Digital Health and Telehealth Sector Outlook — September 2026

Read the report

SlidesScroll

1 of 23

←→Full screen

HEALTH CARE › HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES › DIGITAL HEALTH AND TELEHEALTH

Digital Health: Faster Growth Is Associated with a Higher Forward Multiple

This report shows how business model, growth and revenue quality shape the sector’s forward pricing.

September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential

Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / Revenue (CY2027E)

Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice

Sources & methodology

1

← Previous

1 / 23 · HEALTH CARE › HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES › DIGITAL HEALTH AND TELEHEALTH

Next →

What each page shows

The analyst’s walkthrough of the deck, page by page.

1. 01

   HEALTH CARE › HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES › DIGITAL HEALTH AND TELEHEALTH

   This is the cover slide identifying the report as a Digital Health and Telehealth sector outlook dated September 28, 2026.

   We're opening our review of the Digital Health and Telehealth sector, with market data as of September 28, 2026. Everything in this deck is built on EV / Revenue for CY2027E, the basis practitioners use to price this group.

   Everything on this page

   HEALTH CARE › HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES › DIGITAL HEALTH AND TELEHEALTH Digital Health: Faster Growth Is Associated with a Higher Forward Multiple This report shows how business model, growth and revenue quality shape the sector’s forward pricing. September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / Revenue (CY2027E) Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 1

2. 02
   CONTENTS

   What This Report Covers

   This slide lists the five report sections plus the appendix that the deck covers.

   We've structured this report in five sections plus an appendix, starting with the bottom line so a reader who stops there still gets the whole story. From here we move through the landscape, valuation and situations, precedent transactions, and strategic implications. Each section builds on the last, so let's start with the headline conclusion.

   Everything on this page

   CONTENTS What This Report Covers 01 The Bottom Line Digital Health Prices Growth, Care Delivery and Adjacent Models Differently 02 The Landscape Business Model Changes the Valuation Reference 03 Valuation & Situations The Premium End Retains a Wide Lead 04 Precedent Transactions Buyers Have Used Several Routes to Own Digital Health Assets 05 Strategic Implications Durable Growth Requires Operating Evidence Behind the Promise 06 Appendix Comparables Detail, Methodology, Sources and Assumptions Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 2

3. 03
   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE

   Digital Health and Telehealth Prices Platforms, Care Delivery and Adjacent Models Differently

   This slide summarizes how the sector prices platforms, care delivery and adjacent models differently on EV / Revenue (CY2027E).

   This one page carries the whole argument: on EV / Revenue for CY2027E, all 15 rated companies are covered, with the sector median at 0.8x. The premium end holds a 5.2x median against 0.5x at the discount end, a spread that survives even after the forward lens has already credited forecast growth. Faster-growing names carry a 2.3x median versus 0.6x for slower names, and adjacent models carry a 3.2x median versus 0.7x for care delivery names — so business model and growth trajectory are the two variables that matter most here.

   Everything on this page

   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE Digital Health and Telehealth Prices Platforms, Care Delivery and Adjacent Models Differently The full story on one page · figures on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / Revenue on CY2027E consensus (15 of 15 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / Revenue rather than EV / EBITDA; validated coverage supports the industry standard (15 of 15 companies), so this report follows it. Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 3 1 A Revenue Lens Keeps Unlike Models Comparable CY2027E EV / Revenue covers 15 of 15 companies, with the middle of the range at 0.8x. It suits recurring contracted revenue while keeping clinician-, site- and fulfilment-heavy models in view; the forward lens already credits forecast growth. 2 The Premium End Holds a Wide Pricing Lead The premium end carries a 5.2x middle value, against 0.5x at the discount end. That spread remains after the forward lens has already recognised forecast growth. 3 Faster Growth Sits with Higher Forward Revenue Multiples Among the seven names above 8% growth, the middle value is 2.3x, against 0.6x for the seven names below. For owners, durable enrolment, engagement and renewal are central to defending the growth case. 4 Adjacent Models Hold the Higher Segment Reference Across four adjacent-model names, the middle value is 3.2x, versus 0.7x across six site-based and post-acute care delivery names. Revenue mix, labour intensity and fulfilment costs remain important context for that observed gap. 0.8x Sector median EV/Revenue CY2027E consensus · EV/Revenue is the lens because practitioners price this growth set on revenue and 2 of 15 names are… 5.2x Premium end EV/Revenue vs 0.5x at the discount end top quartile (n=4) against bottom quartile (n=6) on EV/Revenue — the spread the report explains 13 Transactions with disclosed terms 59 recorded in this tier · 3 told as case studies, the full list in the appendix

