Which healthcare AI startup is growing the fastest?
In our healthcare AI market deck, you will find everything you need to understand the market
SUMMARY
OpenEvidence is the fastest-growing healthcare AI startup today. Its lead comes from an unusual combination of revenue acceleration, physician adoption and real clinical usage, rather than from one flattering percentage.
The revenue curve is the clearest separator. OpenEvidence appears to have gone from roughly $7.9 million of annualized revenue at the end of 2024 to about $150 million at the end of 2025, then close to $300 million by mid-2026.
Candid Health can show the better headline percentage, with 190% year-over-year recurring-revenue growth. The missing denominator is the problem: without current ARR in dollars, we cannot tell whether it is adding more actual business than OpenEvidence.
Abridge is the strongest enterprise challenger. It has spread from just over 100 health systems in early 2025 to more than 300, and its newer decision-support product is already getting heavy use inside that installed base.
Hippocratic AI wins on raw interaction volume, with more than 250 million patient interactions. But a short automated phone interaction is not economically comparable with a physician consultation, a clinical conversation or a claims workflow, so the giant number cannot carry the ranking by itself.
OpenEvidence has a distribution advantage that is rare in healthcare software: a doctor can start using it without waiting for a health-system purchase, a security review or a long implementation. That doctor-by-doctor adoption loop is a big reason it has scaled faster than traditional enterprise healthcare tools.
Its monetization model also changes the comparison. OpenEvidence's core product is free to physicians and much of its revenue comes from pharmaceutical advertising and related commercial products, so its roughly $300 million run rate is not the same thing as $300 million of subscription ARR.
Several older healthcare AI companies are already large without matching this recent slope. Aidoc is in nearly 2,000 hospitals, Nabla says more than 85,000 clinicians use its tools, and DeepHealth reached $105.5 million of ARR while nearly doubling year over year.
The valuation story is aggressive but less detached from operations than it first looked. OpenEvidence's latest completed $12 billion valuation was extreme at a $150 million run rate; after revenue roughly doubled, the implied multiple effectively fell by half.
The ranking could move quickly. Abridge has a powerful expansion engine inside 300+ health systems, Hippocratic AI is adding interactions at huge scale, and Candid's 180% net dollar retention shows unusually strong customer expansion. For now, though, OpenEvidence has the strongest combined evidence of speed and scale.
This market map, featured in our healthcare AI market deck, highlights top companies and startups in the healthcare AI market
Which healthcare AI startup is growing the fastest?
Why are healthcare AI startups suddenly growing so fast?
Healthcare AI startups are growing much faster now because hospitals have moved from testing AI to using it across real clinical and administrative workflows.
Rock Health counted $7.4 billion of U.S. digital-health funding across 244 deals in the first half of 2026, compared with $6.4 billion across 245 deals a year earlier. The number of deals barely changed, yet investors put an extra $1 billion into the sector.
Even more revealing, rounds of at least $100 million absorbed 45% of all capital. Only 20 such rounds accounted for nearly half the money invested. Healthcare investors are concentrating their bets around a smaller group of companies that already look capable of reaching serious scale.
The operating data helps explain it. Abridge now works with more than 300 health systems. OpenEvidence says about 65% of U.S. doctors have used its medical AI. Hippocratic AI has passed 250 million patient interactions. Aidoc's technology runs in nearly 2,000 hospitals. Candid Health serves more than 200 healthcare organizations while reporting triple-digit recurring-revenue growth.
A few years ago, healthcare AI growth was often measured through pilots and funding rounds. These days we can compare millions of clinical interactions, hundreds of hospital deployments and nine-figure revenue businesses.
| Current healthcare AI indicator | Latest scale |
|---|---|
| U.S. digital-health funding, H1 2026 | $7.4B |
| Deals completed | 244 |
| Increase from H1 2025 | ~$1B |
| Capital captured by $100M+ rounds | 45% |
| Companies raising mega-rounds | 19 |
What does “fastest-growing healthcare AI startup” actually mean?
The fastest-growing healthcare AI startup should be the company adding the most real business at exceptional speed, with actual usage backing up the revenue growth.
A percentage alone can give us a silly answer. A startup going from $2 million to $6 million grows 200%, while another going from $150 million to $300 million grows 100% but adds $146 million more revenue.
