What’s funding like in the digital twin market right now?

All funding deals in the digital twin market over the last 24 months

Below is the table listing all the deals. You can find our methodology at the end of this page.

If you want a deeper understanding of the market and its current dynamics, get our report covering the Digital Twin Market.

Is digital twin funding actually stronger right now?

Digital twin funding is stronger for companies that can already prove themselves, but the market as a whole has become narrower.

We counted $704 million of disclosed funding over the latest 12 months, up 29.7% from $542.7 million in the previous period. At the same time, the number of deals dropped from 44 to 31. The median round rose even faster, from $5 million to $9.29 million.

Those numbers describe a market where getting funded has become harder while getting a large round has become easier for the companies that clear the bar. Only 31 companies raised money versus 44 a year earlier, and first financings dropped sharply as well.

For now, the digital twin market looks more mature rather than broadly healthier. Capital availability has improved at the top, while company formation and funding breadth have weakened.

Metric	Current 12M	Previous 12M	Change
Deals	31	44	-29.5%
Unique companies	31	44	-29.5%
Disclosed capital	$704.0M	$542.7M	+29.7%
Median round	$9.29M	$5.00M	+86.0%
Average disclosed round	$22.71M	$12.92M	+75.8%
Largest round	$130M	$74M	+75.7%
First-financing share	16.1%	27.3%	-11.1 pp
Follow-on share	83.9%	70.5%	+13.4 pp
Capital excluding >$50M rounds	$326.0M	$345.5M	-5.6%

Would digital twin funding still look stronger without the megarounds?

Digital twin funding loses most of its apparent growth once we strip out the biggest rounds, and below $50 million the market actually shrank.

Four current financings above $50 million contributed $378 million: Buildots raised $130 million, Dexory $100 million of equity, NavVis $85 million and Neara roughly $63 million. Together they accounted for 53.7% of all capital.

Removing only the largest round still leaves current funding above the previous period. The same is true after removing the top three deals. The picture changes once every deal above $50 million disappears: remaining capital falls to $326 million versus $345.5 million a year earlier.

The monthly numbers tell a similar story. Average monthly funding increased from $45.2 million to $58.7 million, yet the median stayed almost flat at around $31 million. Funding has been arriving in large bursts rather than through a consistently higher flow of deals.

One technical detail is worth keeping in mind. The “above $100 million” test leaves Dexory's exactly $100 million equity round in the sample. Removing rounds of $100 million or more would bring current funding down to roughly $474 million, below the previous period.

Test	Current	Previous	Change
All disclosed capital	$704.0M	$542.7M	+29.7%
Excluding largest deal	$574.0M	$468.7M	+22.5%
Excluding top 3 deals	≈$389M	≈$346M	≈+12.5%
Excluding >$50M rounds	$326.0M	$345.5M	-5.6%
Excluding >$100M rounds	$574.0M	$542.7M	+5.8%
Excluding $100M+ rounds	≈$474M	$542.7M	≈-12.7%
Average capital/month	$58.7M	$45.2M	+29.9%
Median capital/month	$30.7M	$31.3M	-1.9%

Are fewer digital twin startups getting funded now?

Yes, digital twin funding is reaching far fewer companies today, especially companies raising their first institutional round.

We found 13 fewer funded companies than in the previous 12 months. First financings fell from 12 to five, while the number of countries represented in the market dropped from roughly 20 to 14.

New startups did not necessarily receive smaller checks. The median first financing actually rose from $1.78 million to $2.32 million, and Bios Life came out of stealth with a $25 million seed round for its cancer-surveillance digital twin platform.

The harder part is getting into the funded group at all. As seen above, deal volume fell almost 30%, and the drop in first financings was even steeper. These days, digital twin investors appear willing to put meaningful money behind a new company when they like it, but they are choosing far fewer of them.

Are existing digital twin winners taking most of the money?

Yes, existing digital twin companies are taking an overwhelming share of the capital now.

Follow-ons made up 83.9% of current deals and absorbed about $666 million. First financings accounted for only $38 million. The median follow-on also climbed from $7.93 million to $12.45 million.

The company examples fit those numbers. Dexory followed its 2024 Series B with a $100 million Series C equity round. Buildots raised $45 million in 2025 and then $130 million in its latest financing. NavVis, Neara and Twin Health also raised large later-stage rounds.