4. 04
   SECTION 02

   02

   This divider introduces Section 02, on how business model changes the valuation reference.

   We're moving into how business model shapes valuation. Platforms, care delivery businesses and adjacent models carry different revenue quality and cost structures, and that difference shows up directly in how the market prices them.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 02 02 THE LANDSCAPE Business Model Changes the Valuation Reference Platforms, care delivery businesses and adjacent models bring different revenue quality and cost structures. 02 of 06 Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 4

5. 05
   02 · MARKET MAP

   Three Distinct Operating Models Carry the Sector's Revenue

   This slide groups the 15 approved companies into three operating models and shows median EV / Revenue (CY2027E) per group.

   We've grouped the approved universe into three distinct operating models, each with its own median EV / Revenue for CY2027E. The spread between groups tells us the market isn't pricing this sector as one thing — it's pricing three different businesses. That's the lens we carry through the rest of this section.

   Everything on this page

   02 · MARKET MAP Three Distinct Operating Models Carry the Sector's Revenue 15 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / Revenue (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Segment grouping follows the platform's classification; group medians on rated names only. "Why it matters" lines are NeuraCap views. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 5 ADJACENT: SITE-BASED AND POST-ACUTE CARE DELIVERY 6 cos median 0.7x PACS Group (PACS) Concentra Group (CON) Option Care Health (OPCH) Astrana Health (ASTH) AMN Healthcare (AMN) DocGo (DCGO) Care delivery scale matters here, but labour, sites and fulfilment keep cash earnings central to the valuation case. HEALTH IT AND PATIENT ENGAGEMENT PLATFORMS 5 cos median 0.6x Hinge Health (HNGE) Teladoc Health (TDOC) Omada Health (OMDA) LifeMD (LFMD) American Well (AMWL) Contracted revenue, enrolment, engagement and renewal quality shape how durable the platform story appears. ADJACENT MODELS 4 cos median 3.2x Beta Bionics (BBNX) WW International (WW) DarioHealth (DRIO) Akso Health (AHG) This group spans devices, wellness, diagnostics and distribution, so its economics require model-specific interpretation.

6. 06
   02 · LANDSCAPE

   Adjacent Models Carry the Higher Segment-Level Reference

   This slide shows that adjacent models carry the highest segment-level EV / Revenue (CY2027E) median among the three groups.

   Looking across the approved universe, adjacent models hold the highest segment-level reference on EV / Revenue for CY2027E, at 3.2x, versus 0.7x for care delivery names. That gap is an observation on the data as reported, not a judgment on quality — revenue mix and cost structure are useful context for it. Full company-level detail sits in the appendix if you want to trace any name.

   Everything on this page

   02 · LANDSCAPE Adjacent Models Carry the Higher Segment-Level Reference Segment view of the approved universe · EV / Revenue (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. "What they do / why it matters" is a NeuraCap view. Full company-level detail in the appendix and companion tables. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 6 Segment n Share of universe Median EV/Revenue Names to know What they do — and why it matters Adjacent: site-based and post-acute care delivery 6 40% 0.7x PACS Group, Inc. (PACS) · Concentra Group Holdings Parent, Inc. (CON) · +4 more Delivery economics stay central. Across six names, the segment median is 0.7x. Clinician utilisation, labour cost and fulfilment intensity remain central to how owners frame growth and profitability. Health IT and patient engagement platforms 5 33% 0.6x Hinge Health, Inc. (HNGE) · Teladoc Health, Inc. (TDOC) · +3 more Retention supports the platform case. Five names combine virtual care, engagement and health IT. Contract length, enrolment, ongoing engagement and vendor consolidation at renewal are the operating tests behind revenue quality. Adjacent models 4 27% 3.2x Beta Bionics, Inc. (BBNX) · WW International, Inc. (WW) · +2 more Different models earn distinction. Across four names, the segment median is 3.2x. Devices, diagnostics, wellness subscriptions and distribution bring distinct revenue models that should be assessed on their own operating evidence.

