, its consumer-focused mental health business, fell 12% to $212.6 million.

The difference becomes even clearer when we examine their adjusted EBITDA figures.

Integrated Care generated $65.2 million, representing a margin of 16.5%. BetterHelp generated only $0.5 million, approximately a 0.2% margin.

A year earlier, BetterHelp had generated $11.9 million in adjusted EBITDA. Its earnings contribution has therefore almost disappeared.

Teladoc still expects positive full-year free cash flow, which suggests that the business can generate cash even while reporting GAAP losses. But the company has already reached considerable scale, and its consumer mental health operation continues to struggle.

Teladoc is a strong warning against assuming that digital healthcare automatically becomes more profitable as patient numbers and revenue increase.

Is anyone actually making money from healthcare AI?

Healthcare AI is already producing substantial revenue, but companies such as Tempus AI have yet to demonstrate consistently strong profits from their core operations.

Tempus sells diagnostic testing, healthcare data and software applications. Its second-quarter 2026 revenue reached $382.5 million, up 22% year over year.

Diagnostics generated $289.3 million, while Data and Applications brought in $93.2 million. The latter business grew 28%, and its Insights operations expanded 36%.

These are meaningful commercial numbers, especially for a company working with AI and complex clinical data. Tempus also delivered its first oncology foundation model to AstraZeneca, providing a concrete example of its work with pharmaceutical customers.

However, the earnings picture is complicated.

Tempus reported $5.6 million in GAAP net income, compared with a $42.8 million loss a year earlier. That latest result included $98.5 million in unrealized gains on marketable securities.

Without that gain, holding everything else constant, the company would have reported an approximately $92.9 million loss.

Adjusted EBITDA was positive at $8 million, equivalent to just 2.1% of revenue.

Tempus is clearly building a large healthcare technology business, but its reported profitability currently looks much stronger after including investment gains than it does when examining underlying operating earnings.

If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest digital health market report.

Does positive adjusted EBITDA mean a digital health company makes money?

Positive adjusted EBITDA shows that a digital health company earns more than certain operating costs, but it can still be losing substantial amounts after other expenses are included.

Teladoc reported $65.7 million in adjusted EBITDA alongside a $38.9 million GAAP net loss. The difference between those figures was approximately $104.6 million.

Hims & Hers reported $60.3 million in adjusted EBITDA but lost $86.3 million on a GAAP basis, leaving an even larger gap of $146.6 million.

Doximity offers a different example. It generated $74.8 million in adjusted EBITDA and still earned $24.3 million in net income.

Adjusted EBITDA removes interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and various company-specific adjustments. It can help compare aspects of operating performance, but those excluded or adjusted expenses can make a substantial difference to shareholders.

Free cash flow adds another useful test. Hinge Health generated approximately $100 million during its latest reported quarter, while Hims & Hers used $68.2 million despite reporting positive adjusted EBITDA.

When comparing digital health companies, we therefore need to look at net income, adjusted operating earnings and cash generation together. Relying on adjusted EBITDA alone can make an unprofitable business appear healthier than it is.

Which digital health business models make the most money?

Healthcare software, financial infrastructure and specialized employer-funded treatment currently have some of the most attractive economics in digital health.

The strongest public examples generally have one thing in common: they can serve additional customers without increasing their costs at the same rate as revenue.

Veeva sells recurring enterprise software subscriptions. Doximity earns revenue from a professional network. HealthEquity manages healthcare financial accounts and assets. Their services are very different, but each has ways of generating revenue without paying for a new clinical appointment every time.

Hinge Health and Omada demonstrate another promising approach. Both sell focused care programs, mainly through employers and health plans, and both have achieved positive quarterly earnings.

Having employers and insurers as customers can reduce the need to acquire every patient individually. It also creates opportunities for larger contracts, although those customers can negotiate aggressively and demand evidence that the programs are worth paying for.

Consumer-focused healthcare is more mixed. GoodRx has remained profitable with relatively modest growth, while Hims & Hers and BetterHelp have recently faced much weaker earnings.

We can see the difference clearly by comparing how these businesses charge customers and what happens to costs as they expand.

Business model	Companies	How they make money	Profitability today
Healthcare financial infrastructure	HealthEquity	Account fees, custodial income, payments	Strong GAAP profits
Life sciences software	Veeva	Enterprise subscriptions and services	Established profitable business
Medical professional network	Doximity	Pharmaceutical and healthcare clients	Strong GAAP profits
Digital physical therapy	Hinge Health	Employers and insurers	Profitable with strong cash generation
Digital chronic care	Omada Health	Employer and health plan programs	Recently reached GAAP profitability
Prescription savings	GoodRx	Prescription services and subscriptions	Profitable, slower growth
Patient administration software	Phreesia	Provider software, payments, life sciences	Small GAAP profits
Direct-to-consumer healthcare	Hims & Hers	Treatment purchases and subscriptions	GAAP loss
Broad virtual healthcare	Teladoc	Employers, insurers and consumers	GAAP loss
Healthcare AI and diagnostics	Tempus AI	Diagnostic tests, data, software	Core profitability remains limited

Can digital health companies keep growing without losing money?

Hinge Health and Omada Health show that digital health companies can currently grow quickly and report profits at the same time, although the results are far from consistent across the industry.

Hinge Health increased revenue 53% while earning a 20.5% net margin. Omada grew revenue 43% and moved from a $5 million quarterly loss to a $5 million profit.

HealthEquity presents a more mature version of profitable growth. Its latest quarterly revenue increased 8%, while the company generated $65.6 million in net income.

Hims & Hers provides the opposite example. Revenue jumped 38%, but the company moved from a profit a year earlier to a sizable loss. Doximity remained profitable but experienced declining earnings despite higher sales.

Across these companies, growth rates and profit margins have no simple relationship. What matters more is how much revenue remains after the costs of acquiring and serving customers.

There is also a visibility problem. Public companies disclose detailed figures, but many venture-backed startups announce customer growth or annual recurring revenue without publishing net income.

We can confidently identify individual companies where profitability is improving. We cannot yet conclude from these examples that digital health startups as a whole are becoming profitable faster.

Who is actually making the most money in digital health now?

HealthEquity is currently one of the strongest established profit generators in digital health, while Hinge Health stands out among companies directly delivering digital treatment. Doximity and GoodRx also produce real GAAP profits, and Omada Health is emerging as another profitable care provider.

For the broader healthcare technology market, Veeva operates at an even larger scale, although its life sciences enterprise software business is quite different from patient-facing digital health.

Hinge Health is particularly impressive among treatment-focused companies. It increased quarterly revenue 53%, earned a 20.5% net margin and generated approximately $100 million in free cash flow. Those three results together make a stronger case than revenue growth or adjusted EBITDA alone.

The picture is much less convincing for some familiar consumer healthcare brands. Hims & Hers continues to add subscribers and generate substantial sales, but its latest GAAP losses and lower gross margin raise questions about current profitability. Teladoc remains unprofitable despite its established position, while Tempus AI's recent GAAP profit benefited heavily from investment gains.

Digital health has produced several genuine financial winners. The most successful businesses today tend to sell essential healthcare infrastructure, recurring software or focused treatment programs with manageable delivery costs. The biggest lesson from the numbers is that serving more patients and generating more revenue can create a large company, but the businesses making the most money have also figured out how to keep a meaningful share of that revenue.

If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest digital health market report.