Digital Twin Startup Funding 2025-2026
In our digital twin market deck, you will find everything you need to understand the market
SUMMARY
This report analyzes every publicly disclosed equity round raised by pure-play digital twin companies between July 2025 and June 2026, a 12-month window where June 2026 is still in progress through June 8. We only kept rounds of $300K or more, and we excluded standalone 3D models, generic dashboards, and simulations that are not maintained as synchronized twins of real assets, systems, or processes.
Over this period, fundraising in the digital twin market was selective but meaningful. The dataset includes 11 disclosed equity deals across 11 unique companies, totaling $409.85M raised.
The digital twin market is concentrated, but not dependent on one exceptional deal. The largest round represents 18.1% of total capital, while the top 3 deals account for 51.0% and the top 5 account for 79.5%.
The median round size was $28M, which is high for an 11-deal sample. This suggests investors are funding infrastructure-grade software, regulated workflows, and operational decision systems rather than light visualization tools.
Deal flow averaged 0.92 disclosed rounds per month. Monthly capital averaged $34.15M, but this number is shaped by a handful of large Series B, Series C, and Series D+ financings.
Process Twin Applications led the digital twin market by both deal count and capital. The segment captured 4 deals and $142.05M, or 34.7% of total disclosed funding.
North America dominated the digital twin market. It produced 8 of the 11 disclosed deals and captured $264.4M, equal to 64.5% of total capital raised.
The market looks more mature on dollars than on deal count. Seed and Series A rounds represented 45.5% of deals, but only 17.7% of capital, while Series B and later rounds captured 82.3%.
Follow-on financings were the main funding engine. Eight of the 11 rounds were follow-ons, which shows investors mostly backed companies that had already moved beyond first financing.
The clearest repeat investor signal was strategic. NVIDIA or NVentures appeared in two deals, PassiveLogic and ThinkLabs AI, pointing to digital twins as part of the broader physical AI and infrastructure software stack.
This market map, featured in our digital twin market deck, highlights top companies and startups in the digital twin market
What are all the funding deals in the digital twin market from July 2025 to June 2026?
The table below lists every disclosed equity round raised by pure-play digital twin companies between July 2025 and June 2026. We count as “pure-play” digital twin companies those creating and maintaining digital representations of real-world assets, systems, or processes for monitoring, simulation, optimization, what-if analysis, or performance improvement.
Each row shows the company, what it does, its category, the deal date, the funding stage, the round size, the region, the main investors, and the announcement source. For a wider view of how digital twin software fits inside the broader industrial AI, infrastructure, and simulation opportunity, we cover it in our Digital Twin market report.
| Company | What they do | Category | Date | Stage | Deal size | Region | Main investors | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BQP | Quantum-accelerated unified digital twin and simulation platform for aerospace, defense, semiconductor, and other mission-critical engineering systems | Asset Twin Platforms | Jul 2025 | Seed | $5M | North America | Not specified in provided dataset | PR Newswire |
| Makersite | AI product lifecycle intelligence software that creates digital twins of manufactured products and supply chains to evaluate cost, sustainability, compliance, and sourcing impacts | Process Twin Applications | Jul 2025 | Series B | $70M | Europe | Not specified in provided dataset | Makersite |
| Twin Health | Wearable and clinical-data platform that creates AI metabolic digital twins for diabetes, obesity, and metabolic health management | Process Twin Applications | Aug 2025 | Series D+ | $53M | North America | Not specified in provided dataset | PR Newswire |
| PassiveLogic | Autonomous building-control software using physics-based digital twins, sensors, and edge AI to optimize buildings and infrastructure systems | Building Twin Software | Sep 2025 | Series C | $74M | North America | NVIDIA / NVentures; others not specified in provided dataset | PR Newswire |
| Parallax Worlds | Hyper-realistic digital twins of factories and warehouses so robotics teams can stress-test deployments before physical rollout | Factory Twin Software | Nov 2025 | Seed | $4M | North America | Not specified in provided dataset | Pear VC |