7. 07
   SECTION 03

   03

   This divider introduces Section 03, on how the premium end of the sector retains a wide valuation lead.

   Next we look at public market valuation in detail. Forward revenue pricing separates sharply across this sector even after forecast growth is already reflected in the multiple.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 03 03 VALUATION & SITUATIONS The Premium End Retains a Wide Lead Forward revenue pricing separates sharply even after forecast growth is reflected. 03 of 06 Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 7

8. 08
   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION

   The Premium End Retains a Wide Forward Revenue Lead

   This slide ranks all 15 rated companies by EV / Revenue (CY2027E) and shows the sector median of 0.8x.

   Across all 15 rated companies, EV / Revenue for CY2027E is the lens we use because practitioners price this growth set on revenue, and two of the fifteen names are loss-making on forward EBITDA. The sector median sits at 0.8x, but the range around it is wide — the premium end holds a 5.2x median. That spread is the starting point for the growth and profitability analysis that follows.

   Everything on this page

   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION The Premium End Retains a Wide Forward Revenue Lead EV / Revenue (CY2027E) · all 15 rated companies, sorted descending · sector median 0.8x · EV/Revenue is the lens because practitioners price this growth set on revenue and 2 of 15 names are loss-making on forward EBITDA · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / Revenue on CY2027E consensus (15 of 15 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / Revenue rather than EV / EBITDA; validated coverage supports the industry standard (15 of 15 companies), so this report follows it. Tier zones are NeuraCap groupings cut at the rated set's quartiles; every multiple quoted on this page is a median on the same EV / Revenue (CY2027E) basis. Panel commentary is a NeuraCap view. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 8 PREMIUM · median 5.2x CORE · median 1.6x DISCOUNT · median 0.5x Sector median 0.8x WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO ENDS The gap remains wide. The premium tier median is 5.2x, against 0.5x for the discount tier. Because both use CY2027E revenue, the gap survives a lens that already credits forecast growth. Model mix needs context. The premium tier includes a patient engagement platform, a connected-care device company, an at-home diagnostics company and a care delivery company. Their routes to durable revenue differ. Revenue quality needs proof. For recurring models, renewal behaviour, enrolment and engagement matter. For care delivery models, clinician utilisation, labour cost and cash earnings carry more weight.

9. 09
   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS

   Faster Growth Is Associated with Higher Forward Revenue Pricing

   This slide splits companies into growth and margin cohorts and compares median EV / Revenue (CY2027E) across each.

   When we split the rated names into faster- and slower-growth cohorts, the faster group carries a 2.3x median EV / Revenue against 0.6x for the slower group. The same directional pattern holds on margin, where higher-margin names carry a different reference than lower-margin ones. We read this as an association in the data we cover, not a causal claim — but it's a consistent enough pattern to inform how we frame the situations on the next page.

   Everything on this page

   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS Faster Growth Is Associated with Higher Forward Revenue Pricing Median EV / Revenue (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort (each split at its covered median) · rated names with estimates · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=7; slower n=7; higher-margin n=6; lower-margin n=6). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 9 EV/Revenue, median per cohort · growth split at 8% · EBITDA-margin split at 9% The Growth Split Separates the Peer Set Among seven names above the 8% split, the median is 2.3x. The seven names below carry a 0.6x median, showing a clear association between faster growth and higher forward revenue pricing in this sample. Growth and Margin Rarely Clear Both Bars Together Among the 12 names with both estimates, 3 clear both operating bars, while 3 clear margin only, 3 clear growth only and 3 clear neither. Contract Quality Tests Whether Growth Can Hold The valuation split makes renewal behaviour, enrolment, engagement and fees at risk the next diligence questions. These measures help distinguish contracted momentum from growth that may be harder to sustain.

