Pet Tech Funding: A Quarter-by-Quarter Analysis

All funding deals in the Pet Tech 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 Pet Tech Market.

Is Pet Tech funding actually slowing down right now?

Yes. Pet Tech funding is clearly smaller in dollar terms than it was in the strongest 2025 quarters, while deal activity has held up much better than the headline totals suggest.

We counted 20 financings across 19 companies between Q2 2025 and Q2 2026. Deal count moved from four to four to five to four to three. Over the same period, disclosed capital swung from $52.34 million to $4.45 million, back to $51.66 million, then down to $1.46 million and $3.30 million.

Those two lines tell very different stories. The number of funded companies changed relatively little. The amount of money changed dramatically whenever $20 million-scale rounds appeared or disappeared.

Disclosure also became worse in 2026. All four Q2 2025 rounds had known amounts, compared with only half of Q1 2026 deals and two-thirds of Q2 2026 deals. We can be confident that large growth rounds became much rarer. We should be more careful with the exact size of the decline in total capital.

Quarter	Deals	Disclosed capital	Median disclosed round	First-financing share
Q2 2025	4	$52.34m	$15.50m	25%
Q3 2025	4	$4.45m	$0.60m	50%
Q4 2025	5	$51.66m	$13.75m	20%
Q1 2026	4	$1.46m	$0.73m	50%
Q2 2026	3	$3.30m	$1.65m	67%
Five-quarter total	20	$113.21m disclosed	-	-

Was Pet Tech funding really strong in Q2 2025, or did a few deals make it look that way?

Q2 2025 was a strong Pet Tech funding quarter, but almost all of the money sat in three deals.

Vetr raised $21 million, Koala Health raised $20 million and Airvet raised $11 million. Together, those three financings represented 99.3% of the quarter's disclosed capital. MetaDx, the fourth company, raised approximately $341,000.

Koala Health's Series B and Airvet's Series B-2 are useful examples of what investors were backing at the time: established digital pet-health businesses with proven operating models. Koala was building a mobile-first pharmacy connected to veterinary clinics, while Airvet had grown its enterprise tele-veterinary business and said enterprise annual recurring revenue had increased more than fourfold year over year.

Vetr needs more care. Its $21 million came from Pale Horse Capital, which is controlled by Vetr founder Andrew Hamilton. We kept the financing in our numbers because the capital was real, while treating it differently from a conventional independent VC-led round.

Q2 2025 therefore set a high funding baseline through a small group of relatively large financings. New-company formation was much quieter: only one of the four deals qualified as a first financing.

What actually happened to Pet Tech funding in Q3 2025?

Pet Tech funding went through a brutal check-size reset in Q3 2025 even though the number of financings did not fall.

There were four deals again, exactly the same as in Q2, while disclosed capital dropped 91.5% to $4.45 million. The median round fell from $15.5 million to just $600,000.

Nest Veterinary accounted for roughly $3.45 million and 77.5% of all disclosed capital in the quarter. Happy Pet Tech raised $600,000 and Petscribers about $399,000. SATELLAI also raised, although the exact amount was not disclosed.

Meanwhile, first financings increased from one-quarter to half of all deals. Investors were still putting money into new companies; they were simply doing it with much smaller checks.

Q3 is one of the clearest examples in the whole period of funding dollars telling a much more dramatic story than deal activity.

Did Pet Tech funding really bounce back in Q4 2025?

Yes, but the Q4 2025 Pet Tech rebound came from a very specific place: growth-stage veterinary software.

Disclosed capital jumped from $4.45 million to $51.66 million while deal count only increased from four to five. Digitail's $23 million Series B and Lupa's $20 million Series A generated about 83% of the quarter's disclosed funding between them.

There was commercial progress behind those financings. Digitail said when it announced the round that its customer base had more than doubled over the previous twelve months, reaching 10,000 veterinarians and three million pet parents. Lupa said its financing followed 50-fold revenue growth since its previous round.

Traini added a $7.5 million financing, VETSTOR raised roughly $1.16 million, and Shenzhen Xiaowen also raised an undisclosed amount. Four of the five deals were follow-ons.