The same problem appears with users. Hippocratic AI can count hundreds of millions of patient interactions because its voice agents make calls at enormous volume. Abridge can add thousands of clinicians through one health-system contract. OpenEvidence spreads doctor by doctor. Candid Health processes medical billing behind the scenes, so patient or clinician counts tell us very little about its success.
We therefore care most about the combination of revenue growth, absolute revenue added, product usage and the size of the base from which the company is growing.
Funding and valuation help confirm that investors are seeing the same acceleration. We give them much less weight because a financing round can reprice a startup overnight while the underlying business barely changes.
As this chart shows, and as featured in our healthcare AI market deck, search interest in healthcare AI has grown rapidly
Which healthcare AI startups are actually in the race today?
OpenEvidence, Abridge, Candid Health and Hippocratic AI currently have the strongest cases, while Aidoc, Nabla and several diagnostic-AI companies form the next group.
OpenEvidence gives doctors an AI tool for searching medical evidence and answering clinical questions. Abridge started in ambient clinical documentation and is expanding into clinical decision support and other hospital workflows. Candid Health automates medical billing and revenue-cycle work. Hippocratic AI uses conversational AI agents to handle patient-facing healthcare tasks.
These companies are large enough for growth to mean something.
Abridge already supports more than 100 million patient-clinician conversations a year across 300+ health systems. Hippocratic AI says its agents have passed 250 million patient interactions. Candid Health now serves more than 200 healthcare organizations. OpenEvidence has reached tens of millions of clinical consultations each month and is generating close to $300 million in annualized revenue according to Bank of America reporting based on information from The Information.
Aidoc also deserves attention. Its AI is deployed across nearly 2,000 hospitals and analyzes around 60 million patient cases annually. Nabla says more than 85,000 clinicians use its tools across 130+ healthcare organizations.
Still, the freshest growth figures put four companies clearly ahead when we ask about speed rather than installed footprint.
Is OpenEvidence really the fastest-growing healthcare AI startup right now?
Yes. OpenEvidence currently has the strongest overall claim because its revenue has exploded while physician usage has risen almost in parallel.
Sacra estimates that OpenEvidence was generating about $7.9 million in annualized revenue at the end of 2024. By the end of 2025, that figure had reached roughly $150 million.
That works out to around 19 times as much annualized revenue in one year.
Then came another jump. Bank of America cited reporting in July 2026 that placed OpenEvidence close to a $300 million annualized revenue run rate. In roughly seven months, the business had doubled again.
The dollar change is unusually large for a startup this young. OpenEvidence appears to have added around $142 million of annualized revenue during 2025, followed by roughly another $150 million during the next seven months.
Usage grew alongside it. Monthly clinical consultations increased from roughly 3 million at the beginning of 2025 to around 18 million in December and 20 million in January. NBC News later reported that OpenEvidence was involved in almost 27 million clinical encounters during April.
Several of these figures come from the company or private-market estimates rather than audited financial statements, so they deserve some caution. But the direction is hard to dispute: revenue, physician penetration and consultation volume have all moved very quickly.
No other private healthcare AI company currently shows the same combination at this scale.
| OpenEvidence metric | Earlier level | Latest useful level |
|---|---|---|
| Annualized revenue | ~$7.9M end-2024 | ~$300M around July 2026 |
| Annualized revenue at end-2025 | ~$150M | Roughly doubled afterward |
| Monthly consultations | ~3M early-2025 | ~20M January 2026 |
| Clinical encounters | — | Nearly 27M in April 2026 |
| U.S. doctors reported as users | — | ~65% |
If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest healthcare AI market report.
This chart, featured in our healthcare AI market deck, shows annual VC investment in healthcare AI startups
Doesn't Candid Health's 190% revenue growth beat OpenEvidence?
Candid Health may be growing faster in percentage terms over its latest disclosed period, but we still cannot put it ahead of OpenEvidence overall.
Candid announced a $120 million Series D in July and disclosed 190% year-over-year annual recurring revenue growth. That means ARR reached about 2.9 times its previous level.
Its customer economics look unusually strong too. Candid reported 180% net dollar retention for 2025. Put simply, customers that were already using Candid collectively spent about 80% more a year later, before we even count new customers.
The company now works with more than 200 healthcare providers and reportedly processes around $7 billion of claims annually. Its latest financing also valued the company at three times the level set during its February 2025 round.