Right now, fundraising is plainly easier for a company with previous investors, customers and a proven product than for a completely new entrant.

Metric	Current 12M	Previous 12M
First financings	5	12
First-financing share	16.1%	27.3%
First-financing capital	$38.0M	$30.3M
Median first financing	$2.32M	$1.78M
Follow-ons	26	31
Follow-on share	83.9%	70.5%
Follow-on capital	$666M	$492.4M
Median follow-on	$12.45M	$7.93M

Are digital twin funding rounds simply getting much bigger?

Yes, successful digital twin companies are raising much bigger rounds across more than just the four headline deals.

The median round rose 86%, which already tells us the change reaches well beyond one or two outliers. The $20 million to $50 million bracket also grew from 15.9% to 25.8% of all deals.

We can see it directly in recent financings. Antioch raised a $32 million Series A for its physical-AI simulation platform. SPREAD AI raised $30 million at Series B. Antaris and ThinkLabs each raised $28 million at Series A, while Teton.ai raised $20 million for its predictive-care platform.

Meanwhile, the $5 million to $20 million bracket lost share. Some of the old middle of the market has effectively moved upward.

Bigger rounds are one of the more convincing structural changes in the data. Even after allowing for heavy concentration at the very top, the typical funded company is receiving substantially more capital than it did a year earlier.

Is early-stage digital twin funding still alive?

Yes. Early-stage digital twin funding is still very active, although investors are concentrating those checks into fewer companies.

Seed and Series A together represent 67.7% of current deals, barely below 70.5% previously. Seed alone still accounts for more than four in ten financings.

The difference is in round size. Median Seed funding increased from $2.15 million to $3.15 million, while the Series A median jumped from $7.93 million to $20 million. Antioch, Antaris and ThinkLabs show how far the upper end of Series A has moved.

There are smaller early-stage bets too. AVES Reality raised €2.7 million to build AI-generated 3D environments, and Cyberwave raised €7 million around software connecting AI, simulation and physical machines. So early-stage digital twin investing remains broad in application even though fewer new companies are making it into the dataset.

Stage	Current deal share	Previous deal share	Current median	Previous median
Seed	41.9%	40.9%	$3.15M	$2.15M
Series A	25.8%	29.5%	$20.0M	$7.93M
Series B	9.7%	11.4%	$30M	$30M
Series C	3.2%	6.8%	$100M	$31M
Series D+	9.7%	4.5%	$85M	$49M
Growth Equity	0%	2.3%	—	$13M
Unknown	9.7%	4.5%	$3.68M	$0.40M

Which digital twin category has the strongest momentum right now?

Asset Twin Platforms currently have the strongest funding momentum because more companies are raising, their share of capital is growing and their typical round has become much larger.

The category moved from 25% to 32.3% of deals and from 20.4% to 32.8% of capital. Its median financing jumped from $3.25 million to $18.07 million.

Several different businesses drove that change. NavVis raised $85 million around spatial data, Antioch raised $32 million around simulation for autonomous systems, SPREAD AI raised $30 million around product twins, and Antaris raised $28 million for satellite-system virtualization. Cyberwave adds another, smaller example at the intersection of digital twins and physical automation.

Process Twin Applications stayed fairly steady overall, while Infrastructure Twin Systems gained deal share but received smaller typical rounds. Tibo Energy's €6 million financing and AVES Reality's €2.7 million seed show that infrastructure-related products are still being funded, just at a very different scale from Neara.

Asset Twin Platforms stand out because their improvement reaches both breadth and check size.

Category	Current deal share	Previous deal share	Current capital share	Previous capital share
Asset Twin Platforms	32.3%	25.0%	32.8%	20.4%
Infrastructure Twin Systems	29.0%	25.0%	20.4%	25.0%
Process Twin Applications	25.8%	27.3%	26.8%	27.8%
Building Twin Software	9.7%	13.6%	19.5%	24.4%
Factory Twin Software	3.2%	4.5%	0.6%	1.7%
Twin Implementation Services	0%	4.5%	0%	0.7%

Is Buildots making Building Twin Software look stronger than it is?

Yes, Buildots is carrying a large part of Building Twin Software's current funding performance.

Building Twin Software's deal share fell from 13.6% to 9.7%, yet the category still captured 19.5% of total capital because Buildots alone raised $130 million.