| Sim&Cure | AI-driven digital twin software for individualized neurovascular procedure planning, simulation, device sizing, training, and prediction | Process Twin Applications | Nov 2025 | Series D+ | $11.65M | Europe | Not specified in provided dataset | Sim&Cure |
| Neara | Physics-enabled digital twins of utility and infrastructure networks, especially power grids, for planning, resilience, safety, and operational decisions | Infrastructure Twin Systems | Feb 2026 | Series D+ | $63.8M | Asia-Pacific | Not specified in provided dataset | Tech in Asia |
| Mantis Biotech | Physics-based predictive digital twins of human anatomy, physiology, and behavior for synthetic biomedical data and medical research | Process Twin Applications | Mar 2026 | Seed | $7.4M | North America | Not specified in provided dataset | TechCrunch |
| Antaris | AI-powered satellite mission design, simulation, manufacturing, and operations software, including TrueTwin technology for satellites and mission virtualization | Asset Twin Platforms | Mar 2026 | Series A | $28M | North America | Not specified in provided dataset | Antaris |
| ThinkLabs AI | Physics-informed AI digital twin technology for electric-grid planning and operations, enabling utilities to simulate millions of grid scenarios rapidly | Infrastructure Twin Systems | Apr 2026 | Series A | $28M | North America | NVIDIA / NVentures; others not specified in provided dataset | Ventureburn |
| JuliaHub | Julia-based engineering, simulation, controls, and Dyad software for industrial digital twins and AI-native physical-system design | Asset Twin Platforms | Apr 2026 | Series B | $65M | North America | Not specified in provided dataset | JuliaHub |
In our digital twin market deck, we identify pain points entrepreneurs should prioritize
OUR METHODOLOGY TO BUILD THIS TRACKER
We built this digital twin funding tracker by reviewing every publicly disclosed equity round raised by pure-play digital twin companies between July 2025 and June 2026. A company counts as pure-play when more than 80% of its activity is dedicated to digital twin platforms, digital twin applications, or implementation work that keeps twins synchronized with real operational data.
We applied four filters to build the dataset. First, we only included equity rounds, so grants, debt, and revenue financing are excluded. Second, we only counted rounds of $300K or more. Third, we only kept pure-play digital twin companies. And fourth, every entry had to be confirmed by a direct company announcement, a press release, or a tier-1 media report, with the source URL preserved for every row.
The final dataset contains 11 disclosed deals across 11 unique companies, and every average, median, share, and concentration ratio is computed on that disclosed sample. Privately raised rounds that were never publicly announced are necessarily missing, which is a known limitation of any public-only digital twin funding tracker.
How active has fundraising been in the digital twin market?
As of June 2026, fundraising in the digital twin market has been active but selective. Over the past 12 months, companies raised 11 disclosed equity rounds and $409.85M combined, which works out to 0.92 deals per month.
The deal count shows a market with visible momentum, but not a broad wave of startup financing. Eleven unique companies raised during the period, so each disclosed deal represents a different company rather than repeated rounds by the same few issuers.
Capital flow was much larger than the deal count might suggest. The average capital raised per month was $34.15M, while the median monthly capital raised was $25.53M, meaning a few larger months lifted the average.
Removing rounds above $50M changes the picture sharply. Capital raised outside those larger financings was only $84.05M, which shows that the digital twin market depends heavily on scaled software and infrastructure rounds.
If you want to go deeper on the companies behind these numbers, see our market report covering digital twin funding.
How concentrated has fundraising been in the digital twin market?
As of June 2026, fundraising in the digital twin market is concentrated, but not monopolized by one exceptional company. Over the past 12 months, the largest deal represented 18.1% of all disclosed capital, the top 3 reached 51.0%, and the top 5 reached 79.5%.
The largest disclosed round was PassiveLogic’s $74M Series C. That one building-twin financing was almost one-fifth of all capital in the dataset, even though Building Twin Software only had one deal.
The top 3 deals were large enough to define the headline market. PassiveLogic, Makersite, and JuliaHub together explain just over half of disclosed capital, which means any broad market reading should start with those scaled rounds.
Still, the digital twin market is not a single-company story. The top 1 share is below 20%, and large rounds appeared across buildings, product lifecycle, infrastructure, and asset-platform software.