10. 10
    03 · SITUATION MAP

    Higher Growth and Higher Multiples Meet in Five Mapped Names

    This slide maps rated names on a grid of EV / Revenue versus revenue growth relative to sector medians, identifying five names above both.

    Cutting the universe on the 0.8x sector median and the 8% growth median, five mapped names sit above both lines — higher growth paired with a higher multiple. This is a characterization of where each name sits today, not a recommendation to buy or sell. It sets up the questions we raise on the next page about how durable that growth case really is.

    Everything on this page

    03 · SITUATION MAP Higher Growth and Higher Multiples Meet in Five Mapped Names Cut on EV / Revenue vs the sector median (0.8x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (8%) (columns) · 1 rated names without the second measure are not mapped · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Situation boundaries are the cohort's own medians (Directional, NeuraCap view). This page characterises situations; it does not recommend buying or selling any security. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 10 Higher Growth, Higher Multiple Above-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 5 names PACS Group, Inc. (PACS) · Hinge Health, Inc. (HNGE) · Omada Health (OMDA) · +2 more Five of 14 mapped names sit above both reference lines. Their task is to sustain growth through renewal, enrolment and engagement while protecting unit economics. Lower Growth, Higher Multiple Above-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 2 names Concentra Group Holdings Parent, Inc. (CON) · WW International, Inc. (WW) Two of 14 mapped names retain above-reference pricing with below-reference growth. The operating question is whether margin, revenue quality or model durability can support that standing. Higher Growth, Lower Multiple Below-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 2 names Astrana Health, Inc. (ASTH) · LifeMD, Inc. (LFMD) Two of 14 mapped names deliver above-reference growth but remain below the valuation line. Converting momentum into retention, margin progress and durable contracted revenue is the value-building test. Lower Growth, Lower Multiple Below-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 5 names Option Care Health, Inc. (OPCH) · AMN Healthcare Services, Inc. (AMN) · Teladoc Health, Inc. (TDOC) · +2 more Five of 14 mapped names sit below both reference lines. Cost structure, client retention, product mix and capital allocation are the central operating questions.

11. 11
    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY

    Three Names Sit Above the Middle of the Range on Both Growth and Margin

    This slide plots 12 companies with both growth and margin estimates, cut at covered medians, with three names above the middle on both measures.

    Among the 12 companies with both a growth and a margin estimate, cutting at the covered medians, three names sit above the middle of the range on both. That combination — growth held alongside margin — is the profile we'd want to understand best before extending the forward growth case. It's an observation on this sample, not a forecast.

    Everything on this page

    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY Three Names Sit Above the Middle of the Range on Both Growth and Margin Revenue growth (CY2027E, x-axis) vs EBITDA margin (CY2027E, y-axis) · 12 companies with both estimates · cuts at the covered medians (7% growth, 9% margin) · median EV/Revenue per quadrant · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Quadrant cuts are the covered set's medians. Quadrant medians on names with a meaningful EV/Revenue (balanced n=3; margin-only n=3; growth-only n=3; neither n=3). Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 11 -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 0% 10% 20% 30% MARGIN ONLY median 0.8x BALANCED median 2.3x NEITHER median 0.6x GROWTH ONLY median 0.5x AMN TDOC WW AMWL CON OPCH DCGO PACS ASTH LFMD OMDA HNGE x: revenue growth (CY2027E) · y: EBITDA margin (CY2027E) HOW TO READ THIS Among the 12 names with both estimates, 3 clear both the 7% growth bar and the 9% margin bar. PACS Group, Inc. [PACS], Omada Health [OMDA] and Hinge Health, Inc. [HNGE] occupy that cell. Three clear margin only, 3 clear growth only and 3 clear neither. The map is an operating snapshot, not evidence that either measure causes valuation. The balanced median rests on 3 names and is lifted by HNGE at 6.5x. The margin-only median rests on 3 names and is lifted by CON at 2.7x. Rule of 40 (revenue growth + EBITDA margin ≥ 40%): 1 of 12 names clear it (HNGE).

