What are the latest funding trends in MedTech?

All funding deals in the MedTech market over the last years

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 MedTech market.

Is MedTech funding actually booming right now?

MedTech funding is clearly having a much stronger year, and the jump in the number of companies raising money is even more striking than the rise in dollars.

We count 177 financings in the current period, compared with 108 over the same stretch of 2025 and 114 two years ago. Unique funded companies moved from 104 last year to 177 now. Total disclosed capital reached $5.77 billion, up 47% from $3.92 billion.

The interesting part is what did not rise. The median round fell from $20 million to $11 million, while the average disclosed round slipped from $36.3 million to $33 million. Investors are funding many more companies these days, but the typical company is raising less than it did last year.

There is one coverage limitation we need to keep visible. Our current-period MedTech records stop on September 24, so the final part of the requested comparison window is still missing. Even with that gap, current deal activity is already far ahead of the previous comparable periods.

Metric	Current YTD	2025 comparable YTD	2024 comparable YTD	Current vs 2025
Deals	177	108	114	+63.9%
Unique companies	177	104	114	+70.2%
Total disclosed capital	$5.77B	$3.92B	$2.95B	+47.3%
Capital excluding >$50M rounds	$2.05B	$1.52B	$1.28B	+34.9%
Capital excluding >$100M rounds	$3.53B	$2.43B	$2.09B	+45.3%
Median round	$11.0M	$20.0M	$11.0M	-45.0%
Average disclosed round	$33.0M	$36.3M	$25.9M	-9.1%
Largest round	$1.50B	$650M	$200M	+130.8%

Is one giant MiRus deal making MedTech funding look stronger than it really is?

MiRus makes the MedTech funding boom look bigger, but the market would still be clearly up without the largest rounds.

Boston Scientific invested $1.5 billion in MiRus for roughly 34% of the company and secured an exclusive option tied to MiRus's TAVR business. That one transaction represents about 26% of all current disclosed MedTech capital, so ignoring its effect would badly distort the picture.

Still, capital below the $50 million round threshold reached $2.05 billion, compared with $1.52 billion last year. That is roughly 35% growth after removing every financing above $50 million. Capital excluding rounds above $100 million is up about 45%. Strip out the biggest rounds and the picture changes, which is why we size the market ourselves in our market report about MedTech.

There is another useful clue. We count only five rounds above $100 million now versus eight last year, yet overall capital is much higher. The top end has become more concentrated around a few exceptional transactions rather than simply producing more nine-figure rounds.

MiRus changes the scale of the increase, especially in implantables and Growth Equity. The wider funding recovery survives comfortably without it.

Are more MedTech startups actually getting funded now?

Yes. MedTech investors are currently backing a much wider set of companies, and that expansion is one of the clearest changes this year.

All 177 current financings belong to different companies. Last year's 108 deals covered only 104 businesses because four companies raised twice.

The bottom of the financing market has opened up especially fast. Sub-$5 million rounds rose from 15 to 49, Seed rounds increased from 10 to 41, and Series A financings moved from 25 to 47.

That gives us a very different market from 2025. Last year had fewer funded companies and a much higher $20 million median round. Today we have far more companies accessing capital, often through smaller checks.

Why is the typical MedTech round getting smaller?

The typical MedTech round is getting smaller because most of the extra activity is happening below $20 million.

Rounds under $5 million jumped from 15 last year to 49 now. Financings between $5 million and $20 million increased from 37 to 59. Together, those two groups now make up more than 60% of all current deals.

The middle barely expanded. We found 38 rounds between $20 million and $50 million, versus 34 last year, so that segment grew by only four transactions while the overall market added 69.

Large financings remain available, with 25 deals above $50 million compared with 21 last year. The shape of the market has stretched outward: many more small rounds, a relatively thin middle and a handful of enormous checks.

That mix naturally pushes the median down even during a year when total funding is rising quickly.

Is MedTech funding becoming a barbell market?

Yes. MedTech funding currently has a clear barbell shape, with far more Seed and Series A activity at one end and huge Growth Equity commitments at the other.

Seed and Series A together account for 49.7% of current deals, up from 32.4% last year. Early-stage activity has moved almost back to the 54.4% level we saw two years ago.

Growth Equity went the other way in terms of dollars. Only 16 current transactions fall into that stage, yet they attracted $2.22 billion, or 38.4% of all disclosed capital. Last year Growth Equity represented only 6.7% of funding. Money piling into a handful of late-stage deals is one of the less obvious risks we rate by likelihood in our report covering the MedTech market.

