What are the funding trends in digital health right now?

All funding deals in the digital health 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 Digital Health Market.

Digital health funding: what is actually changing in 2026?

Is digital health funding actually doing well right now?

Digital health funding is holding up surprisingly well in dollars today, even though investors are financing far fewer companies.

We tracked 183 financings from January 1 through September 21, 2026, down 13.7% from 212 over the same period last year. The number of companies receiving funding also fell, from 205 to 181. Yet calculable capital slipped by only 5.4%, from $6.13 billion to $5.79 billion.

Rounds are simply getting much bigger. The median financing increased from $12 million to $14.6 million, while the average climbed from $29.2 million to $32.2 million.

The comparison with 2024 makes the change even easier to see. Digital health has raised 44.7% more money than during the same period two years ago despite recording 13.7% fewer deals. By September 21, 2026, funding had even reached 111% of the amount raised during the whole of 2024, with only 62.5% as many deals as that full year.

So the money is still there. Access to that money has become much narrower.

Digital health funding	2026 YTD	2025 same period	2024 same period
Deals	183	212	212
Funded companies	181	205	211
Calculable capital	$5.79B	$6.13B	$4.00B
Median round	$14.6M	$12.0M	$10.0M
Average round	$32.2M	$29.2M	$19.4M
Largest reliable round	$700M	$320M	$200M
First financings	49	53	46
Companies with multiple rounds	2	7	1

Are fewer digital health startups getting funded?

Yes. Digital health investors are financing a noticeably smaller group of startups this year.

We counted 181 funded companies, compared with 205 last year and 211 over the comparable 2024 period. Deal volume fell at almost the same pace, from 212 to 183.

Repeated fundraising by the same startups does little to distort that picture. Only two companies recorded multiple rounds during the current period, compared with seven last year.

Other parts of the market are shrinking at the same time. We identified 157 disclosed lead or co-lead investors, down from 208. Deals involving a named strategic investor fell from 55 to 35. First financings also slipped from 53 to 49.

Put together, the pattern is pretty clear: digital health currently has fewer funded startups, fewer deals and fewer active lead investors.

Are bigger rounds making digital health funding look healthier than it really is?

Yes. Larger checks are doing a lot of the work behind today's digital health funding total.

The median round is up 21.7% year on year to $14.6 million. Because the median sits in the middle of the market, a single giant financing cannot push it up. Companies that successfully get funded are genuinely raising more money than they did last year.

At the same time, investors completed 29 fewer deals.

That changes how we should read the $5.79 billion headline. Investors have become more generous with the companies they choose while choosing fewer companies overall.

The average round has reached $32.2 million, up from $19.4 million just two years ago. In barely two years, average capital per disclosed financing has increased by roughly two-thirds while deal volume has moved the other way.

For founders, that produces two very different realities: large rounds are absolutely available these days, while getting into the funded group has become harder.

Would digital health funding still look strong without the megadeals?

No. Strip out the largest digital health financings and 2026 suddenly looks much less impressive.

Total calculable funding is down 5.4% versus last year. Once rounds above $100 million are removed, the decline reaches 12.1%. Removing everything above $50 million leaves $2.35 billion, 9.2% below the comparable 2025 figure.

The two-year comparison changes even more dramatically. Headline capital is 44.7% above 2024. Below the $50 million threshold, funding is actually 4.0% lower.

Concentration has risen as well. The biggest financing represents 12.1% of all calculable capital today, compared with 5.2% last year. The five biggest financings account for 26.6%.

An external check points in the same direction. Rock Health's Q1 2026 review of the U.S. digital-health market found that 12 $100 million-plus rounds captured 59% of the quarter's funding. Its market definition differs from ours, so the totals should not be mixed, but the pattern is strikingly similar.

Digital health has plenty of capital at the top. The broader funding market underneath those deals is softer.