How much of the digital twin funding signal is driven by outliers?
As of June 2026, a meaningful share of the funding signal in the digital twin market is driven by outliers. Over the past 12 months, 5 of 11 deals were above $50M, and those larger rounds created most of the total capital raised.
The market had no $100M-plus megarounds, which matters. Digital twin funding was capital-rich, but it did not reach the financing scale seen in foundation-model AI, humanoid robotics, or capital-intensive hardware categories.
The average round size was $37.26M, while the median round size was $28M. That gap shows right-tail skew, but not a single extreme outlier overwhelming the entire dataset.
The better reading is that the digital twin market has several scale-up lanes. Buildings, product lifecycle, grids, satellite systems, and industrial engineering all produced sizeable rounds, rather than one vertical absorbing all investor attention.
For more context on which outliers matter most, review our deeper analysis of the digital twin market.
This chart, included in our digital twin market deck, breaks down Neara's playbook in digital twins
Is the digital twin market broad with many targets, or narrow with few fundable companies?
As of June 2026, the digital twin market is narrow rather than broad. Over the past 12 months, only 11 disclosed equity rounds appeared, and they came from 11 unique companies.
That does not mean digital twin activity is rare across industry. It means the strict pure-play venture sample is small once generic dashboards, CAD models, unsynchronized simulations, and service-heavy non-scalable work are excluded.
The category spread also shows a selective market. Process Twin Applications had 4 deals, Asset Twin Platforms had 3, Infrastructure Twin Systems had 2, and both buildings and factory twins had 1 each.
This is enough breadth to show multiple use cases, but not enough breadth to call the market democratized. Funding still concentrates around companies that can connect twins to expensive decisions in infrastructure, engineering, healthcare, or operations.
Is digital twin mostly an early-stage formation market or a late-stage scaling market?
As of June 2026, the digital twin market looks more like a late-stage scaling market on dollars and a mixed market on deal count. Over the past 12 months, Seed and Series A represented 45.5% of deals, but only 17.7% of capital.
Late-stage and later-growth rounds drove most of the dollars. Series B and later companies raised $337.45M, or 82.3% of total disclosed capital, across 6 deals.
Seed rounds were visible but small. The three Seed deals raised $16.4M combined, with an average size of $5.47M and a median size of $5M.
Series A was more substantial, but still not the center of the market. The two Series A rounds were both $28M, suggesting companies crossing from prototype to commercialization need meaningful capital for enterprise sales and domain engineering.
We cover the stage split in more detail in our full market deck on digital twin financing.
Are investors backing first financings or follow-on rounds in the digital twin market?
As of June 2026, investors in the digital twin market are mostly backing follow-on rounds. Over the past 12 months, 8 of the 11 disclosed rounds were follow-ons, while only 3 were first financings.
The first financings were BQP, Parallax Worlds, and Mantis Biotech. All three were Seed rounds, and together they accounted for $16.4M, or only 4.0% of total capital.
Follow-on rounds carried the market’s dollar weight. They included Makersite, Twin Health, PassiveLogic, Neara, Antaris, ThinkLabs AI, JuliaHub, and Sim&Cure.
This matters because digital twin credibility depends on more than a product demo. Investors appear to reward proof that the company can synchronize real operational data, support simulation, and influence decisions in customer environments.
This chart, included in our digital twin market deck, shows annual funding in digital twin startups
Which categories attract the most investor attention in digital twin?
As of June 2026, Process Twin Applications attract the most investor attention in digital twin. Over the past 12 months, the segment produced 4 of 11 deals and $142.05M raised, equal to 34.7% of total disclosed capital.
Process Twin Applications is a broad segment rather than a single buyer category. It includes Makersite in product lifecycle intelligence, Twin Health in metabolic care, Sim&Cure in neurovascular planning, and Mantis Biotech in biomedical synthetic data.
Asset Twin Platforms ranked second by capital with $98M across 3 deals. BQP, Antaris, and JuliaHub show that investors still fund horizontal or semi-horizontal platforms when they are tied to mission-critical engineering or operations.
Infrastructure Twin Systems ranked third with $91.8M across 2 deals. Neara and ThinkLabs AI show that utility and grid twins are an important lane even with fewer total rounds.
