Healthtech Roundup: Deals, partnerships and other news you should know + 4 questions with Oura's Chief Medical Officer

I hope you all had a wonderful 4th of July weekend, and returned refreshed. In theory, things should be quiet over a holiday - but the opposite seems to be the case. So we compiled all the big news items of the week, and shared some context about why we think these updates are meaningful. If you have tips for us on upcoming news, please keep reaching out! 

Carrot launches a new metabolic fertility program

What’s been reported: The fertility platform Carrot is launching Sprint, a program to address metabolic issues, a growing cause of fertility challenges. Through interventions from habit-building lifestyle changes to prescription drugs (such as GLP-1, which the company calls a “fertility-supporting” medication), these should be adopted three to 12 months ahead of pregnancy. Carrot said it aims to target conditions such as obesity, which is known to have an impact on fertility. 

What Carrot said: The app is promoting the program as a cost-saving opportunity for plan sponsors, claiming it could save up to $30,000 in IVF costs, either by reducing the number of cycles or eliminating the need for expensive interventions. Sprint will be available to existing Carrot customers starting in November 2025.

One question: It will be interesting to see how much of this becomes just another road leading to a GLP-1 prescription for patients, especially with the rise of so-called “Ozempic babies.” Physicians are reporting that patients who have struggled for years with getting pregnant, suddenly find they’re able to do so after taking the medication. It’s also worth noting that there’s still a dearth of evidence surrounding the use of GLP-1s during pregnancy, as opposed to in the preconception phase. 

Expert POV: Cofertility cofounder and angel investor Halle Tecco notes it’s a “smart move” to treat fertility as a whole-body issue. “Employers want to support their employees in family planning, but IVF is prohibitively expensive for most of them,” she explained. Since metabolic health can significantly impact ovarian function, she agreed there’s the potential to improve outcomes and lower costs. Tecco noted that research shows up to one-third of women conceive without assistance after undergoing IVF, suggesting that for some, the treatment may not have been medically necessary. Tecco described this move ultimately as a “win” for both patients and payers.

Leslie Schrock, author of the book Fertility Rules and our own women’s health editor, agrees, sharing: “holistic fertility programs that take into account health beyond the ovaries have the potential to speed up timelines, and make the experience far less painful for patients.”

Lifeforce’s new partnership has eyes on longevity

The big deal: Longevity platform Lifeforce is partnering with Toku, a health tech company that uses AI to translate retinal images into biological age and cardiovascular risk scores. Patients who use Toku’s retinal scans will receive access to the Lifeforce platform, which offers at-home diagnostics and access to physicians and health coaches. 

A CLAiR view: Toku uses CLAiR, an investigational medical device that assesses cardiovascular health based on retinal images.

The goal: The aim is for thousands of weekly routine eye exams to lead to a boost in users for longevity services.

The expert POV: There’s huge potential to align the longevity sector more closely with the world of medical devices and diagnostics. It’s long been challenging to get patients to take advantage of preventative screenings, and longevity provides a cool twist in the branding - “health optimization” versus “population health” - that might move the needle here. I am starting to believe, and I’m planning to spend more time digging into this thesis, that longevity could usher in a golden age for diagnostics. Diagnostics has been under-funded for decades now, with the exception of the pandemic. Longevity offers the user-experience “front end” meets coaching and clinical interpretation layer to make diagnostics more accessible to the masses. 

The disclosure: Scrub Capital, where Chrissy is a GP, is an investor in Lifeforce. 

Digital health funding is on the upswing, but is still down compared to pandemic levels 

The news: US digital health startups got $6.4 billion in venture capital funding in the first half of this year, up from $6 billion of H1 2024 and $6.2 billion in H1 2023, Rock Health reports. At Second Opinion, we closely follow these reports as a lagging indicator about investment appetite in the space. 

The big deal: The funding was spread over 245 deals of an average size of $26.1 million, significantly more than the average $20.4 million of 2024. 

AI rules: Nearly two thirds of the funding went to AI-powered startup ventures, which got an average of $34 million per deal. Out of the 11 megadeals of $100 million or more, nine were for AI-powered companies in areas like revenue cycle management and scribing. 

Editors’ Note: I may be the author of this newsletter, but I also invest via Scrub Capital, where I’m a GP, and advise companies through fundraising processes. My personal opinion is that it’s still a slow, tough market compared to the hype years of 2021. I don’t think much will change in the back half of the year. Founders should get ahead of this by earmarking at least 3 months for the raise, sometimes longer. Rounds are getting done but it takes connecting with a true believer who really gets the business, and valuations have come down. 

Samsung Buys Xealth

The big deal: Samsung announced plans to acquire Xealth, a startup that integrates digital tools into clinical work, with a network of 500 hospitals across the country. Xealth spun out of Providence Health Ventures in 2017. The company said its goal is to combine its wearable technology with Xealth’s medical platform to allow for close home health monitoring. The financial details of the deal have not been disclosed. Further details would help investors leverage this as a comp. 