Series B looks squeezed between those two ends. Its share of transactions fell from 24.1% to 9.6%, while its share of capital dropped from 22.7% to 7.0%.

Right now, the funding ladder has plenty of activity near company formation and plenty of money for selected mature companies. The middle has become much less prominent.

Stage	Current deal share	Current capital share	Current median	2025 deal share	2025 capital share
Seed	23.2%	3.4%	$3.3M	9.3%	1.0%
Series A	26.6%	13.1%	$10.38M	23.1%	9.9%
Series B	9.6%	7.0%	$22.0M	24.1%	22.7%
Series C	9.0%	16.5%	$45.4M	13.9%	17.5%
Series D+	9.6%	17.8%	$40.0M	12.0%	33.1%
Growth Equity	9.0%	38.4%	$45.0M	3.7%	6.7%
Unknown	13.0%	3.8%	$3.9M	13.9%	9.1%

Can new MedTech startups raise money again?

New MedTech companies are having a much easier time getting their first financing than they did last year.

We identify 40 first financings now, compared with only 10 in the equivalent 2025 period and 22 two years ago. Their share of all transactions rose from 9.3% to 22.6%.

The checks also became more meaningful. Median first financing increased from $2.35 million to $4.88 million, while total capital going into first financings rose from $69.5 million to $364.1 million.

These new entrants still receive only a small part of the overall dollar pool. Previously financed companies attracted $5.37 billion, so the biggest checks remain heavily skewed toward businesses with an existing financing history.

Still, access has changed dramatically. Founders trying to enter the MedTech funding market currently face a much better environment than they did in 2025.

We keep some caution around this measure because identifying a "first financing" depends on publicly traceable financing history. It is a useful market indicator, but we do not pretend every private historical transaction can be reconstructed perfectly.

Which parts of MedTech are getting hot right now?

The fastest-moving parts of MedTech currently depend on what we mean by "hot": Implantable Devices dominate the money, Diagnostics are exploding in deal count, and Digital Medical Software is gaining on both.

Implantable Devices attracted $2.93 billion, more than half of all current capital. Their share of deals, however, fell from 30.6% last year to 20.9%.

Diagnostic Devices tell almost the opposite story. Deal count jumped from seven to 25 and deal share more than doubled, yet the median round is only $5 million.

Digital Medical Software may have the cleanest momentum. Its deal share increased from 7.4% to 11.9%, while capital share moved from 4.4% to 8.8%. Aidoc's $150 million Series E helped, but the category's expansion goes beyond that one financing.

Therapeutic Devices remain the busiest category by raw deal count, with 53 financings, while Surgical and Robotic Systems have lost ground.

Category	Current deals	Current deal share	Current capital	Current capital share
Therapeutic Devices	53	29.9%	$1.44B	24.9%
Implantable Devices	37	20.9%	$2.93B	50.9%
Diagnostic Devices	25	14.1%	$383.4M	6.6%
Digital Medical Software	21	11.9%	$505.6M	8.8%
Surgical & Robotic Systems	15	8.5%	$242.3M	4.2%
Patient Monitoring	15	8.5%	$148.1M	2.6%
Medical Imaging	11	6.2%	$120.7M	2.1%

Is the implantable-device funding boom actually broad?

The current implantable-device boom is mostly a story of investors putting very large amounts behind a relatively small group of advanced companies.

Implantables lost almost 10 percentage points of deal share versus last year while still increasing their capital share. Investors are making fewer relative bets in the category but writing much larger checks when they have conviction.

MiRus is the extreme case. Boston Scientific's $1.5 billion investment came with an approximately 34% stake and an exclusive option around the SIEGEL TAVR business.

Precision Neuroscience adds another $250 million. By the time of its latest round, the company said its Layer 7 interface had been used in more than 100 patients across more than 18 medical centers, following FDA clearance for temporary cortical use.

Science Corporation raised $230 million as PRIMA moved much closer to being a commercial product. The picture became even more concrete later in the year when Science announced European commercial availability of PRIMA after receiving CE marking, with Germany expected to host the first commercial implants.

These are very different situations from an early implant startup raising on technical promise alone. Investors are currently putting serious money behind companies that have accumulated clinical evidence, regulatory progress or strategic value.

Is clinical AI now one of the strongest areas in MedTech?

Clinical AI is currently one of the healthier MedTech funding areas because investor interest is expanding across both deal activity and capital.

Digital Medical Software now represents 11.9% of financings and 8.8% of funding, up from 7.4% and 4.4% respectively last year.