Those numbers make Candid one of the fastest-growing healthcare software businesses we found.
The missing number is important, though: Candid has not publicly disclosed its current ARR in dollars.
Suppose Candid grew from $20 million to $58 million. That would satisfy a 190% growth claim and still add only $38 million. OpenEvidence moving from roughly $150 million to $300 million adds around $150 million.
We are deliberately avoiding inventing Candid's actual revenue base. Until the company gives us that denominator, its 190% figure proves extraordinary growth but cannot prove that Candid is adding business faster than OpenEvidence.
Is Abridge catching OpenEvidence now?
Abridge is the closest challenger today if we care about large hospital adoption, and its newest usage data makes the race much more interesting.
Abridge now says more than 300 enterprise health systems use its platform, collectively representing more than 250 million patients. Its technology is expected to support over 100 million patient-clinician conversations this year.
The speed of expansion is impressive. Abridge had passed 100 health-system deployments in early 2025 and reported more than 150 enterprise health systems by June of that year. The count has since moved beyond 300.
Its customers include some of the biggest names in American healthcare. Johns Hopkins planned deployment across approximately 6,700 clinicians. Duke selected Abridge for around 5,000. Mayo Clinic began a broad rollout involving roughly 2,000 physicians.
A very recent development strengthens the case further. Abridge says its context-aware clinical decision-support product, introduced in April, has already been adopted across its 300+ partner systems. By August, monthly active usage had reached more than half of eligible clinicians, while the number of queries per clinician had tripled in only two months.
That is fast adoption inside hospitals, where new software can take months or years to spread.
Abridge still trails OpenEvidence on visible revenue acceleration and direct physician adoption. Among enterprise healthcare AI companies, though, Abridge looks like the clear growth leader right now.
If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest healthcare AI market report.
This chart, featured in our healthcare AI market deck, looks at Tempus AI’s strategy in healthcare AI
Are doctors actually using OpenEvidence while treating patients?
Yes. The latest evidence suggests OpenEvidence has become a regular clinical tool for a large share of U.S. doctors.
NBC News reported in May that roughly 65% of U.S. physicians had used OpenEvidence and that the platform appeared across almost 27 million clinical encounters during April alone.
That is far beyond the pattern we would expect from doctors simply trying a chatbot once.
Earlier company data showed around 20 million clinical consultations in January. On March 10, verified physicians completed one million consultations within a single day. The one-day record is a peak, not a normal daily average, but it fits the broader trajectory.
There is outside evidence too. A survey of hospitalists at one large academic medical center found OpenEvidence was the most widely used AI tool among respondents. In a Stanford-Harvard clinical-AI study, physicians who could freely choose external resources turned to OpenEvidence more often than ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and other general chatbots combined.
That last observation is useful because the doctors made the choice themselves. There was no enterprise rollout forcing everyone onto the same product.
OpenEvidence has managed to insert itself into a behavior doctors already had: looking up evidence, guidelines and treatment information during clinical work. That is probably a major reason adoption moved this quickly.
Could Hippocratic AI actually be growing faster than OpenEvidence?
Hippocratic AI is now the most serious challenger on raw interaction growth, but its missing revenue data keeps it behind OpenEvidence in our ranking.
The latest number is much larger than the one available earlier in the year. Hippocratic AI currently reports more than 250 million patient interactions.
In January, the company was talking about more than 150 million. The increase is therefore at least 100 million interactions in well under a year.
Hippocratic has also moved well beyond a narrow voice-bot use case. The company says more than 300 clinical use cases are live and lists over 50 EHR integrations. Its customers span healthcare providers, insurers and pharmaceutical companies.
In August, Hippocratic introduced “Agentic Orchestrators,” where several specialized AI agents coordinate around broader goals such as reducing readmissions, improving medication adherence or recovering patients who have fallen out of follow-up care.
The scale is already huge. But an interaction with an automated patient agent can be short, inexpensive and generated in bulk. One physician consultation with OpenEvidence or one Abridge encounter cannot be compared directly with one Hippocratic phone interaction.
More importantly, Hippocratic does not give us a current revenue figure that lets us test whether commercial growth is keeping pace with interaction growth.
If Hippocratic eventually discloses several hundred million dollars of rapidly increasing recurring revenue, our answer could change quickly. For now, 250 million interactions make Hippocratic a genuine contender rather than the winner.