Which categories attract disproportionately large checks in the digital twin market?
As of June 2026, Building Twin Software attracted the most disproportionately large check in the digital twin market. Over the past 12 months, the category had only one deal, but PassiveLogic’s $74M Series C captured 18.1% of all disclosed capital.
Infrastructure Twin Systems also punched above its deal count. It represented 18.2% of deals but 22.4% of capital, giving it a capital-share-to-deal-share ratio of 1.23.
Process Twin Applications sat close to parity. It held 36.4% of deals and 34.7% of capital, which suggests broad attention but not disproportionate check size.
Factory Twin Software was the weakest category by check size. Parallax Worlds was the only qualifying factory-twin round, at $4M, leaving the segment with just 1.0% of total disclosed capital.
Which geographies matter most for fundraising in the digital twin market?
As of June 2026, North America matters most for fundraising in the digital twin market. Over the past 12 months, the region produced 8 of 11 deals and $264.4M, equal to 64.5% of all disclosed capital.
Europe ranked second by capital, with $81.65M across 2 deals. Makersite and Sim&Cure show that European funding in this dataset is more application-led than platform-led.
Asia-Pacific ranked third with one deal and $63.8M. That one deal was Neara, so the region’s entire disclosed share depends on a single infrastructure-twin financing.
The geographic pattern is therefore clear but narrow. North America dominates both deal count and capital, while Europe and Asia-Pacific are visible through a small number of strong companies.
For a broader geographic read, see our market report on digital twin companies and funding.
This chart, included in our digital twin market deck, compares the main business model options for digital twin enterprise software platforms
Is the digital twin opportunity set broad or concentrated in one hub?
As of June 2026, the digital twin opportunity set is concentrated in one main hub, with secondary activity elsewhere. Over the past 12 months, North America alone captured 72.7% of disclosed deals and 64.5% of disclosed capital.
That makes North America the clearest center of gravity for pure-play digital twin venture funding. The region includes BQP, Twin Health, PassiveLogic, Parallax Worlds, Mantis Biotech, Antaris, ThinkLabs AI, and JuliaHub.
Europe is present, but smaller. It contributed 18.2% of deals and 19.9% of capital, driven by Makersite and Sim&Cure.
Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa were absent from the disclosed qualifying dataset. That should not be read as proof of no activity, only as no visible pure-play public equity rounds under the strict filter.
Is digital twin a market of small experiments or scaled financings?
As of June 2026, the digital twin market is closer to a market of scaled financings than small experiments. Over the past 12 months, 5 of the 11 disclosed rounds were $50M or larger.
The size distribution is top-heavy. One deal was under $5M, three deals were between $5M and under $20M, two deals were between $20M and under $50M, and five deals were $50M or above.
The median round size of $28M is the most useful guide to the market. It shows that investors are not just funding exploratory digital models; they are funding software expected to sit inside operational workflows.
At the same time, the absence of $100M-plus rounds is important. The digital twin market has scale-up capital, but it is not yet in extreme megaround territory.
Who are the investors that appear the most in digital twin fundraising?
As of June 2026, the clearest repeat investor in digital twin fundraising is NVIDIA or NVentures. Over the past 12 months, it appeared in two identified deals: PassiveLogic and ThinkLabs AI.
That repetition is more informative than a long investor leaderboard would be. It points to strategic interest in physical AI, grid simulation, building control, and real-world infrastructure software.
The provided dataset does not disclose a complete named-investor list for every round. For that reason, the investor analysis should be read as a signal from identified repeat participation, not as a full ranking of all active capital providers.
One important caveat applies to investor data in the digital twin market. Round announcements usually disclose total deal size, not individual investor check size, so participation should not be converted into exact dollars committed by each investor.
You can find a deeper investor and category view in our digital twin market report.
This chart, featured in our digital twin market deck, illustrates how revenue is divided among customer segments in the digital twin market
INSIGHTS
The insights below come from reviewing every disclosed equity round in the digital twin market between July 2025 and June 2026. They are not row-by-row summaries. They are the reusable patterns that kept showing up across the 11-deal dataset, and they are meant to stay useful when reading any future digital twin funding announcement.