Outlier test	2026 YTD	2025 same period	2024 same period
Total calculable capital	$5.79B	$6.13B	$4.00B
Capital excluding >$50M	$2.35B	$2.59B	$2.45B
Capital excluding >$100M	$3.32B	$3.77B	$3.40B
Median round	$14.6M	$12.0M	$10.0M
Largest deal share	12.1%	5.2%	5.0%
Top three deal share	20.2%	14.4%	11.9%
Top five deal share	26.6%	22.4%	17.6%
Rounds above $50M	23	30	18
Reliable rounds above $100M	12	12	4

Is Series B getting squeezed in digital health?

Yes. Series B currently looks like the weakest part of the digital health funding ladder.

Series B deal count dropped from 30 to 18, while its share of calculable capital fell from 26.3% to 12.9%.

We see almost the same hole when rounds are grouped by size. Financings between $50 million and $100 million fell from 23 deals to only 10. At the same time, the $100 million-plus bucket expanded.

That creates an unusual shape. Smaller and medium-sized financings still happen frequently, and the strongest companies can attract enormous checks. The middle layer between those groups has thinned out.

Series C and later companies are taking a much larger share of the money as a result. Series C accounts for 29.2% of current funding, while Series D and later rounds account for another 25.7%.

Investors appear increasingly comfortable making a very large commitment once a digital health company has crossed into a more established group. Series B companies are having a much harder time capturing the same amount of capital.

Are digital health investors mostly backing companies they've already funded?

Yes. Existing digital health companies still absorb almost all the money being invested today.

We classified 134 current-period financings as follow-ons and 49 as first financings. First financings actually gained share, from 25.0% to 26.8%, because follow-on activity contracted faster. Their absolute number still fell from 53 to 49.

Capital tells the story more clearly. First financings attracted about $397 million, compared with roughly $5.4 billion for follow-ons. Around 93% of calculable funding therefore went to companies with an earlier financing in the history we were able to establish.

The median first financing was $4 million. For follow-ons it was $18 million.

That does not mean new digital health startups have lost access to venture funding. Forty-nine first financings is still meaningful activity. We simply do not see a fresh startup cohort expanding quickly enough to change the market. Right now, most of the money continues to build companies investors already know.

Because financing histories are sometimes incomplete publicly, we use this comparison directionally rather than pretending every previous round can be reconstructed perfectly.

Financing history	2026	2025	2024
First financings	49	53	46
First-financing share	26.8%	25.0%	21.7%
First-financing capital	$397M	$375M	$250M
Median first financing	$4.0M	$4.5M	$4.0M
Follow-on financings	134	158	166
Follow-on share	73.2%	74.5%	78.3%
Follow-on capital	$5.40B	$5.75B	$3.75B
Median follow-on financing	$18.0M	$19.95M	$13.0M

Which parts of digital health are investors paying more attention to now?

Virtual Care and Remote Monitoring have gained the most investor attention this year, although the money is reaching those categories in very different ways.

Remote Monitoring recorded only one additional deal, moving from 23 to 24, while capital jumped 89.8%. Its share of all calculable funding reached 21.2%.

Virtual Care looks broader. We recorded 45 deals compared with 47 last year, so activity has barely moved, while capital increased 56%. Its median round went from $10 million to $15 million and its share of market capital gained 9.6 percentage points.

Care Navigation is concentrating quickly as well. Deal count fell from 18 to 12, yet capital increased by roughly 45%. Fewer companies are taking larger checks.

Elsewhere, Patient Engagement and Health Data Infrastructure each lost around 71% of their funding versus last year. Clinical Workflow remains huge by number of deals, though its share of the money has fallen sharply.

There are really three different stories here. Virtual Care has become stronger across several measures. Remote Monitoring has been transformed by one exceptionally large financing. Care Navigation has become richer and smaller at the same time.

Digital health category	2026 deals	2026 capital	Capital share	Median round
Clinical Workflow Software	75	$2.19B	37.8%	$15.0M
Virtual Care Platforms	45	$1.41B	24.4%	$15.0M
Remote Monitoring Solutions	24	$1.23B	21.2%	$11.3M
Patient Engagement Tools	16	$145M	2.5%	$4.4M
Care Navigation Platforms	12	$602M	10.4%	$27.0M
Health Data Infrastructure	11	$211M	3.6%	$18.0M
Whole digital health market	183	$5.79B	100%	$14.6M

Is Remote Monitoring really booming because of Neko Health?