12. 12
    03 · THE AGENDA

    The Forward Growth Case Still Rests on Thin Evidence

    This slide frames the open questions an owner or acquirer should resolve before extending the forward growth case.

    Having seen where growth and pricing meet, we think the forward growth case in this sector still rests on thin evidence. This page frames the specific questions an owner or acquirer should work through before leaning on that case. These are our observations on the data shown, not recommendations.

    Everything on this page

    03 · THE AGENDA The Forward Growth Case Still Rests on Thin Evidence NeuraCap view · framed as the questions an owner or acquirer should resolve · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All content on this page is Directional — NeuraCap advisory judgment grounded in the cohort data shown earlier. It does not constitute investment advice. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 12 Concentrate on Durable Revenue Prioritise contracted recurring revenue, multi-year relationships and renewal quality over volume that depends on episodic demand. What changes the answer: The answer changes when retention, contract length or client concentration materially changes. Turn Eligible Populations into Active Members Focus product and channel investment on enrolment, activation and sustained engagement, particularly where performance guarantees put fees at risk. What changes the answer: The answer changes when engagement improves without weakening gross margin per enrolled member. Choose Breadth That Improves Economics Test whether adding conditions or products improves retention, contract value and channel access rather than simply expanding the catalogue. What changes the answer: The answer changes when broader offerings produce stronger renewal behaviour or better unit economics. Match Cost Structure to the Model Align clinician capacity, sites, logistics and fulfilment with realised demand. Services-heavy models need cash earnings that can support their growth case. What changes the answer: The answer changes when utilisation and labour economics improve on a sustained basis.

13. 13
    SECTION 04

    04

    This divider introduces Section 04, on the routes buyers have used to acquire digital health assets.

    We now turn to the transaction record. Buyers have reached digital health assets through several different routes, and those precedents give us a second, deal-based read on how this sector is valued.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 04 04 PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS Buyers Have Used Several Routes to Own Digital Health Assets The transaction record spans dedicated buyer vehicles, strategic acquirers and listed-company combinations. 04 of 06 Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 13

14. 14
    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES

    Buyers Have Used Several Routes to Own Digital Health Assets

    This slide presents three transactions with disclosed terms as detailed case studies, drawn from a wider recorded set.

    We highlight three transactions with disclosed terms as case studies, with multiples shown on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed. The complete transaction list sits in the appendix. These deal multiples sit on a different basis than our CY2027E public comparison, so we don't draw a direct spread between the two — but the rationale behind each deal is instructive on its own terms.

    Everything on this page

    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES Buyers Have Used Several Routes to Own Digital Health Assets 3 of 13 transactions with disclosed terms, told as case studies · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · the complete list is in the appendix · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 65 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 46 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. "Why the deal happened" is a NeuraCap read of the recorded evidence. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 14 Feb-2026 $4.6B Horizon BidCo Pty Ltd Horizon BidCo Pty Ltd Put Meaningful Scale Behind Hims, Inc. EV / LTM revenue 2.0x EV / LTM EBITDA 14.5x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED The pairing suggests a dedicated buyer vehicle was assembled around Hims, Inc. It points to conviction in the target as a standalone whole-company investment. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The disclosed value is $4.6B, with 2.0x EV / Revenue and 14.5x EV / EBITDA. The revenue mark sits below Preventice Solutions, Inc. and BioTelemetry, Inc. in this transaction record. Aug-2022 $163M Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp. I Akili Interactive Labs, Inc. Used a Corporate Combination to Change Ownership EV / LTM revenue n/a EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED The pairing with Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp. I suggests the buyer saw strategic fit in a corporate combination. The completed transaction provides a reference for another route to funding and ownership. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The disclosed value is $163M. It benchmarks headline transaction size within the selected case studies. Apr-2025 $2M Sanara MedTech Inc. Sanara MedTech Inc. Added CarePICS, LLC Through a Focused Acquisition EV / LTM revenue n/a EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED The transaction suggests Sanara MedTech Inc. saw strategic fit with CarePICS, LLC. The completed acquisition points to selective expansion through a focused care technology asset. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The disclosed value is $2M. It provides a smaller headline-value reference within the selected case studies.