That mix makes Q4 easy to read: investors were willing to put serious money behind companies that had already reached a stronger level of commercial maturity, especially in veterinary software.

Company	Quarter	Amount	Why the deal mattered
Digitail	Q4 2025	$23.0m	Large Series B for veterinary software
Vetr	Q2 2025	$21.0m	Large round, although founder-affiliated
Koala Health	Q2 2025	$20.0m	Growth capital for digital pet pharmacy
Lupa	Q4 2025	$20.0m	Series A for AI veterinary software
Airvet	Q2 2025	$11.0m	Follow-on funding for pet telehealth
Traini	Q4 2025	$7.5m	AI and wearable exposure
Nest Veterinary	Q3 2025	$3.45m	Dominated an otherwise small quarter
Petwealth	Q2 2026	$1.7m	Early pet-health platform financing
Travv	Q2 2026	$1.6m	Seed funding for AI veterinary diagnostics

Why did Pet Tech funding crash again in Q1 2026?

Pet Tech funding fell in Q1 2026 because the big veterinary-software rounds disappeared and the deal mix swung toward young Chinese wearables and smart devices.

Deal count slipped from five to four, yet disclosed capital fell to $1.46 million. PettiChat's $1 million financing and Moggie's approximately $461,000 share allotment were the only rounds with precise amounts. SATELLAI and MOVA AI Pets both raised qualifying rounds without disclosing enough detail for us to assign reliable dollar values.

The category mix changed just as sharply. Pet Care Apps went from 80% of Q4 deals to zero in Q1. The four Q1 transactions were split evenly between Pet Health Wearables and Smart Pet Devices.

Three of those companies were based in China. SATELLAI was developing an AI-connected pet collar, MOVA was combining connected devices with a pet-data platform, and PettiChat was developing an AI-powered wearable intended to interpret animal vocalizations.

The quarter looked dramatically weaker in dollars because the market had moved from companies raising tens of millions for established software platforms to much younger businesses financing new hardware and AI products.

Is Pet Tech funding recovering in Q2 2026?

Only a little. Pet Tech check sizes improved in Q2 2026, but the market was still operating far below the scale-up funding seen in 2025.

Disclosed capital increased from $1.46 million to $3.30 million even though deal count fell from four to three. Petwealth accounted for $1.7 million and Travv for $1.6 million. Qialg also raised a qualifying round in China, with the exact amount undisclosed.

The median disclosed financing more than doubled to $1.65 million. That sounds dramatic after Q1 because the starting point was so low. In absolute terms, these were still early-stage-sized checks.

The category mix also moved back toward software. Petwealth, Travv and Qialg all sit within Pet Care Apps in our classification, giving the category all three Q2 deals.

Q2 looks like a modest improvement in early-stage funding, not a return to the kind of $20 million-plus scale-up rounds seen during 2025.

Are new Pet Tech startups still getting funded?

Yes. New Pet Tech companies are taking a bigger share of deals, and the funded cohort is getting noticeably younger.

First financings fell to just 20% of deals during the follow-on-heavy Q4 2025 boom, then rose to 50% in Q1 2026 and 67% in Q2. PettiChat and MOVA were first financings in Q1; Petwealth and Travv were first financings in Q2.

Company age moves in the same direction. Median age across funded companies fell from roughly four years in Q2 2025 to two years in both Q3 and Q4, then to 1.5 years in Q1 2026 and one year in Q2.

That age progression is unusually smooth compared with the funding totals. Dollar amounts jump all over the place, while the companies attracting money gradually get younger.

The rise in first financings reinforces the same picture. Pet Tech is currently producing a younger pipeline of funded startups even though those companies are entering with relatively modest amounts of capital.

Are Pet Tech investors writing smaller checks now?

Yes. By 2026, disclosed Pet Tech rounds had moved decisively into the sub-$5 million range.

Q2 and Q4 2025 each contained two financings between $20 million and $50 million. Q3 had none, and neither did Q1 or Q2 2026.

