Doximity at the New York Stock Exchange for their IPO, June 24, 2021.
Source: NYSE
If the Covid era marked a boom time for digital health companies, 2024 was the reckoning.
In a year that saw the Nasdaq jump 32%, surpassing 20,000 for the first time this month, health tech providers largely suffered. Of 39 public digital health companies analyzed by CNBC, roughly two-thirds are down for the year. Others are now out of business.
There were some breakout stars, like Hims & Hers Health, which was buoyed by the success of its popular new weight loss offering and its position in the GLP-1 craze. But that was an exception.
While there were some company-specific challenges in the industry, overall it was a “year of inflection,” according to Scott Schoenhaus, an analyst at KeyBanc Capital Markets covering health-care IT companies. Business models that appeared poised to break out during the pandemic haven’t all worked as planned, and companies have had to refocus on profitability and a more muted growth environment.
“The pandemic was a huge pull forward in demand, and we’re facing those tough, challenging comps,” Schoenhaus told CNBC in an interview. “Growth clearly slowed for most of my names, and I think employers, payers, providers and even pharma are more selective and more discerning on digital health companies that they partnered with.”
In 2021, digital health startups raised $29.1 billion, blowing past all previous funding records, according to a report from Rock Health. Almost two dozen digital health companies went public through an initial public offering or special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC, that year, up from the previous record of eight in 2020. Money was pouring into themes that played into remote work and remote health as investors looked for growth with interest rates stuck near zero.
But as the worst waves of the pandemic subsided, so did the insatiable demand for new digital health tools. It’s been a rude awakening for the sector.
“What we’re still going through is an understanding of the best ways to address digital health needs and capabilities, and the push and pull of the current business models and how successful they may be,” Michael Cherny, an analyst at Leerink Partners, told CNBC. “We’re in a settling out period post Covid.”
GoodRx signage on the outside of the Nasdaq on the day of its IPO, September 23, 2020.
Source: GoodRx
Progyny, which offers benefits solutions for fertility and family planning, is down more than 60% year to date. Teladoc Health, which once dominated the virtual-care space, has dropped 58% and is 96% off its 2021 high.
GoodRx, which offers price transparency tools for medications, is down 33% year to date.
Schoenhaus says many companies’ estimates were too high this year.
Progyny cut its full-year revenue guidance in every earnings report in 2024. In February, Progyny was predicting $1.29 billion to $1.32 billion in annual revenue. By November, the range was down to $1.14 billion to $1.15 billion.
In Teladoc’s first-quarter report, the company said it expected full-year revenue of $2.64 billion to $2.74 billion. The company withdrew its outlook in its second quarter, and reported consecutive year-over year declines.
“This has been a year of coming to terms with the growth outlook for many of my companies, and so I think we can finally look at 2025 as maybe a better year in terms of the setups,” Schoenhaus said.
While overzealous forecasting tells part of the digital health story this year, there were some notable stumbles at particular companies.
Dexcom, which makes devices for diabetes and glucose management, is down more than 35% year to date. The stock tumbled more than 40% in July – its steepest decline ever – after the company reported disappointing second-quarter results and issued weak full-year guidance.
CEO Kevin Sayer attributed the challenges to a restructuring of the sales team, fewer new customers than expected and lower revenue per user. Following the report, JPMorgan Chase analysts marveled at “the magnitude of the downside” and the fact that it “appears to mostly be self-inflicted.”
Genetic testing company 23andMe had a particularly rough year. The company went public via a SPAC in 2021, valuing the business at $3.5 billion, after its at-home DNA testing kits skyrocketed in popularity. The company is now worth less than $100 million and CEO Anne Wojcicki is trying to keep it afloat.
In September, all seven independent directors resigned from 23andMe’s board, citing disagreements with Wojcicki about the “strategic direction for the company.” Two months later, 23andMe said it planned to cut 40% of its workforce and shutter its therapeutics business as part of a restructuring plan.
Wojcicki has repeatedly said she intends to take 23andMe private. The stock is down more than 80% year to date.
Digital health’s bright spots
Products of Hims & Hers displayed.
Hims & Hers
Investors in Hims & Hers had a much better year.
Shares of the direct-to-consumer marketplace are up more than 200% year to date, pushing the company’s market cap to $6 billion, thanks to soaring demand for GLP-1s.
Hims & Hers began prescribing compounded semaglutide through its platform in May after launching a new weight loss program late last year. Semaglutide is the active ingredient in Novo Nordisk‘s blockbuster medications Ozempic and Wegovy, which can cost around $1,000 a month without insurance. Compounded semaglutide is a cheaper, custom-made alternative to the brand drugs and can be produced when the brand-name treatments are in shortage.