Buildots itself has a strong reason for attracting that kind of money. In its latest funding announcement, the company said customers have been shifting from individual projects toward company-wide deployments, mega-projects and multi-year commitments. It also pointed to the data-centre buildout, re-industrialisation, defence and energy construction as forces increasing the pressure on large construction programmes.

Those developments make Buildots interesting on its own. They don't show that Building Twin Software as a whole suddenly became one of the broadest parts of the market.

For a cleaner category-growth story, Asset Twin Platforms give us much stronger evidence.

Are corporate investors becoming more important in digital twin funding?

Yes, corporate investors have become more important in digital twin funding, and they are increasingly appearing around companies with obvious strategic value.

Strategic investors participated in 38.7% of current deals versus 29.5% previously. The absolute number of strategic-backed rounds barely changed, from 13 to 12, so the higher share comes partly from the smaller overall deal market. Their median round still more than doubled, from $8.4 million to $17.65 million.

The names are telling. Intel Capital invested in Buildots, Salesforce participated in SPREAD AI, National Grid Partners backed Sensat, and ThinkLabs' Series A included NVentures, Edison International and GE Vernova. Tibo Energy brought in Hitachi Ventures and WEPA Ventures.

These companies sit close to industries where digital twins can directly affect physical operations. Corporate investors can bring more than money in those situations: infrastructure access, distribution, customer relationships and technical integration all become relevant.

At the same time, we counted 48 disclosed investor names versus 59 previously. That decline is smaller than the drop in deals, but together with the higher round sizes and lower company count it still points to capital concentrating around a smaller group of companies.

Do digital twin startups need more proof before investors write big checks?

The largest digital twin rounds now tend to go to companies with real commercial adoption, major customers or a clear operational role inside their industry.

Dexory had already expanded its warehouse-intelligence platform across Europe, North America and Asia-Pacific before raising its $100 million Series C. NavVis said more than one billion square metres were scanned, processed and distributed through its platform in 2025 before its $85 million round. Buildots describes company-wide and multi-year deployments as increasingly normal among its customers.

Healthcare shows the same pattern in a different setting. Twin Health raised $53 million while expanding its digital-twin treatment platform among health plans and large employers. Teton.ai raised $20 million after reporting rapid growth and deployments across care environments in the United States and Europe.

We cannot turn this into a clean market-wide milestone percentage because public milestone disclosure is too inconsistent. Still, the companies absorbing the largest amounts of capital today usually have something concrete to point to beyond the technology itself.

Interestingly, median company age stayed at five years across both periods. Investors are not simply choosing much older companies. Commercial proof looks more relevant than age alone.

What are digital twin companies spending their new funding on?

Digital twin companies are increasingly raising money to expand products and distribution that already exist, with AI development appearing repeatedly alongside commercial expansion.

Buildots plans to widen enterprise deployments, cover more of the construction lifecycle and deepen the AI behind its platform. Dexory linked its financing to product development and broader commercial availability following international expansion. NavVis plans to build a much larger spatial-data engine while accelerating its AI roadmap.

SPREAD AI said its $30 million round would support expansion in Europe and the United States, growth around its Salesforce relationship and deeper penetration of aerospace, defence and heavy machinery. Teton.ai is using its funding to expand nationally in the United States, deepen its European business and add engineering capacity.

The better-funded part of the market is spending heavily on sales reach, geographic expansion, richer data platforms and AI capabilities around products that have already found a market.

We did not calculate a market-wide use-of-funds distribution because many companies disclose these plans loosely and inconsistently. The pattern is strongest among the larger rounds, where public announcements contain much more detail.

Is physical AI now pulling digital twins into a bigger market?

Yes, physical AI is giving digital twins a much bigger role than traditional monitoring and visualisation alone.

NavVis describes its spatial-data platform as a foundation for physical AI. Antioch is building simulation infrastructure that lets robotics and autonomous-system teams test changes across thousands of virtual scenarios before those changes touch real hardware. Cyberwave is connecting simulated robots, sensors and machines to real-world automation workflows.

AVES Reality is coming at the same opportunity from geospatial data, using aerial and satellite imagery to produce simulation-ready 3D environments. These companies have very different products, yet all rely on a digital representation of the physical world as part of an AI development or operating loop.

Deloitte's recent work with NVIDIA makes the broader direction easier to see. The two companies are combining digital twins, computer vision, robotics and edge AI for physical-AI deployments in industries such as manufacturing and life sciences.