Healthy purchases: This is Samsung’s second big health deal in less than a year. In September 2024, the Korean company acquired Sonio, a French AI-powered prenatal sonogram startup, for $92 million. 

What’s on the horizon? With the deal, Samsung promises to enable real-time monitoring of patients through data collected by their wearables. “We will design a bridge between home health monitoring and clinical decision-making,” said Xealth’s CEO Mike McSherry.

The context: “Samsung clearly sees the opportunity to drive a similar digital transformation and efficiency improvement in the US market,” noted Ian Chiang, a health-tech investor with Flare Capital. “Additionally, the tariff war will encourage East Asia companies to increase their investments in the U.S., I anticipate Samsung and other East Asian (Korean, Japanese, and Taiwanese) electronics players to be more active in deploying capital in the U.S.”

Microsoft AI diagnosis agent isn’t yet “super-intelligent”

The news: At the end of June, Microsoft released a study on new ways to use AI agents to get complex medical diagnoses at a rate four times as high as experienced physicians. The company claimed it was on the path of “medical superintelligence.”

The reality check: Slow down, Microsoft — a number of experts told STAT’s Brittany Trang. AI systems have been better at diagnoses than unaided physicians for decades, but the claim that it would be four times as good is dependent on the conditions of the experiment, which prevented physicians from doing any research about the cases. 

Now, that’s smart: The system, experts say, does an impressive job of mimicking the way clinicians go about diagnosing patients, as well as finding the most cost-effective way to reach a diagnosis.

Expert POV: Towerbrook’s Eric Larsen notes this is still a “pretty consequential advance,” not because it’s a huge research or algorithmic breakthrough but because it’s a “methodologically rigorous study with some cool twists.” He described it as a milestone in the march towards medical superintelligence, noting that it’s been known that the reasoning models could provide superior differential diagnostic capabilities, and have improved with chain-of-thought reasoning and training across medical specialties. He said Microsoft moved us closer to a real world experience and what’s interesting here is the combination of models (multiple models from different companies) to enhance the accuracy. He was also intrigued by the layering in of estimated costs. His final thought is that the U.S. isn’t working to progress to medical superintelligence in isolation, and that he’s keeping a close watch on developments in China. 

$6.1 million for Dutch dental innovation startup Novenda Technologies:  Novenda has secured €5.2 million ($6.1 million) in series A funding, led by Brightlands Venture Partners, for its technology that automates the production of night guards and dentures through 3D printing. The product aims to reduce the need for post-processing, cutting the cost of dental technician labor, which is scarce and expensive.

$55 million for ACO Vytalize Health: Value-based care enablement continues to be a hot space, making Vytalize Health a target for growth-stage investors and private equity. Per Axios, a firm called Jory Capital led this round. The company also reports rapid growth of its practices and a move to profitability, which is now increasingly essential in a market that remains more cautious than during the pandemic years. 

If you have a job of the week to share with me or are keen to sponsor our next job board, please reach out! 

SO: Hardware is a really tough category, especially now with tariffs, but you've spent a lot of your career at hardware companies. What do you like about hardware versus pure software plays, which tend to get a lot more funding these days? 

RB: I’m a firm believer in the value of software - especially with the rise of generative AI - but hardware has always held a special place in my heart. I still remember opening my first iPod back in 2003: the experience of opening a box, seeing something shiny and new, looking at its shape - the blending of form and function - it was tangible and visceral. I was experiencing the product before I had even used it.

You may not have loyalty to an email or calendaring service, or to an AI agent, or an online booking service, but once a piece of hardware wins you over and becomes a part of your daily routine - an accessory that is in contact with your bare skin nearly 24/7 - it’s more emotional than logical. Of course the hardware has to be useful - those are the table stakes. But if a piece of hardware can both improve your life and become a part of it, you now have a loyal customer.

It’s also really challenging for someone to accurately value a piece of software, especially in a world where the expectation is that most software should be free (or close to it). A physical object nearly always has intrinsic value, especially if well designed, well built, and useful.

Finally, all software requires hardware in some form. The more you can control the vertical integration of that hardware and software, the more you can refine and innovate on the experience, which becomes a major differentiator.

SO: Wearables have had an interesting history where it felt like they ended up in people's drawers gathering dust, but now suddenly feel cool and relevant again. Can you point to any specific developments that may have changed user perceptions?

RB: I’ve lived through several generations of wearables. The first ones, like Fitbit, were primarily step-counters. That first generation motivated people to get up and get moving, and they worked pretty well! The second generation added bigger screens and much, much more functionality. Wrist-worn wearables like Apple Watch could not only track your steps and your heart rate, sleep, and temperature, but could also send you email notifications, allow you to purchase nearly anything, and could wake you up in the morning. Some might say that they did too much. The response to this explosion of complexity (and perhaps intrusiveness) was a dramatic simplification that resulted in screenless, health-centric wearables. This third generation that I get to work on today consists of devices that have a laser-focus on improving your health and get out of your way when you don’t want to think about them.