If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest healthcare AI market report.
This chart, featured in our healthcare AI market deck, shows annual funding in healthcare AI startups
Are Aidoc, Nabla and diagnostic AI companies growing fast enough to win?
Aidoc, Nabla and DeepHealth are already large healthcare AI businesses, but their latest measurable growth still falls short of the leaders.
Aidoc has probably reached the deepest hospital footprint of this group. The company says its AI runs in nearly 2,000 hospitals, analyzes around 60 million patient cases each year and has processed more than 150 million cases cumulatively. It raised another $150 million in April.
The recent shift at Aidoc is interesting because hospitals are increasingly buying broader diagnostic-AI infrastructure rather than one algorithm for one condition. Twelve U.S. health systems recently joined an Aidoc-led diagnostic AI consortium, which shows how far the company has moved from isolated radiology tools toward system-wide deployment.
Nabla has a different kind of scale. Its current website says 85,000+ clinicians use Nabla across more than 130 healthcare organizations and over 20 million patient encounters annually. Those numbers are substantial, although the headline clinician and organization counts have changed little publicly since 2025. That makes it hard to establish a fresh growth rate.
DeepHealth gives us cleaner financial evidence because its parent, RadNet, is public. Digital Health ARR reached $105.5 million at the end of June 2026, up 97.2% year over year. Quarterly digital-health revenue also grew strongly.
A business approaching $106 million of ARR while almost doubling annually is growing very fast by normal healthcare-software standards. OpenEvidence's recent revenue curve is simply steeper.
| Company | Latest useful scale | Recent growth evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Aidoc | Nearly 2,000 hospitals | ~60M patient cases annually |
| Nabla | 85,000+ clinicians | 20M+ encounters annually |
| DeepHealth | $105.5M ARR | +97.2% YoY |
| Abridge | 300+ health systems | >100M conversations annually |
| Hippocratic AI | 250M+ cumulative interactions | >100M added since early 2026 |
Why can OpenEvidence grow this fast when hospitals usually buy software slowly?
OpenEvidence can spread unusually fast because an individual doctor can start using the product without waiting for a hospital-wide software purchase.
That changes the normal healthcare-software growth curve.
Abridge can win thousands of users through one contract, but hospital procurement involves compliance reviews, security checks, EHR integration, budgeting and deployment. A deal can be huge once it closes, although getting there takes time.
OpenEvidence has a much lighter path. Doctors can hear about the product from colleagues, verify that they are healthcare professionals and start using it themselves.
This gives OpenEvidence something healthcare software rarely gets: organic professional distribution.
The free core product makes that process even easier. OpenEvidence can focus on maximizing physician usage first and monetize the audience elsewhere.
Abridge's approach may create deeper institutional ties over time because the software becomes connected to hospital workflows and EHR data. OpenEvidence's approach is much faster at building an audience.
For a question about growth today, that distribution difference explains a large part of the result.
This chart, featured in our healthcare AI market deck, compares the main business model options for ambient AI companies
Is OpenEvidence's $300 million revenue run rate as impressive as it sounds?
OpenEvidence's roughly $300 million annualized revenue run rate is genuinely impressive, although its advertising-heavy model makes the number different from traditional SaaS ARR.
Doctors can use the core product free of charge. OpenEvidence monetizes much of its audience through pharmaceutical advertising and related commercial products, rather than collecting a software subscription from every physician.
That model helps explain how usage and revenue can rise together so quickly. OpenEvidence can add doctors with almost no purchasing friction and then sell access to that professional audience.
Bank of America estimated the relevant pharmaceutical advertising market at around $3 billion and said it was growing roughly 5% to 7% annually.
If OpenEvidence is already near $300 million of annualized revenue, the company has reached a meaningful fraction of that market in a remarkably short period. Continued growth at the same speed will eventually require more share, broader advertising products, enterprise health-system revenue or other forms of monetization.
The reported economics are strong so far. Sacra cites gross margins of roughly 90%, while reporting around the latest revenue estimate suggested OpenEvidence was close to cash-flow breakeven.
So we should discount the comparison with enterprise subscription ARR slightly, but there is no good reason to dismiss the revenue itself.
Has OpenEvidence's valuation grown faster than the actual business?
OpenEvidence's valuation raced ahead early on, but the latest revenue growth has already closed part of the gap.