15. 15
    SECTION 05

    05

    This divider introduces Section 05, on the operating evidence needed to support durable growth.

    In this section we turn from pricing to operating substance. Revenue quality, engagement and cost structure are what determine whether the forward growth case can actually hold.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 05 05 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS Durable Growth Requires Operating Evidence Behind the Promise Revenue quality, engagement and cost structure determine how well the forward case can hold. 05 of 06 Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 15

16. 16
    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

    The Higher Forward Multiples Sit with the Names Whose Growth Holds Up

    This slide argues that higher forward multiples sit with the names whose growth holds up on operating evidence.

    Pulling the analysis together, the higher forward multiples in this sector sit with the names whose growth is backed by real operating evidence — renewal, engagement, and unit economics. That's the question we'd put on the table for the next twelve months: which names can show that evidence, and which are pricing growth that hasn't yet been proven. These are our observations on the data, not recommendations.

    Everything on this page

    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS The Higher Forward Multiples Sit with the Names Whose Growth Holds Up NeuraCap view · the questions this data puts on the table for the next twelve months Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. This page is Directional — NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report. Observations, not recommendations. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 16 FOR OWNERS Build Around Renewal and Engagement Revenue growth carries more weight when contracts renew, eligible populations activate and members remain engaged. Product, pricing and channel choices should reinforce those outcomes. FOR MANAGEMENT TEAMS Protect Unit Economics as Volume Grows Tie growth plans to clinician utilisation, gross margin per member or visit, and fulfilment efficiency. The relevant operating measure depends on whether the model is software-led or care-delivery-led. FOR BOARDS Set Clear Build-Versus-Buy Priorities Use retention, channel access and multi-condition economics to decide where internal investment is justified and where a partnership or acquisition may offer a better route.

17. 17
    SECTION 06

    06

    This divider introduces Section 06, the appendix covering the full comparables universe, methodology and sources.

    We close with the full comparables universe, our methodology, and the source for every figure in this report. This is where you can trace any number back to its filing.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 06 06 APPENDIX The Full Universe, Methodology and Sources Comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives. 06 of 06 Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 17

18. 18
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 2)

    Public Comparables on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier

    This slide lists the public comparables set on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), grouped by valuation tier, with all 15 rated companies shown across two pages.

    Here and on the next page, we show all 15 rated companies on EV / Revenue for CY2027E, grouped by valuation tier and shaded against the 0.8x sector median. Every ticker links back to its underlying source. This is the full comparable set behind every multiple quoted earlier in the deck.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 2) Public Comparables on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/Revenue above the sector median (0.8x); amber marks below · 15 rated companies · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 15 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 18 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/Revenue (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 PREMIUM — ≥2.5x · median 5.2x · 4 companies DarioHealth Corp. DRIO Remote and at-home diagnostics supporting virtual care $333M 8.5x 47% n/a n/a Hinge Health, Inc. HNGE Health IT and patient engagement platforms $7.0B 6.5x 27% 32% 59 Beta Bionics, Inc. BBNX Connected care devices and remote monitoring hardware $722M 4.0x 43% n/a n/a Concentra Group Holdings Parent, Inc. CON Adjacent: site-based and post-acute care delivery $6.6B 2.7x 6% 21% 27 CORE — 0.6x–2.5x · median 1.6x · 5 companies Akso Health Group AHG Adjacent: home infusion and medical product distribution $184M 2.4x n/a n/a n/a Omada Health OMDA Health IT and patient engagement platforms $937M 2.3x 20% 9% 29 PACS Group, Inc. PACS Adjacent: site-based and post-acute care delivery $10.0B 1.6x 9% 11% 20 WW International, Inc. WW Consumer health and wellness subscription programmes $498M 0.8x 1% 17% 18 Option Care Health, Inc. OPCH Adjacent: site-based and post-acute care delivery $4.7B 0.8x 7% 8% 15 DISCOUNT — <0.6x · median 0.5x · 6 companies AMN Healthcare Services, Inc. AMN Adjacent: site-based and post-acute care delivery $1.5B 0.6x -21% 6% -14 Astrana Health, Inc. ASTH Adjacent: site-based and post-acute care delivery $2.6B 0.6x 10% 7% 17 Teladoc Health, Inc. TDOC Health IT and patient engagement platforms $1.3B 0.6x -1% 12% 11 LifeMD, Inc. LFMD Health IT and patient engagement platforms $111M 0.5x 18% 7% 25 American Well Corporation AMWL Health IT and patient engagement platforms $61M 0.3x 4% 2% 6