Hims & Hers will likely have to contend with dynamic supply and regulatory environments next year, but even before adding compounded GLP-1s to its portfolio, the company said in its February earnings call that it expects its weight loss program to bring in more than $100 million in revenue by the end of 2025.
Doximity, a digital platform for medical professionals, also had a strong 2024, with its stock price more than doubling. The company’s platform, which for years has been likened to a LinkedIn for doctors, allows clinicians to stay current on medical news, manage paperwork, find referrals and carry out telehealth appointments with patients.
Doximity primarily generates revenue through its hiring solutions, telehealth tools and marketing offerings for clients like pharmaceutical companies.
Leerink’s Cherny said Doximity’s success can be attributed to its lean operating model, as well as the “differentiated mousetrap” it’s created because of its reach into the physician network.
“DOCS is a rare company in healthcare IT as it is already profitable, generates strong incremental margins, and is a steady grower,” Leerink analysts, including Cherny, wrote in a November note. The firm raised its price target on the stock to $60 from $35.
Another standout this year was Oscar Health, the tech-enabled insurance company co-founded by Thrive Capital Management’s Joshua Kushner. Its shares are up nearly 50% year to date. The company supports roughly 1.65 million members and plans to expand to around 4 million by 2027.
Oscar showed strong revenue growth in its third-quarter report in November. Sales climbed 68% from a year earlier to $2.4 billion.
Additionally, two digital health companies, Waystar and Tempus AI, took the leap and went public in 2024.
The IPO market has been largely dormant since late 2021, when soaring inflation and rising interest rates pushed investors out of risk. Few technology companies have gone public since then, and no digital health companies held IPOs in 2023, according to a report from Rock Health.
Waystar, a health-care payment software vendor, has seen its stock jump to $36.93 from its IPO price of $21.50 in June. Tempus, a precision medicine company, hasn’t fared as well. It’s stock has slipped to $34.91 from its IPO price of $37, also in June.
“Hopefully, the valuations are more supportive of opportunities for other companies that have been lingering in the background as private companies for the last several years.” Schoenhaus said.
Out with the old
The Nasdaq MarketSite is seen on December 12, 2024 in New York City.
Michael M. Santiago | Getty Images
Several digital health companies exited the public markets entirely this year.
Revenue cycle management company R1 RCM was acquired by TowerBrook Capital Partners and Clayton, Dubilier & Rice in an $8.9 billion deal. Similarly, Altaris bought Sharecare, which runs a virtual health platform, for roughly $540 million.
Commure, a private company that offers tools for simplifying clinicians’ workflows, acquired medical AI scribing company Augmedix for about $139 million.
“There was a lot of competition that entered the marketplace during the pandemic years, and we’ve seen some of that being flushed out of the markets, which is a good thing,” Schoenhaus said.
Cherny said the sector is adjusting to a post-pandemic period, and digital health companies are figuring out their role.
“We’re still cycling through what could be almost termed digital health 1.1 business models,” he said. “It’s great to say we do things digitally, but it only matters if it has some approach toward impacting the ‘triple aim’ of health care: better care, more convenient, lower cost.”
Formula One F1 – United States Grand Prix – Circuit of the Americas, Austin, Texas, U.S. – October 23, 2022 Tim Cook waves the chequered flag to the race winner Red Bull’s Max Verstappen
Mike Segar | Reuters
Apple had two major launches last month. They couldn’t have been more different.
First, Apple revealed some of the artificial intelligence advancements it had been working on in the past year when it released developer versions of its operating systems to muted applause at its annual developer’s conference, WWDC. Then, at the end of the month, Apple hit the red carpet as its first true blockbuster movie, “F1,” debuted to over $155 million — and glowing reviews — in its first weekend.
While “F1” was a victory lap for Apple, highlighting the strength of its long-term outlook, the growth of its services business and its ability to tap into culture, Wall Street’s reaction to the company’s AI announcements at WWDC suggest there’s some trouble underneath the hood.
“F1” showed Apple at its best — in particular, its ability to invest in new, long-term projects. When Apple TV+ launched in 2019, it had only a handful of original shows and one movie, a film festival darling called “Hala” that didn’t even share its box office revenue.
Despite Apple TV+being written off as a costly side-project, Apple stuck with its plan over the years, expanding its staff and operation in Culver City, California. That allowed the company to build up Hollywood connections, especially for TV shows, and build an entertainment track record. Now, an Apple Original can lead the box office on a summer weekend, the prime season for blockbuster films.