The company was valued at roughly $1 billion in early 2025. Later rounds moved that figure to about $3.5 billion, then $6 billion and finally $12 billion.
That is roughly a twelvefold increase from the first of those valuations.
At a $150 million annualized revenue run rate, a $12 billion valuation implied around 80 times revenue. If the business is now near $300 million, the same valuation works out to approximately 40 times annualized revenue.
The multiple effectively fell by half because revenue doubled.
Investors reportedly floated financing OpenEvidence at around $20 billion during 2026. The company did not complete that transaction, so treating $20 billion as its current valuation would be misleading.
The latest completed $12 billion valuation is already extremely aggressive. The interesting part is how quickly the operating business has started catching up with it.
Abridge has seen a similarly dramatic repricing, going from around $2.75 billion to $5.3 billion within a few months in 2025. Candid Health says its latest financing tripled its previous valuation. Hippocratic AI raised at $3.5 billion after scaling its agent business.
Private investors are paying extraordinary prices across healthcare AI. OpenEvidence stands out because its revenue has moved almost as violently as its valuation.
This chart, featured in our healthcare AI market deck, illustrates how revenue is distributed across customer segments in the healthcare AI market
Could Abridge eventually become bigger than OpenEvidence?
Yes. Abridge has a credible path to becoming the bigger healthcare AI company even while OpenEvidence is growing faster today.
Abridge began by fixing one obvious problem: clinicians spending too much time writing notes. The product is now stretching much further into the clinical workflow.
Its newer platform prepares clinicians before appointments, generates documentation, surfaces evidence during care, supports coding and connects clinical information with financial workflows. Abridge is also working across health systems, payers and life-sciences companies.
The distribution is already there. More than 300 health systems give Abridge access to institutions collectively serving over 250 million patients.
That installed base could make every new product easier to distribute. The recent decision-support launch is an early example: Abridge says queries per clinician tripled in two months and more than half of eligible clinicians were already monthly active users.
OpenEvidence currently wins through rapid doctor-by-doctor adoption and a highly effective advertising model. Abridge can potentially make much more money per institution if it becomes embedded across documentation, decision support, billing and other workflows.
OpenEvidence is growing faster right now. Abridge may have the broader route to becoming the larger healthcare platform.
If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest healthcare AI market report.
Could ChatGPT, Claude or other general AI tools slow OpenEvidence down?
General-purpose AI models are the clearest long-term threat to OpenEvidence, although they have not stopped its growth so far.
The product sits in a market where underlying model quality keeps improving. ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini can all answer medical questions, summarize studies and increasingly connect answers to sources.
Healthcare specialists also have to worry about established medical platforms. Doximity is investing heavily in clinical AI, and traditional medical-information providers already have large professional audiences.
OpenEvidence's defense comes from specialization and distribution. The product is designed around medical evidence, peer-reviewed literature and physician workflows. It has also built relationships with medical publishers and professional organizations.
More important today is the audience it already has. Reaching roughly two-thirds of U.S. physicians gives OpenEvidence a distribution advantage that even technically strong competitors still have to overcome.
That advantage can disappear if doctors decide a general AI assistant is just as reliable and more convenient. We do not see that happening at scale yet. OpenEvidence's consultation volume continued climbing while competition became stronger.
The competitive risk is real, especially over several years. It has not changed the current growth ranking.
This chart, featured in our healthcare AI market deck, shows how symptom checker app technology has evolved over time
Which healthcare AI startup has the strongest growth when we combine speed and scale?
OpenEvidence currently has the best combination of growth rate, new revenue added and repeated clinician usage.
Candid Health has the cleanest eye-catching percentage: 190% year-over-year ARR growth. We still lack the absolute ARR number needed to know how much revenue it actually added.
Hippocratic AI has the biggest interaction count in the group, with more than 250 million patient interactions. Revenue remains too opaque for a clean comparison.
Abridge has arguably the strongest enterprise adoption story. It is now across 300+ health systems and more than 100 million annual conversations, while its newest clinical decision-support product is spreading quickly inside those customers.
DeepHealth nearly doubled ARR to $105.5 million. Aidoc has reached nearly 2,000 hospitals. Nabla serves more than 85,000 clinicians.
