Digital health companies often underestimate the role of pricing in go-to-market execution. Pricing isn’t just a financial lever. It’s a signal to buyers, investors, and your internal teams. It’s how you communicate what your solution is worth, what kind of organization you are, and who your product is for.
In our work with digital health companies at various stages of commercialization, we’ve seen this play out in two directions. Either the solution is priced too low in hopes of landing quick pilots, or it’s pegged too high based on theoretical ROI without enough proof to justify the ask. Both can slow you down.
The right digital health pricing strategy doesn’t just get you paid—it unlocks growth, builds trust with buyers, and keeps you investor-ready.
Why Pricing Strategy Matters More Than You Think
Healthcare pricing is messy. There are procurement committees, budget cycles, and incentive misalignments baked into the system. So when you’re introducing a new digital health solution, you’re not just competing on clinical merit or features. You’re also competing on clarity. That includes how you price.
Your pricing structure directly affects how you get through contracting. It changes who inside a health system becomes your champion. It even affects what kind of internal champions you’ll attract in the first place. If your pricing model doesn’t fit the procurement structure your buyer is used to, your deal will stall—even if the solution is a perfect clinical fit.
The Most Common Pricing Models in Digital Health
There isn’t a one-size-fits-all approach, but most digital health companies cluster into a few core models. Each one carries signals to the buyer.
Per-User or Per-Seat Pricing
This model is most common in SaaS. It’s simple, familiar, and easy to justify when you have a defined user base—like call center staff or clinic schedulers. But it can backfire with health system CFOs who are trying to reduce variable costs. They see per-user pricing as a tax on growth. A clinician decision support tool might see uptake stall when user-based pricing makes budgeting unpredictable during headcount freezes.
Flat-Fee or Subscription Pricing
With a flat monthly or annual rate, buyers get predictability. You get recurring revenue. This model works well for solutions embedded in a workflow or used consistently across a department.
But be careful—flat-fee pricing can undersell the value of your solution, especially if you’re enabling high-value outcomes like avoided readmissions or improved quality scores. If you’re charging $20,000 a year but helping avoid $200,000 in penalties, someone’s going to ask why you’re pricing so low.
Volume-Based or Tiered Pricing
This is often a bridge strategy—used to incentivize adoption in early pilots, then scale up as usage increases. It helps health systems de-risk a new vendor relationship. It also lets you reward growth without renegotiating contracts. That said, buyers will ask what triggers each tier and how long pricing holds. Ambiguity here can slow procurement.
Risk-Based or Shared-Savings Models
Risk-based pricing is increasingly attractive, especially in value-based care environments. It signals confidence and long-term alignment. But it also introduces complexity. Many buyers won’t consider risk-sharing until you’ve proven your outcomes. And unless your own internal model accounts for margin tolerance, you might be signing up for a deal that looks good in theory but can’t scale.
We saw this dynamic play out when working with healthfinch. They needed a scalable revenue model that didn’t add financial friction for clinic buyers. We helped them shift to a risk-aligned, recurring revenue structure where value was tied to measurable performance—without scaring off buyers with early-stage pricing complexity.
Here’s a simplified example of how different pricing models play out financially:
| Pricing Model | Annual Revenue Potential | Buyer Risk Level | Notes |
| Per-User ($25/user) | $75,000 (300 users) | High | Sensitive to headcount swings |
| Flat Fee | $60,000 | Low | Easier to budget; may undervalue |
| Tiered (10-30-50k) | $50k to $90k | Moderate | Scales with usage |
| Risk-Based (10% ROI) | $150,000 (if savings hit) | Low to High | Depends on proof and trust |
Choosing a Pricing Strategy That Fits Where You Are
I tend to anchor pricing strategy around three variables:
- Your buyer persona
- Your level of proof, and
- Your stage in market
A solution selling into health systems with robust internal analytics can get more traction with risk-based pricing—they’ll want to tie you to shared savings. But early-stage companies often need the simplicity of flat-fee or tiered models to get in the door.
Here’s what we often advise:
- If you’re still proving ROI, flat-fee or tiered pricing makes adoption easier.
- Once you have enough data, you can shift into more strategic pricing models—or even introduce a second SKU for shared-savings arrangements.
- If you’re selling into risk-bearing providers (e.g. ACOs, capitated systems), be ready to offer a risk-based model that aligns with outcomes and cost offsets.
Pricing Strategy as an Investor Signal
If you’re fundraising, pricing sends a signal to investors too. A model that’s tied to recurring revenue, aligned with buyer incentives, and scalable across customer types gives them confidence. One early-stage client moved from usage-based pricing to a flat-fee model with value-based incentives layered in year two. That shift helped them close a $6M raise, because the economics made more sense at scale.
Your pricing structure should reflect the confidence you have in your product—but also match your buyer’s readiness to adopt. Underpricing to win a pilot might seem strategic in the short term, but it can backfire when you try to scale or renegotiate. Buyers anchor to early pricing. So if you want to charge more later, you’ll need a compelling reason.
Don’t Let Pricing Be an Afterthought
We see too many companies treat pricing as an internal spreadsheet exercise. But it’s a frontline tool. It should reflect how your buyer thinks, how they budget, and how they measure value. If your pricing model doesn’t align with how your buyer gets paid, it’s going to be a slow sale.
If you’re still working through your pricing structure, or wondering how to position your value for health system CFOs and CMIOs, let’s talk. We’ve helped digital health teams align their pricing to both buyer economics and board expectations. And when you get that right, you’re not just closing deals—you’re building a real business.