This connection is becoming more visible in funding now because AI systems that act in the real world need places to train, test, understand context and compare predicted behaviour with reality. Digital twins can provide that layer.

Why are grids and critical infrastructure attracting more digital twin funding?

Digital twins are becoming especially valuable in grids and infrastructure because operators need to make expensive physical systems work harder without rebuilding everything from scratch.

Neara's Series D is the clearest large-scale example. Its physics-based digital twins are used to model electricity infrastructure and assess how networks behave under changing loads and physical conditions.

ThinkLabs tackles a related problem with physics-informed AI for grid planning and operations. The company grew out of GE Vernova and later attracted Energy Impact Partners, NVentures, Edison International and GE Vernova in its Series A.

Sensat applies geospatial AI and digital twins to civil infrastructure, with National Grid Partners participating as a strategic investor. National Grid has publicly described using Sensat on infrastructure projects including substation upgrades and connections for data centres.

At the earlier end, Tibo Energy raised €6 million after deploying its energy-management technology across more than 30 industrial sites. Its product simulates and controls local energy systems where grid congestion is already restricting available capacity.

All four companies are benefiting from the same pressure: electricity demand, grid congestion, new infrastructure and more complex operating conditions are creating problems that better digital modelling can actually help solve.

Is digital twin funding becoming more geographically concentrated?

Yes, digital twin funding is geographically narrower now, although different regions are moving in very different ways.

We counted companies across roughly 14 headquarters countries in the current period versus about 20 previously. Europe remains the largest region and still represents just over half of deals, so there has been no dramatic geographic handover.

North America gained a lot of deal share, moving from 18.2% to 32.3%, but its share of capital fell from 31.4% to 20.9%. More North American companies raised, yet their rounds were smaller relative to the biggest deals elsewhere.

Asia-Pacific went the other way. Its deal share fell from 22.7% to 12.9%, while its capital share rose from 9.3% to 17.1%. Neara's large Australian financing explains much of that shift.

Individual companies now have enough weight to move country-level numbers on their own. Dexory materially lifts the United Kingdom, while Buildots dominates Israel's current contribution. Geographic funding figures therefore need to be read alongside the underlying deal count.

Are digital twin companies raising again faster?

No convincing evidence shows that digital twin companies are coming back to investors faster than they did a year ago.

Among the follow-ons where we could reliably reconstruct the previous financing, the median interval increased from 10.6 months to 15.5 months.

The limitation is sample size. Only five current follow-ons and three previous ones had enough public history for a clean calculation. The round-step-up analysis is equally thin: the median moved from 2.11x to 2.03x, essentially unchanged.

We would not build a market story around either result. Funding velocity is one of the areas where public data is still too patchy to support the kind of confidence we have on deal count, round size, first financings or capital concentration.

What's actually changed in digital twin funding over the last 12 months?

Digital twin funding has become a bigger-round, proven-company market, while the pipeline of newly funded companies has thinned out.

The most misleading headline would be that funding “grew 30%.” It did, but the increase sits heavily in a handful of large rounds, while capital below $50 million declined slightly.

The more durable changes are bigger median rounds, much stronger follow-on funding, fewer first financings and the rise of Asset Twin Platforms. Strategic investors are also showing up more often relative to total deal activity, especially where digital twins connect directly with industrial, infrastructure or technology ecosystems.

Physical AI adds another layer to the story. NavVis, Antioch, Cyberwave and AVES Reality show how digital twins are becoming part of the development stack for AI that must understand or interact with the real world. Neara, ThinkLabs, Sensat and Tibo Energy show a parallel shift toward operational infrastructure problems where simulation can have immediate economic value.

What changed most	What it tells us
Funding rose while deal count fell sharply	More capital is available to a smaller group of companies
Large rounds drove most of the headline increase	Underlying funding breadth is weaker than the total suggests
First financings dropped from 12 to 5	New-company formation is the clearest weak spot
Follow-ons absorbed about $666M	Existing winners benefited most
Median round size rose 86%	Larger checks extend well beyond the megarounds
Asset Twin Platforms gained deals, capital and round size	This is the clearest category-level momentum
Physical AI and infrastructure appear repeatedly in major rounds	Digital twins are moving deeper into operational technology and AI workflows