OpenEvidence's numbers sit in a different range. The company appears to have moved from about $7.9 million of annualized revenue at the end of 2024 to $150 million a year later and close to $300 million by mid-2026. At the same time, monthly clinical use increased from a few million consultations to tens of millions.
The $300 million estimate is the third time we have used that figure because it anchors the comparison: very few startups can double from a $150 million run rate in roughly seven months.
That combination is why OpenEvidence stays ahead after we account for the different business models.
So which healthcare AI startup is growing the fastest today?
OpenEvidence is the fastest-growing healthcare AI startup today, and the gap is large enough that we would need substantially different revenue data from Abridge, Hippocratic AI or Candid Health to change the answer.
The case comes from the trajectory rather than one spectacular metric.
OpenEvidence multiplied annualized revenue by roughly 19 times during 2025 according to Sacra's estimates, then roughly doubled again within about seven months. Physician usage also expanded from around 3 million monthly consultations early in 2025 to tens of millions per month. NBC News reported that about 65% of U.S. doctors had used the platform by spring 2026.
Candid Health can beat OpenEvidence on one disclosed percentage metric with 190% year-over-year ARR growth. Abridge can beat it on deep enterprise health-system penetration. Hippocratic AI can beat it on raw cumulative interaction volume. Aidoc has a larger established hospital footprint than most younger healthcare AI startups.
Once we combine speed with scale, OpenEvidence still comes out first.
The ranking could change. Abridge is spreading new products through more than 300 existing health systems, which gives it an unusually powerful expansion engine. Hippocratic AI has added at least 100 million patient interactions since the beginning of the year. Candid Health's 180% net dollar retention suggests existing customers are expanding aggressively.
For now, those companies are chasing a business that appears to have gone from single-digit millions of annualized revenue to hundreds of millions in less than two years.
That makes OpenEvidence our clearest answer today.
If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest healthcare AI market report.
In our healthcare AI market deck, we identify pain points entrepreneurs should prioritize
OUR METHODOLOGY
This analysis asks which healthcare AI startup is growing the fastest based on the strongest recent operating evidence, rather than choosing the company with the biggest funding round, the highest valuation or the most eye-catching usage number.
We broke the question into a few dimensions that can be compared across very different business models: revenue trajectory, absolute revenue added, product usage, customer or clinician adoption, the size of the existing base, and the speed at which that base is expanding. The final ranking reflects the combined evidence across those dimensions.
Percentage growth is useful but can be misleading when the starting base is small, so we gave extra weight to the amount of new business being added in dollars where a credible revenue base was available. This is why Candid Health's 190% recurring-revenue growth is treated as strong evidence without assuming an undisclosed ARR figure.
We also kept unlike usage metrics separate. A Hippocratic AI patient interaction, an OpenEvidence physician consultation, an Abridge patient-clinician conversation and a Candid Health claims workflow do not represent the same economic unit. We used each one to judge growth inside its own business model, then looked for confirmation in other measures.
Private-company revenue figures are not always audited or formally disclosed. Where we relied on estimates or reported run rates, we treated them as estimates and checked whether adoption, consultation volume, health-system expansion or customer growth pointed in the same direction.
Funding and valuation were secondary checks. They help show where investors are seeing acceleration, but they can move much faster than the underlying business, so neither was allowed to decide the ranking on its own.
We weighted fresh operating data more heavily than older milestones because the healthcare AI market is moving quickly. A company with the biggest installed footprint can still be growing more slowly than a younger company whose revenue and usage are accelerating much faster.
Key sources include Rock Health's H1 2026 digital-health funding overview, Rock Health's H1 2025 comparison data, Sacra's OpenEvidence revenue and usage estimates, The Information on OpenEvidence's reported revenue run rate and contemplated financing, NBC News on physician usage and clinical encounters, Candid Health on its Series D and customer scale, Sixth Street on Candid's recurring-revenue growth, Abridge on its 300+ health-system footprint and decision-support adoption, Hippocratic AI on patient interactions and live use cases, Aidoc on hospital deployment and diagnostic-AI scale, Nabla on clinician and encounter scale, and RadNet on DeepHealth's $105.5 million ARR and year-over-year growth.
This chart, featured in our healthcare AI market deck, illustrates how revenue is distributed geographically across Europe, Asia, North America, Africa, and South America in the healthcare AI market
Related blog posts
- Which healthcare AI startups are making the most revenue today?