There were no $50 million-plus rounds anywhere in the five-quarter period. The volatility cannot be blamed on giant megarounds. A much more useful dividing line for this market is around $20 million.

When $20 million-scale transactions were present, quarterly funding exceeded $50 million. Once they disappeared, disclosed quarterly capital stayed below $5 million.

That gives us a straightforward way to watch the market from here: a meaningful funding recovery probably needs the return of eight-figure growth rounds, not simply a few more seed deals.

Quarter	<$5m deals	$5m–<$20m deals	$20m–<$50m deals	Median disclosed round
Q2 2025	1	1	2	$15.50m
Q3 2025	3	0	0	$0.60m
Q4 2025	1	1	2	$13.75m
Q1 2026	2	0	0	$0.73m
Q2 2026	2	0	0	$1.65m

Is veterinary software the hottest part of Pet Tech funding now?

Veterinary software has the strongest multi-quarter funding case in Pet Tech right now.

Pet Care Apps represented half of Q2 2025 deals, 75% in Q3 and 80% in Q4. The category disappeared during the Q1 hardware rotation, then came straight back with all three financings in Q2 2026.

More importantly, the category has attracted capital at several levels of maturity. We saw small first rounds, follow-ons and major growth financings rather than one company carrying the entire theme.

The products are also moving closer to core veterinary workflows. Practice management, clinical documentation, diagnostics, communications, medical records and AI-assisted workflows are increasingly being sold together instead of as isolated software tools.

External adoption data supports that direction. The British Veterinary Association's Voice of the Veterinary Profession research found in 2025 that 21% of surveyed vets were already using AI at work. Radiography diagnostics and reporting were the most common applications, followed by laboratory diagnostics, client communication and administration.

That commercial connection makes veterinary software the part of Pet Tech where funding momentum currently looks most grounded in everyday professional use.

Did smart pet devices really take over Pet Tech funding?

Only briefly. Smart pet devices and wearables owned Q1 2026 deal flow, with China driving most of that burst, then vanished from Q2.

SATELLAI, MOVA, PettiChat and Moggie made Q1 entirely hardware- or wearable-oriented. Three of the four companies were Chinese, pushing Asia-Pacific to 75% of the quarter's deals.

There was a real commercial idea behind that cluster. Smart collars, feeders, litter boxes and other connected products can collect continuous behavioral, physiological and environmental data. AI then becomes useful for health alerts, safety monitoring and personalized services. iResearch's 2025 research on China's pet-tech sector highlighted that move toward connected feeding, health monitoring and AI-enabled pet products.

SATELLAI's financing announcement made the same argument. Its investors described the company as combining positioning, wearable hardware and multimodal AI to build longer-term health and safety models around individual pets.

Q2 immediately swung back to software, which keeps the Q1 hardware boom in the one-quarter-spike category for now.

Is North America still getting the biggest Pet Tech checks?

Yes. North American Pet Tech companies keep attracting a disproportionate share of disclosed dollars whenever larger rounds appear.

North America represented 75% of Q2 2025 deals and 99.3% of disclosed capital. In Q3, its deal share fell to 25%, yet Nest Veterinary alone gave the region 77.5% of disclosed capital.

Q4 became more balanced. North America had 40% of deals and 59% of disclosed capital, while Europe had another 40% of deals and 41% of dollars. That was largely driven by sizable software financings on both sides of the Atlantic.

The Chinese hardware cluster then made Q1 the exception. Asia-Pacific represented three-quarters of deals. By Q2, two of the three financings were back in North America, and those two accounted for all precisely disclosed capital.

With such a small number of transactions, we would avoid claiming that North America has structurally won Pet Tech. The narrower conclusion is solid: the largest disclosed checks in our research have disproportionately gone to North American companies.

Quarter	North America deal share	North America capital share	APAC deal share	Europe deal share
Q2 2025	75%	99.3%	25%	0%
Q3 2025	25%	77.5%	50%	25%
Q4 2025	40%	59.0%	20%	40%
Q1 2026	0%	0% disclosed	75%	25%
Q2 2026	67%	100% disclosed	33%	0%

Is Pet Tech funding shifting back to early-stage startups?