Aidoc gives us a good example of what investors are paying for. Goldman Sachs Alternatives led its $150 million Series E, with General Catalyst, SoftBank Vision Fund 2 and NVentures also participating. The company said the financing would support expansion of its clinical foundation model and enterprise AI platform. Clinical AI platforms are the kind of tech we sort into what works today, what is being tested and what is still on paper in our market report about MedTech.

By now, the pitch is much broader than a single algorithm that flags one abnormality on one scan. Companies such as Aidoc are trying to become infrastructure used across hospital workflows, imaging modalities and clinical specialties.

We can see a similar appetite around imaging efficiency elsewhere in our deal research. Vista AI raised $29.5 million around automated MRI scanning, while Subtle Medical secured $33 million to expand its AI-powered imaging products.

Clinical AI still has plenty to prove commercially, but investors are clearly paying more attention to the category today than they were a year ago.

Are diagnostics quietly becoming one of MedTech's busiest areas?

Yes. Diagnostic Devices are having a much bigger year than their relatively modest funding total suggests.

We count 25 current diagnostic financings versus seven last year. The category's share of MedTech deals jumped from 6.5% to 14.1%.

Vitestro raised $70 million for its autonomous blood-draw technology, ClearNote Health secured $52 million for early cancer detection, Mammogen announced up to $30 million for blood-based breast-cancer detection, and Abram Scientific raised $11.75 million around its blood testing platform.

At the other end of the distribution, several much smaller Seed and Series A financings are showing up across cancer screening, infectious disease, pancreatic-cancer detection and other diagnostic applications.

That explains the unusual combination of strong activity and a $5 million median round. Diagnostics currently look like an area where investors are trying many things rather than concentrating most of the money behind one or two dominant companies.

Are surgical and robotic MedTech startups losing investor attention?

Surgical and Robotic Systems are clearly losing relative funding momentum for now.

The category accounts for 8.5% of current deals, down from 13.9% last year and 14.0% two years ago. Capital share fell to 4.2%, compared with 10.2% and 8.9% in those earlier periods.

There are still meaningful financings. Route 92 Medical raised $50 million, Calyxo secured $40 million, Ventaris Surgical raised $30 million, XCath raised another $30 million and Monteris Medical secured $28 million.

The issue is relative momentum. Other parts of MedTech are expanding much faster, so surgical and robotic systems now occupy a smaller piece of the funding market than they did in either comparable year.

We should avoid turning that funding shift into a claim that demand for surgical technology itself is falling. What we can say confidently is that investors are currently directing a smaller share of both their deals and their dollars toward this category.

Is Series B the weak spot in MedTech funding right now?

Series B is currently the clearest weak point in the MedTech funding ladder.

Series B fell from 26 deals in the comparable 2025 period to 17 now, even though overall MedTech financing activity surged. Its deal share collapsed from 24.1% to 9.6%. What it would take for Series B funding to recover is one of the growth drivers we weigh in our report covering the MedTech market.

Series A moved the other way, from 25 deals to 47. Series C still attracted $952 million despite having only 16 deals. Growth Equity had an exceptional year.

The available company-age data add an interesting wrinkle. The median Series B company getting funded is around 10 years old today, versus eight years last year and 6.5 years two years ago. Series C moved from seven years to 11 over the same two-year comparison.

That pattern could mean investors want considerably more proof before committing mid-stage capital. We would not push that conclusion too far because founding-date coverage is incomplete, especially for 2025. The collapse in Series B's share itself, however, is hard to miss.

Are MedTech investors getting more selective?

MedTech investors currently look more open to funding companies but tougher about who deserves a really large check.

At the entry level, the market has loosened dramatically. We see far more first financings, Seed rounds, Series A deals and sub-$5 million checks.

As companies move further along, the pattern gets harder. Series B has weakened, the median overall round has fallen, and the biggest capital pools are clustering around companies with visible clinical progress, commercial traction or strategic relevance.

Recent Therapeutic Device rounds illustrate the split. Spiro Medical raised $67 million to develop a neuromodulation system for asthma. Inquis Medical secured $75 million to scale adoption of its thrombectomy system. Endogenex raised another $50 million around a pivotal clinical study and FDA pathway. Pulnovo Medical raised $100 million in a round that included a strategic investment from Medtronic.

There is plenty of capital available right now, but investors seem much happier taking numerous smaller early bets and reserving the very large checks for companies that can show something concrete.