In addition to this evolution of the wearables landscape, we’ve also seen a greater emphasis on consumer-facing “check engine light” features, such as a-fib detection, sleep apnea detection, and general illness detection. The accuracy and level of validation required for these features has meant that more and more people are finding that a wearable has made a real difference in their lives or the lives of their loved ones through early detection of a treatable condition. Almost everyone I know knows at least one other person who has benefited from these detection features, and the positive word-of-mouth has had a real impact on the perception of wearables generally.

Beyond these detection features, the latest wearables also do a much better job at translating the raw data into actionable insights. I was probably the biggest skeptic when I first started wearing Oura Ring last year. Fast-forward 4 months and I was checking my sleep and readiness scores every day to know if this was a day I could really push myself, or if I should take it easy (or heaven forbid attempt to take a nap!) The ring wasn’t just telling me what I already knew - it was helping me make better decisions to be my most productive self. 

SO: Between non-invasive glucose monitoring and non-invasive, continuous blood pressure, there have been some 'holy grail' ideas of what wearables could monitor in the future... What is your holy grail idea at the intersection of extremely useful and also scientifically feasible?

The idea of a medical tricorder - popularized by Star Trek - has captured imaginations for decades, and wearables are beginning to make that science fiction a reality. Many of today’s capabilities stem from photoplethysmography (PPG), the light-based sensor technology found in most consumer wearables. But I believe we’re still in the early days of understanding what these sensors can unlock. I’m particularly fascinated by advances in spectroscopy - the science of analyzing the electromagnetic spectrum, including visible light. It’s the same technique astronomers use to determine the chemical composition of stars light-years away, by analyzing the specific wavelengths of light those stars emit. That same principle could be applied much closer to home. If each molecule in our blood reflects or absorbs light in unique ways, why couldn’t we use spectroscopy to non-invasively detect things like glucose, lipids, and electrolytes? There are real technical hurdles, but the foundation is there - and it feels inevitable.

Beyond what wearables can measure, I’m equally focused on how they – combined with AI – can help solve a looming crisis in healthcare delivery. The U.S. faces a projected shortage of up to 86,000 physicians by 2036, according to the AAMC. While advanced practice providers (APPs) like NPs and PAs will help close the gap, burnout is at an all-time high. We can’t simply work harder - we have to work smarter.

It may be cliché, but I’m bullish on the ability for generative AI to support physicians. Sooner than later we need to get to the point where AI systems can diagnose and prescribe. I’m not naive to the challenges, including regulatory hurdles, the potential for fraud and abuse, accuracy/hallucination, liability, etc. But if this could be one of the solutions to out-of-control healthcare spending, rampant burnout, and a growing care gap, aren’t we obligated to try? In fact, this may not be as futuristic as it may seem. There are already companies attempting to do this (with physician oversight) in Saudi Arabia. And the consensus is growing that the most important ingredient to accurate responses isn’t the model itself, but having access to comprehensive and accurate clinical context, which is a problem I’ve spent a significant portion of my career working on (interoperability FTW).

CF: You've worked at a company (Apple) that had a wearable at the wrist. And now one with a ring (Oura). What are some of the pros and cons of these form factors, and how does that change the demographics around the user base?

RB: This is something I’ve thought about deeply recently. 😉 I’ve been an Apple Watch wearer since day one; I may have one of the largest HealthKit databases out there! Over the past 10 years there are probably only 1 or 2 days I haven’t worn it. But I’m also someone who has worn a watch almost my entire life (including that awkward phase in elementary school when I wore a Nintendo watch …). I recognize that many people - including my wife - either don’t want to wear a watch at night, or don’t want to wear one at all. Yet having a device that is comfortable to wear at night is crucial for sleep tracking, obviously. What may be less obvious is that it’s also the best time to measure almost everything else due to the cleaner signals you get while nearly motionless.

Having a device that’s comfortable to wear at night would be insufficient if the battery didn’t last long enough. This is why we’ve focused on ensuring that the ring can last up to 8 days on a charge, depending on the size of the ring. This is in contrast to most watches, which typically need to be charged every day.

While the long-lasting battery is a key feature, it’s also a byproduct of another intentional design decision: no screen. As I described above, the latest generation of health-centric wearables focus on doing one thing very well - helping you live a healthier life. By avoiding the noise and complexity of notifications, the ring can get out of your way when you don’t want to be distracted.

The ring form factor has been very appealing to both men and women, although because of the minimalist form factor, accurate temperature sensing (which facilitates high quality cycle tracking) and integration with products like Natural Cycles, the majority of new Oura users are now women. Through our partnership with Essence, a Medicare Advantage plan, we’ve also seen strong uptake and use by the 65+ population. The stereotype that the older population is more reticent to adopt new technologies isn’t true, and they not only appreciate the simplicity of the ring, but also the accessibility of an app-based experience with larger screens when they need it vs. a tiny screen on their wrist.

That’s it folks for this week’s issue of the round up. Please keep sending news tips and funding announcements my way so I can incorporate them!