Yes. Company ages, financing histories and 2026 check sizes all point back toward early-stage Pet Tech, even though the stage labels themselves are incomplete.

Q4 2025 was the clearest scale-up quarter. Series A and Series B rounds accounted for 83.2% of disclosed capital. Q1 then consisted entirely of companies classified as Seed or Series A, and the precisely disclosed rounds were much smaller.

Q2 looks early-stage too, although we only have a reliable conventional stage for one of its three transactions. Petwealth and Qialg remain Unknown because public evidence did not justify forcing them into a stage bucket.

This is why we put more weight on several facts together: younger company ages, more first financings and much smaller checks. They all point in the same direction without requiring us to guess missing stage labels.

For now, Pet Tech looks more like a startup-formation market than a mature-company financing cycle.

Is Pet Tech funding spreading across more companies or concentrating on a few winners?

Pet Tech is broadening at the bottom and staying concentrated at the top.

The deal count never moves outside a narrow range of three to five financings per quarter. New companies also become more visible toward the end of the period.

Dollar concentration is much harsher. Nest Veterinary generated 77.5% of Q3 disclosed capital on its own. The two largest Q4 rounds generated roughly 83% of that quarter's capital. In Q2 2025, the three largest transactions captured 99.3%.

A founder looking only at total dollars could easily think Pet Tech repeatedly jumps between boom and bust. Looking at actual financings gives a steadier picture, with far less consistency in who can raise a large round.

That concentration helps explain why quarterly funding charts for small markets like Pet Tech can look much more volatile than the underlying startup activity.

Are the same investors coming back to Pet Tech every quarter?

No. Pet Tech lead investors are unusually fragmented in our five-quarter sample.

We did not find one disclosed lead investor that led more than one financing during the period. HighlandX appeared behind Airvet, Valspring Capital behind Koala Health, Singular behind Lupa, Five Elms behind Digitail, SenseTime Guoxiang Capital behind SATELLAI, Skyworks Venture Capital behind MOVA, Predictive Venture Partners behind Petwealth and Digitalis Ventures behind Travv.

That makes the investor base look broad, although disclosure quality varies too much to claim that investor diversity itself is increasing. Q2 2025 had disclosed leads for every deal; Q3 disclosed a lead for only one of four.

Q4 is another good example of why raw counts can mislead. Eight unique lead or co-lead names appear, but Traini alone disclosed four co-leads.

What we can say confidently is that there is no recurring lead-investor group repeatedly controlling Pet Tech financings quarter after quarter.

Are corporate strategic investors actually entering Pet Tech?

Not in any clear, repeatable way. Strategic capital is still peripheral in the Pet Tech rounds we could verify.

None of the transactions between Q2 2025 and Q2 2026 met our standard for confirmed strategic-investor participation based on both the investor identity and a defensible strategic rationale.

MOVA is the closest case. Financing coverage reported participation by an unnamed strategic industrial investor, but the investor was not identified clearly enough for us to classify the transaction as confirmed strategic capital.

Vetr's financing is unusual for a different reason because the funding came from a founder-controlled investment firm. We treat founder-affiliated capital separately from a corporate investor entering Pet Tech because it wants access to technology, distribution, data or another strategic asset.

For now, conventional venture and investment firms remain much more visible than corporate strategic investors in the funding history we reconstructed.

Did investors lose interest in tele-vet startups?

Funding did. Tele-vet went from 61% of disclosed Pet Tech capital in Q2 2025 to zero observed deals in the next four quarters, even though the business model itself remained part of the pet-care market.

Airvet and Vetr produced $32 million of Q2 funding between them. No company classified as a Tele Vet Platform then raised another qualifying round through the end of Q2 2026.

Part of the explanation may simply be that tele-veterinary functions are being absorbed into broader products. Video consultations, messaging, prescriptions and remote care increasingly sit inside larger veterinary software, pharmacy and pet-health platforms.

That makes the category boundary less clean than it was a few years ago. A company can still provide remote veterinary care while investors think of the business primarily as practice software, diagnostics, pharmacy infrastructure or a broader pet-health platform.