Mostly, yes. Neko Health's $700 million Series C explains more than half of the Remote Monitoring capital we recorded this year.

Remote Monitoring generated about $1.23 billion in calculable funding, and Neko alone contributed roughly 57%. Without that financing, the category would still exist as an active investment area, but the spectacular year-on-year funding jump would disappear.

Neko also has unusually strong operating numbers behind the round. In its 2026 funding announcement, the company said more than 350,000 people had registered or joined its waitlist, while more than 100,000 people had already completed a scan in Sweden and the UK. It also said 75% of members booked and prepaid for their next scan after their first appointment.

More recently, Neko has been moving into the U.S. market, adding another layer to the expansion story investors were financing.

That helps explain why one preventive-health company could raise $700 million. It gives us much less reason to assume another Remote Monitoring startup can expect anything close to the same outcome.

For now, the category's funding boom is heavily tied to Neko's scale.

Is Virtual Care making a real comeback?

Yes. Virtual Care currently has one of the most convincing funding improvements in digital health because the change stretches beyond one oversized round.

Deal volume is almost flat at 45 financings versus 47 last year. Capital increased 56%, the median round rose from $10 million to $15 million, and the category gained share both in deal count and in dollars.

Several of the companies receiving large checks are also far beyond the old telehealth model of connecting a patient to a doctor on video.

Oviva secured €200 million in Series D financing to expand reimbursed care for weight-related and chronic conditions across Europe. The company says it has supported more than one million patients and is expanding into areas including hypertension and type 2 diabetes.

Talkiatry raised $210 million this year as it continued building a large in-network psychiatry platform. The company had already passed two million patient visits and expanded its psychiatrist workforce beyond 600.

Reimbursement, specialist clinical capacity and chronic-care infrastructure are becoming central to these businesses. Today's Virtual Care market looks very different from the flood of lightly differentiated telemedicine products funded earlier in the decade.

Among the categories gaining funding this year, Virtual Care has one of the strongest combinations of stable deal activity, larger rounds and real operating scale.

Is Clinical Workflow losing momentum?

Clinical Workflow is still the busiest part of digital health by far, although the huge checks that dominated last year have cooled.

We recorded 75 financings in Clinical Workflow, representing 41% of all current-period deals. Its deal share has barely changed.

Capital fell 25.2%, however, and the category lost 10 percentage points of market capital share.

Last year's comparison base was unusually strong. Abridge raised a $300 million Series E in 2025 after announcing that its clinical AI platform was working with more than 150 enterprise health systems. Ambience also raised a $243 million Series C that year to expand its clinical and administrative AI platform.

The commercial rollout has continued since then. Abridge now says it works with more than 300 health systems and supports more than 100 million clinician-patient conversations annually.

Clinical Workflow is still extremely active. Investors simply spent an exceptional amount on a handful of leading healthcare-AI platforms last year, while some of 2026's biggest checks have landed elsewhere.

Is Europe catching up with North America in digital health?

Europe has gained real ground in digital health funding this year, although a couple of very large rounds make the shift look bigger in dollars than it does in deal count.

Europe represents 26.2% of current deals, up 4.5 percentage points from last year. Its capital share reached 26.3%, an increase of 10.6 points.

Neko Health and Oviva explain much of that difference. Their financings together contribute roughly $920 million, around 60% of the European capital in our dataset.

North America still dominates. We recorded 120 North American deals worth $4.11 billion, equivalent to 65.6% of transactions and 70.9% of funding.

Europe is clearly taking a larger share of digital health activity these days. The deal-count increase gives that trend some depth. The much larger jump in dollar share deserves more caution because two companies account for such a large part of it.