The success of “F1” also highlights Apple’s significant marketing machine and ability to get big-name talent to appear with its leadership. Apple pulled out all the stops to market the movie, including using its Wallet app to send a push notification with a discount for tickets to the film. To promote “F1,” Cook appeared with movie star Brad Pitt at an Apple store in New York and posted a video with actual F1 racer Lewis Hamilton, who was one of the film’s producers.
(L-R) Brad Pitt, Lewis Hamilton, Tim Cook, and Damson Idris attend the World Premiere of “F1: The Movie” in Times Square on June 16, 2025 in New York City.
Jamie Mccarthy | Getty Images Entertainment | Getty Images
Although Apple services chief Eddy Cue said in a recent interview that Apple needs the its film business to be profitable to “continue to do great things,” “F1” isn’t just about the bottom line for the company.
Apple’s Hollywood productions are perhaps the most prominent face of the company’s services business, a profit engine that has been an investor favorite since the iPhone maker started highlighting the division in 2016.
Films will only ever be a small fraction of the services unit, which also includes payments, iCloud subscriptions, magazine bundles, Apple Music, game bundles, warranties, fees related to digital payments and ad sales. Plus, even the biggest box office smashes would be small on Apple’s scale — the company does over $1 billion in sales on average every day.
But movies are the only services component that can get celebrities like Pitt or George Clooney to appear next to an Apple logo — and the success of “F1” means that Apple could do more big popcorn films in the future.
“Nothing breeds success or inspires future investment like a current success,” said Comscore senior media analyst Paul Dergarabedian.
But if “F1” is a sign that Apple’s services business is in full throttle, the company’s AI struggles are a “check engine” light that won’t turn off.
Replacing Siri’s engine
At WWDC last month, Wall Street was eager to hear about the company’s plans for Apple Intelligence, its suite of AI features that it first revealed in 2024. Apple Intelligence, which is a key tenet of the company’s hardware products, had a rollout marred by delays and underwhelming features.
Apple spent most of WWDC going over smaller machine learning features, but did not reveal what investors and consumers increasingly want: A sophisticated Siri that can converse fluidly and get stuff done, like making a restaurant reservation. In the age of OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Anthropic’s Claude and Google’s Gemini, the expectation of AI assistants among consumers is growing beyond “Siri, how’s the weather?”
The company had previewed a significantly improved Siri in the summer of 2024, but earlier this year, those features were delayed to sometime in 2026. At WWDC, Apple didn’t offer any updates about the improved Siri beyond that the company was “continuing its work to deliver” the features in the “coming year.” Some observers reduced their expectations for Apple’s AI after the conference.
“Current expectations for Apple Intelligence to kickstart a super upgrade cycle are too high, in our view,” wrote Jefferies analysts this week.
Siri should be an example of how Apple’s ability to improve products and projects over the long-term makes it tough to compete with.
It beat nearly every other voice assistant to market when it first debuted on iPhones in 2011. Fourteen years later, Siri remains essentially the same one-off, rigid, question-and-answer system that struggles with open-ended questions and dates, even after the invention in recent years of sophisticated voice bots based on generative AI technology that can hold a conversation.
Apple’s strongest rivals, including Android parent Google, have done way more to integrate sophisticated AI assistants into their devices than Apple has. And Google doesn’t have the same reflex against collecting data and cloud processing as privacy-obsessed Apple.
Some analysts have said they believe Apple has a few years before the company’s lack of competitive AI features will start to show up in device sales, given the company’s large installed base and high customer loyalty. But Apple can’t get lapped before it re-enters the race, and its former design guru Jony Ive is now working on new hardware with OpenAI, ramping up the pressure in Cupertino.
“The three-year problem, which is within an investment time frame, is that Android is racing ahead,” Needham senior internet analyst Laura Martin said on CNBC this week.
Apple’s services success with projects like “F1” is an example of what the company can do when it sets clear goals in public and then executes them over extended time-frames.
Its AI strategy could use a similar long-term plan, as customers and investors wonder when Apple will fully embrace the technology that has captivated Silicon Valley.
Wall Street’s anxiety over Apple’s AI struggles was evident this week after Bloomberg reported that Apple was considering replacing Siri’s engine with Anthropic or OpenAI’s technology, as opposed to its own foundation models.
The move, if it were to happen, would contradict one of Apple’s most important strategies in the Cook era: Apple wants to own its core technologies, like the touchscreen, processor, modem and maps software, not buy them from suppliers.
Using external technology would be an admission that Apple Foundation Models aren’t good enough yet for what the company wants to do with Siri.