Are big medical-device companies investing more directly in startups?

Large medical-device companies are showing up in more financings, although strategic investors still participate in a minority of MedTech deals.

We count 32 financings with strategic participation, versus 23 last year and 20 two years ago. Because total deal volume grew even faster, the strategic share actually slipped from 21.3% to 18.1%.

The corporate footprint is still worth watching. Boston Scientific's MiRus transaction is the obvious outlier, while Medtronic participated strategically in Pulnovo Medical's $100 million financing and appears three times among current disclosed leads or co-leads in our research.

The wider lead-investor pool has expanded as well. We identify 142 unique disclosed lead investors today versus 108 last year, even though the percentage of rounds naming a lead fell from 72.2% to 63.3%.

That combination suggests a broader investor ecosystem, although lead disclosure is imperfect enough that we would not build a league-table narrative around individual firms disappearing or appearing in one period.

Is North America pulling away from Europe in MedTech funding?

North America is pulling away in MedTech dollars, while the gap in actual deal activity is much smaller.

North America represents 50.8% of current transactions, close to 49.1% last year. Its capital share, however, jumped from 60.7% to 72.9%.

The United States alone accounts for 89 deals and 72.8% of disclosed capital. MiRus clearly pushes that number upward, but U.S. deal activity itself also increased sharply.

Europe still produces 58 financings, or nearly one-third of the market, yet its share of capital has fallen to 20.2% from 30.1% last year.

Asia-Pacific looks different again. Deal count rose from six to 22, while capital share stayed close to 5%. More companies are raising there, but the checks remain much smaller than the large North American financings dominating the dollar totals.

Region	Current deals	Current deal share	Current capital share	2025 deal share	2025 capital share
North America	90	50.8%	72.9%	49.1%	60.7%
Europe	58	32.8%	20.2%	42.6%	30.1%
Asia-Pacific	22	12.4%	5.2%	5.6%	5.4%
Middle East	6	3.4%	1.6%	2.8%	3.8%
Africa	1	0.6%	0.1%	0%	0%
United States alone	89	50.3%	72.8%	47.2%	59.9%
Outside North America	87	49.2%	27.1%	50.9%	39.3%

Has MedTech funding already beaten the previous full years?

Yes. The MedTech market has already produced more observed deals than either of the previous two complete calendar years.

We count 177 transactions through the latest available current-period record. Full-year 2025 had 133 deals, while 2024 had 144.

Current disclosed capital of $5.77 billion has also passed the full-year 2025 total of $5.36 billion and is well above the 2024 total. Deal counts that pass whole earlier years are among the market signals we follow every quarter in our report on MedTech.

We do not annualize from here because MedTech financing arrives unevenly and one or two large transactions can change the year quickly. There is no need to extrapolate anyway: the activity already recorded is enough to show how unusual this year has been.

As seen above, this conclusion also survives the outlier test. The market is not merely ahead because one giant transaction inflated the capital total; the number of companies successfully raising money has already moved well beyond recent full-year levels.

What is actually changing in MedTech funding?

The biggest change is that MedTech fundraising has become much broader. More companies can currently get financed, and the increase is especially visible among first financings, Seed rounds and smaller checks. That is the strongest evidence that the market has genuinely improved.

At the same time, a broad recovery in access has not translated into bigger rounds for the typical company. The $11 million median is almost half last year's level. Investors are spreading smaller amounts across many more businesses while concentrating very large sums around a narrower group of advanced companies.

The funding ladder has also become more polarized. Seed and Series A are busy again, Growth Equity commands an enormous share of the money, and Series B has become the obvious soft spot.

Investor attention is rotating across MedTech categories as well. Diagnostics are adding companies quickly. Digital Medical Software is gaining both deals and dollars. Implantables dominate capital because investors are backing selected clinical and regulatory winners at very large scale. Surgical and Robotic Systems have lost relative weight.

Strategic capital remains important without taking over the market. Corporates are involved in more deals, and transactions such as Boston Scientific–MiRus or Medtronic–Pulnovo show how strategic considerations can produce very large financings.

The trend we would treat most carefully is company age. There are hints that investors are demanding longer proof histories at Series B and Series C, but founding-date coverage is too uneven to put that conclusion on the same footing as the deal-count, capital, stage and category findings.

The clearest way to describe MedTech funding today is simple: many more companies are getting funded, the average successful company does not need to raise a bigger round, and the truly huge checks are increasingly reserved for businesses that can show investors tangible clinical progress, regulatory movement, commercial traction or strategic value.