Region	2026 deals	Deal share	2026 capital	Capital share
North America	120	65.6%	$4.11B	70.9%
Europe	48	26.2%	$1.52B	26.3%
Asia-Pacific	11	6.0%	$110M	1.9%
Latin America	2	1.1%	$37.8M	0.7%
Middle East	2	1.1%	$15.5M	0.3%
Africa	0	—	—	—
Whole market	183	100%	$5.79B	100%

Are digital health investors getting more selective?

Yes. Digital health investors are making fewer investments today while putting larger amounts behind the companies that make the cut.

The pool of disclosed lead and co-lead investors fell from 208 last year to 157. Deals with an identified lead dropped from 183 to 153.

Part of that decline naturally follows the lower deal count. But it becomes harder to dismiss when we connect it with the rest of the market.

We have 24 fewer funded companies than last year, 29 fewer transactions and four fewer first financings. Meanwhile, the median round has grown by more than one-fifth.

Some venture firms are bucking the overall decline. Andreessen Horowitz appeared in five lead or co-lead positions in our current-period research versus three last year. Spark Capital went from none to three, and Index Ventures from one to three. General Catalyst moved from five to three.

Investors have not collectively backed away from digital health. The market is concentrating around a smaller group of companies and investors willing to make larger bets.

Why are fewer corporate investors showing up in digital health deals?

Strategic investors are appearing in fewer digital health rounds this year, even while financing sizes rise.

We found 35 current-period deals with a named strategic investor, down from 55 last year. Their share of deal activity declined from 25.9% to 19.1%.

The drop is visible across several categories. Clinical Workflow still recorded 12 strategically backed deals, followed by Virtual Care with eight and Care Navigation and Remote Monitoring with six each.

Series A remains the most common point at which strategic investors appear, although its count fell from 14 deals to nine.

We should be careful about turning that into a grand theory about corporate interest in digital health. The entire funding market is completing fewer transactions.

What we can say much more confidently is that the bigger checks currently being written have arrived without a corresponding increase in corporate participation. Traditional financial investors and existing syndicates can clearly support very large digital health rounds on their own.

Are investors only funding older digital health companies now?

No. Digital health companies receiving funding still have a median age of five years, exactly the same as in both comparable earlier periods.

That stability rules out one simple explanation for the larger rounds. Investors have not suddenly replaced young companies with a much older set of businesses.

There are meaningful differences inside individual categories. Remote Monitoring companies with known founding dates have a median age of eight years this year, compared with five previously. Patient Engagement moved the other way, with its median falling to two years from seven last year.

We have lower confidence in those category comparisons because founding-year information was available for 132 of the 183 current-period deals.

At the market level, though, the picture is stable. The big change in digital health funding today is how capital is distributed, rather than a broad jump in the age of the companies receiving it.

What is actually changing in digital health funding?

Digital health has become a smaller funding market by participation and a bigger one by check size.

The most important change is the gap between breadth and money. Deal count is down 13.7% from last year, funded companies are down 11.7%, yet capital has fallen only 5.4%. Successful financings have become substantially larger.

Megadeals explain much of the apparent strength. The spectacular 44.7% increase in funding versus 2024 disappears once very large rounds are stripped out. Below $50 million, current funding is actually slightly lower than it was two years ago.

Existing companies continue to take nearly all the capital. Follow-on financings account for around 93% of calculable dollars, while first-financing activity has slipped in absolute terms.

The middle of the market has become unusually thin. Series B deals have dropped sharply, as has the $50 million-to-$100 million financing bucket, while Series C, Series D+ and nine-figure rounds absorb a much larger part of the money.

Investor attention is also rotating. Virtual Care has produced the cleanest broad improvement, Remote Monitoring has been transformed by Neko Health's enormous financing, and Clinical Workflow remains the busiest category despite losing some of its previous capital dominance.

Investors look more selective now too. We found fewer funded companies, fewer disclosed leads and less strategic-investor participation. The companies that still attract strong conviction can raise enormous rounds.

That is the clearest reading of digital health funding today: billions of dollars are still available, but investors are concentrating them much more aggressively.