The funding category has clearly faded. The underlying functionality has not disappeared with it.

Is AI actually driving Pet Tech funding today?

Yes, especially in veterinary software, where AI is already tied to documentation, diagnostics and clinic workflow.

The British Veterinary Association found that 21% of surveyed vets were already using AI in daily work. Among those users, radiography diagnostics and reporting were the most common applications at 44%, followed by laboratory diagnostics at 27%. Smaller shares used it for client communication and administration.

A study published in the Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine in 2026 found routine AI use among 42% of surveyed American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine respondents and 33% of European College of Veterinary Internal Medicine–Companion Animals respondents. AI medical scribes were among the most common tools.

Funding is moving into many of those same jobs. Travv raised $1.6 million to develop AI-native veterinary diagnostic workflows. Other funded platforms cover medical records, documentation, practice management, communication and decision support.

We still need to separate useful AI from fashionable branding company by company, but veterinary workflows already give investors several concrete problems where the technology can save time or improve access to information.

What's the biggest funding problem for Pet Tech right now?

Pet Tech's biggest funding problem right now is scale-up capital.

The early end of the market is still alive. New companies are getting financed, younger founders are entering the market and Q2 2026 even showed a modest rebound in median deal size.

What has been missing since the end of 2025 is a dependable path into larger growth rounds. The strongest quarters had companies raising around $20 million to $23 million. The first half of 2026 gave us disclosed checks around $461,000, $1 million, $1.6 million and $1.7 million.

That gap is more important than whether the next quarter contains three deals or five. Pet Tech needs some of its younger companies to grow far enough for investors to start writing eight-figure checks again.

Until that happens, startup activity can remain healthy while total funding still looks weak.

Has anything changed since Q2 2026?

As of now, the first Pet Tech financings after our June cutoff reinforce the early-stage story more than they overturn it.

We kept all post-Q2 deals outside the calculations above so that the five quarters remain directly comparable. Still, looking at what happened next is useful.

Wonderdog raised a $5 million pre-seed round for a preventive canine-health platform combining at-home blood testing with AI. Hoomanely raised $1.8 million in pre-seed funding around a sensor-equipped feeding station and pet-health data platform. Australia's Elita then raised A$1.9 million, approximately $1.36 million at the financing-date exchange rate, as it expanded its dog-health and longevity platform.

Those deals are recent enough to give us an early check on the thesis. New pet-health companies are still attracting capital, and AI-enabled preventive care remains active. Wonderdog's $5 million round also shows that early-stage checks can move above the roughly $1 million to $2 million level seen in Q2.

We still have not seen enough post-period evidence to call a return of the 2025 scale-up cycle. The current picture remains formation-heavy.

What is Pet Tech funding actually telling us now?

The clearest read is that Pet Tech is still producing new companies, but the market has yet to rebuild a reliable path to large growth rounds.

Quarterly funding totals exaggerate the swings. Deal activity stayed within a relatively narrow band while disclosed capital moved by more than tenfold between adjacent quarters. The presence of a few $20 million-scale deals explains most of that volatility.

The younger-company trend looks much more durable. Median company age fell steadily across the period, and the share of first financings increased again after Q4. The recent post-period rounds point in the same direction.

Veterinary software currently has the best multi-quarter case for sustained investor interest. It attracted both early-stage funding and the largest institutional rounds, while independent surveys show AI tools already entering routine veterinary work.

The China-led smart-device surge deserves attention, although one quarter followed by an immediate reversal is still too little evidence for a lasting shift. The same caution applies to geography: North America repeatedly captured large dollar shares, but a small number of deals can change the ranking very quickly.

Investor leadership remains fragmented, and we found little evidence that strategic corporate capital is becoming a major force. The bigger question these days is whether today's young Pet Tech companies can mature into tomorrow's $10 million to $25 million rounds.

The most misleading headline would be that Pet Tech funding simply collapsed in 2026. Large disclosed checks clearly dried up, while incomplete disclosure hides part of the actual capital raised and new-company formation continued. As of now, the market looks younger, earlier and cheaper to fund than it did in 2025.