“They’ve fallen farther and farther behind, and they need to supercharge their generative AI efforts” Martin said. “They can’t do that internally.”
Apple might even pay billions for the use of Anthropic’s AI software, according to the Bloombergreport. If Apple were to pay for AI, it would be a reversal from current services deals, like the search deal with Alphabet where the Cupertino company gets paid $20 billion per year to push iPhone traffic to Google Search.
The company didn’t confirm the report and declined comment, but Wall Street welcomed the report and Apple shares rose.
In the world of AI in Silicon Valley, signing bonuses for the kinds of engineers that can develop new models can range up to $100 million, according to OpenAI CEO Sam Altman.
“I can’t see Apple doing that,” Martin said.
Earlier this week, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg sent a memo bragging about hiring 11 AI experts from companies such as OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google’s DeepMind. That came after Zuckerberg hired Scale AI CEO Alexandr Wang to lead a new AI division as part of a $14.3 billion deal.
Meta’s not the only company to spend hundreds of millions on AI celebrities to get them in the building. Google spent big to hire away the founders of Character.AI, Microsoft got its AI leader by striking a deal with Inflection and Amazon hired the executive team of Adept to bulk up its AI roster.
Apple, on the other hand, hasn’t announced any big AI hires in recent years. While Cook rubs shoulders with Pitt, the actual race may be passing Apple by.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk speaks alongside U.S. President Donald Trump to reporters in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30, 2025 in Washington, DC.
Kevin Dietsch | Getty Images
Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who bombarded President Donald Trump‘s signature spending bill for weeks, on Friday made his first comments since the legislation passed.
Musk backed a post on X by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who said the bill’s budget “explodes the deficit” and continues a pattern of “short-term politicking over long-term sustainability.”
The House of Representatives narrowly passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on Thursday, sending it to Trump to sign into law.
Paul and Musk have been vocal opponents of Trump’s tax and spending bill, and repeatedly called out the potential for the spending package to increase the national debt.
The independent Congressional Budget Office has said the bill could add $3.4 trillion to the $36.2 trillion of U.S. debt over the next decade. The White House has labeled the agency as “partisan” and continuously refuted the CBO’s estimates.
Read more CNBC tech news
The bill includes trillions of dollars in tax cuts, increased spending for immigration enforcement and large cuts to funding for Medicaid and other programs.
It also cuts tax credits and support for solar and wind energy and electric vehicles, a particularly sore spot for Musk, who has several companies that benefit from the programs.
“I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!” Trump wrote in a social media post in early June as the pair traded insults and threats.
Shares of Tesla plummeted as the feud intensified, with the company losing $152 billion in market cap on June 5 and putting the company below $1 trillion in value. The stock has largely rebounded since, but is still below where it was trading before the ruckus with Trump.
Stock Chart IconStock chart icon
Tesla one-month stock chart.
— CNBC’s Kevin Breuninger and Erin Doherty contributed to this article.
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella speaks at the Axel Springer building in Berlin on Oct. 17, 2023. He received the annual Axel Springer Award.
Ben Kriemann | Getty Images
Among the thousands of Microsoft employees who lost their jobs in the cutbacks announced this week were 830 staffers in the company’s home state of Washington.
Nearly a dozen game design workers in the state were part of the layoffs, along with three audio designers, two mechanical engineers, one optical engineer and one lab technician, according to a document Microsoft submitted to Washington employment officials.
There were also five individual contributors and one manager at the Microsoft Research division in the cuts, as well as 10 lawyers and six hardware engineers, the document shows.
Microsoft announced plans on Wednesday to eliminate 9,000 jobs, as part of an effort to eliminate redundancy and to encourage employees to focus on more meaningful work by adopting new technologies, a person familiar with the matter told CNBC. The person asked not to be named while discussing private matters.
Scores of Microsoft salespeople and video game developers have since come forward on social media to announce their departure. In April, Microsoft said revenue from Xbox content and services grew 8%, trailing overall growth of 13%.
In sales, the company parted ways with 16 customer success account management staff members based in Washington, 28 in sales strategy enablement and another five in sales compensation. One Washington-based government affairs worker was also laid off.
Microsoft eliminated 17 jobs in cloud solution architecture in the state, according to the document. The company’s fastest revenue growth comes from Azure and other cloud services that customers buy based on usage.
CEO Satya Nadella has not publicly commented on the layoffs, and Microsoft didn’t immediately provide a comment about the cuts in Washington. On a conference call with analysts in April, Microsoft CFO Amy Hood said the company had a “focus on cost efficiencies” during the March quarter.