19. 19
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (2 OF 2)

    Public Comparables on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier

    This slide continues the public comparables set on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), grouped by valuation tier.

    This completes the comparable set, with all 15 rated companies now shown across the two pages. The shading is consistent with the first page — teal above the 0.8x median, amber below — so you can scan the full tier structure at a glance.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (2 OF 2) Public Comparables on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/Revenue above the sector median (0.8x); amber marks below · 15 rated companies · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 15 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 19 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/Revenue (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 DISCOUNT — CONTINUED — <0.6x · median 0.5x · 6 companies DocGo Inc. DCGO Adjacent: site-based and post-acute care delivery $8M 0.0x 7% 2% 9

20. 20
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    This slide lists the transactions with disclosed terms, newest first, out of the full recorded set.

    This page and the next carry all 13 transactions with disclosed terms, out of 59 recorded, newest first. Deal values link back to the underlying filing. These multiples sit on an LTM-at-announcement basis and aren't directly comparable to our CY2027E public basis, so we don't claim a spread between the two.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 13 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (59 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 65 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 46 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 20 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Feb-2026 Horizon BidCo Pty Ltd → Hims, Inc. $4.6B 2.0x 14.5x Horizon BidCo Pty Ltd’s announced transaction for Hims, Inc. shows a dedicated buyer vehicle pursuing a whole-company digital health investment. Apr-2025 Sanara MedTech Inc. → CarePICS, LLC $2M n/a n/a Sanara MedTech Inc.’s completed acquisition of CarePICS, LLC suggests strategic interest in extending its offering through a care-focused technology asset. Aug-2022 Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp. I → Akili Interactive Labs, Inc. $163M n/a n/a Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp. I completed its combination with Akili Interactive Labs, Inc., illustrating another ownership route for a digital health company. Jul-2022 Amazon.com, Inc. → 1Life Healthcare Inc. n/a 4.1x n/a Amazon.com, Inc.’s announced acquisition of 1Life Healthcare Inc. was valued at 4.1x EV / Revenue, indicating strategic appetite for a scaled care platform. Feb-2022 Patient Square Capital, LP → SOC Telemed, Inc. n/a 0.7x 8.8x Patient Square Capital, LP completed its acquisition of SOC Telemed, Inc. at 0.7x EV / Revenue and 8.8x EV / EBITDA. Sep-2021 ModivCare Inc. → VRI Intermediate Holdings, LLC n/a 0.1x n/a ModivCare Inc. completed its acquisition of VRI Intermediate Holdings, LLC at 0.1x EV / Revenue, suggesting an extension of its care-access offering. Apr-2021 Accolade, Inc. → PlushCare, Inc. n/a 0.7x 8.8x Accolade, Inc. completed its acquisition of PlushCare, Inc. at 0.7x EV / Revenue and 8.8x EV / EBITDA, consistent with point-solution consolidation into a broader platform. Jan-2021 Boston Scientific Corporation → Preventice Solutions, Inc. n/a 5.9x n/a Boston Scientific Corporation’s announced acquisition of Preventice Solutions, Inc. was valued at 5.9x EV / Revenue, showing strategic interest in connected monitoring. Dec-2020 Koninklijke Philips N.V. → BioTelemetry, Inc. n/a 6.4x 27.4x Koninklijke Philips N.V.’s announced acquisition of BioTelemetry, Inc. was valued at 6.4x EV / Revenue and 27.4x EV / EBITDA.