The digital twin market is not broad-based in capital terms. Five of 11 deals account for 79.5% of total disclosed funding. Headline funding is therefore mostly a story about scaled platforms and high-consequence applications.
The market looks more mature on capital than on deal count. Early-stage rounds represented 45.5% of deals, but later-stage rounds captured 82.3% of capital. This means the funding center has already moved toward commercialization and scale.
The median round size is a strong credibility signal. A $28M median is high for a small 11-deal sample. It suggests investors are backing infrastructure-grade or regulated-decision software, not lightweight visualization tools.
Pure visualization is not where capital is going. Nearly every qualifying company links the twin to prediction, control, simulation, optimization, or decision automation. The fundable product is the decision layer, not the model alone.
The market rewards synchronization with expensive real-world consequences. Companies tied to building energy, grid planning, satellite operations, medical workflows, and product compliance raised the largest rounds. The more costly the decision, the more fundable the twin.
Process Twin Applications lead, but the category is not unified. Product lifecycle, metabolic health, neurovascular care, and biomedical data all sit inside the same capital bucket. The leadership of the segment reflects cross-domain diffusion, not one common buyer.
Infrastructure twins have a stronger funding signal than their deal count implies. Grid and utility twins represented only 2 deals, but captured 22.4% of capital. Investors appear to value twins that can support resilience, safety, and planning under physical constraints.
Building twins show the clearest path from diagnosis to action. PassiveLogic’s $74M round implies confidence that twins can move beyond monitoring into autonomous control. That is a more valuable role than passive analysis.
Factory twins remain earlier in the adoption curve. Parallax Worlds was the only qualifying factory-twin deal, and it raised a seed-sized round. Factory twins still look more like deployment-risk reduction than control of operating assets.
Digital twin credibility depends less on the phrase “digital twin” than on the closed loop. The strongest companies connect representation, synchronization, simulation, and operational decisions. Companies that only provide static models or generic dashboards do not meet the same bar.
Healthcare twins are fundable when they model measurable processes. Twin Health, Sim&Cure, and Mantis Biotech all focus on physiological or procedural systems. Generic patient avatars would be a weaker signal under the same definition.
Product and supply-chain twins follow a different logic from asset twins. Makersite is less about real-time sensor control and more about reconciling product, supplier, material, cost, and compliance data. That still fits the market when the twin supports decisions on real products and systems.
Satellite and grid twins show digital twins becoming a risk-reduction layer. Antaris, Neara, and ThinkLabs AI point to high-fidelity simulation as part of mission-critical infrastructure planning. The twin becomes a procurement and safety tool, not just an engineering aid.
Implementation services were absent from the qualifying venture sample. That suggests equity capital is flowing toward scalable platforms and applications. Service-heavy system integration is less visible in public venture funding under this filter.
The strict pure-play filter materially lowers the deal count. Many AI, robotics, maintenance, and infrastructure companies mention digital twins. The cleaner signal comes from excluding those where the twin is not the core business.
North America is the center of gravity for disclosed venture activity. It captured 8 of 11 deals and 64.5% of capital. Europe and Asia-Pacific matter, but their presence is driven by only a few companies.
Europe’s funding signal is application-led in this sample. Makersite and Sim&Cure both solve specific enterprise or clinical workflows. The European pattern is less about broad digital twin platforms and more about focused use cases.
The best forward-looking screen is operational integration. Future digital twin financing is likely to favor companies embedded in real assets, regulated workflows, or infrastructure constraints. Generic 3D modeling, dashboards, and unsynchronized simulations should remain weaker funding signals.
PR Newswire (BQP), Makersite (Series B), PR Newswire (Twin Health), PR Newswire (PassiveLogic), Pear VC (Parallax Worlds), Sim&Cure (Series extension), Tech in Asia (Neara), Antaris (Series A), TechCrunch (Mantis Biotech), Ventureburn (ThinkLabs AI), JuliaHub (Series B)
Related blog posts
- All funding deals in the digital twin market
- Which startups have raised the most funding in the digital twin market?
- Which startups are the most valued in the digital twin market?