21. 21
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    This slide continues the list of transactions with disclosed terms, newest first.

    This completes the precedent list of 13 disclosed-terms transactions. As on the prior page, figures are shown as recorded in the filing, and any data-quality flags are carried rather than smoothed over.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 13 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (59 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 65 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 46 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 21 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Sep-2020 Oaktree Acquisition Corp. → Hims, Inc. $1.6B 11.8x n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Aug-2020 Leonard Green & Partners L.P. → Livongo Health, Inc. n/a n/a 15.0x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Sep-2017 Internet Brands → WebMD Health Corp. n/a n/a 11.5x Apr-2017 BioTelemetry, Inc. → LifeWatch AG n/a n/a 11.0x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved.

22. 22
    06 · METHODOLOGY

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality

    This slide explains the report's sources, assumptions and data-quality treatment.

    This page documents how we built the report — what was included, what was excluded, and where each underlying disclosure lives. Every figure in this deck links to the record it was taken from, or the appendix names the source directly. That transparency is what lets you verify any number we've quoted.

    Everything on this page

    06 · METHODOLOGY Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality How this report was built, what was excluded, and where every underlying disclosure lives · as of 2026-09-28 Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from. Where a figure has no link, the appendix names its source and the basis on which it was read. Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice 22 VALUATION BASIS Primary valuation basis: EV / Revenue on CY2027E consensus (15 of 15 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / Revenue rather than EV / EBITDA; validated coverage supports the industry standard (15 of 15 companies), so this report follows it. EV / Revenue on CY2027E is the lead convention: it is the sector-appropriate prior for Digital Health and Telehealth and it clears the coverage gate with 15 of 15 companies (100%). P / E is carried as a cross-check. A revenue lens is used rather than a profit multiple because the set is not consistently profitable on a forward basis (12 of 15 names with a meaningful EBITDA). DATA QUALITY & EXCLUSIONS 43 records were excluded or quarantined by the platform's validation gates (unit errors, implausible ratios, ineligible securities and classification failures); the full ledger ships in the companion tables and never feeds a statistic in this report. DEFINITIVE VS DIRECTIONAL Definitive content is disclosed or consensus data passed through stated arithmetic. Directional content — tier boundaries, situation cuts, "why it matters" commentary, the agenda pages — is NeuraCap analyst judgment and is labeled as such where it appears. WHAT THIS REPORT IS NOT This report characterises a sector. It does not recommend buying, selling or holding any security, and no statement in it should be read as investment advice or a price target. WHERE THE DATA LIVES 553 registered source documents stand behind the figures in this report. Metric hyperlinks throughout the deck open the specific filing or data record; by publisher: sec.gov (552) · home.treasury.gov (1). The companion workbook beside this deck carries the complete source index.

23. 23

    Higher Forward Pricing Sits with Faster Growth in This Sample.

    This closing slide restates that higher forward pricing sits with faster growth in this sample.

    Higher forward pricing sits with faster growth in this sample. The companion tables alongside this deck carry the full universe, the exclusion ledger, and the complete source index for any figure you want to trace further.

    Everything on this page

    Higher Forward Pricing Sits with Faster Growth in This Sample. NeuraCap AI — Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Digital Health and Telehealth Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 23

More coverage in Health Care

• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Digital Health and Telehealth Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Sector Report · Sep 28, 2026Neurology and CNS Therapeutics Sector Outlook — September 2026
• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Oncology Therapeutics Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Neurology and CNS Therapeutics Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026