OpenEvidence Valuation 2026: $12B Round, 40% of US Doctors, and Why It Moved to Miami

OpenEvidence closed a $250 million Series D in January 2026 at a $12 billion valuation — double the $6 billion it was worth three months earlier and 12 times its $1 billion price tag from February 2025. The Miami-based company says more than 40% of U.S. physicians now use it every day.

Founded in Cambridge, Massachusetts in 2022 by Daniel Nadler and Zachary Ziegler, OpenEvidence has gone from $10 million of Nadler's own money to a $12 billion company in under four years — and relocated its headquarters to Miami along the way. This is the funding history, the advertising-driven business model behind it, and the questions the growth numbers don't answer.

OpenEvidence Valuation 2026: How It Reached $12 Billion

OpenEvidence's valuation reached $12 billion in January 2026 after a $250 million Series D round co-led by Thrive Capital and DST Global. That doubled the $6 billion valuation the company held just three months prior, following an October 2025 Series C, and marked a 12x jump from its $1 billion Series A valuation in February 2025.

The speed of that re-pricing is the story. Most startups take years between a $1 billion and $12 billion valuation; OpenEvidence did it in eleven months, across four separate funding rounds, without a single quarter where its valuation didn't at least double from the prior raise.

The Four Rounds That Built a $12 Billion Company

OpenEvidence's climb ran through four distinct rounds, each closing roughly three months apart. Sequoia Capital led the $75 million Series A in February 2025 at a $1 billion valuation. Five months later, GV (Google's venture arm) and Kleiner Perkins co-led a $210 million Series B at $3.5 billion. By October 2025, GV led a $200 million Series C — joined by Sequoia, Kleiner Perkins, Blackstone, Thrive Capital, Coatue, BOND, and Craft Ventures — at $6 billion. The $250 million Series D that closed in January 2026 pushed the price to $12 billion, co-led by Thrive Capital and DST Global.

Add it up and OpenEvidence has taken in roughly $700 million in disclosed venture capital in under a year, on top of the $10 million Nadler put in himself when he and Ziegler started the company in 2022. Nadler had previously founded Kensho Technologies, an AI analytics firm he sold to S&P Global; this time, he and Ziegler — then a Harvard machine-learning PhD — built OpenEvidence after Nadler's grandfather died from a medical error and Ziegler watched a family member go through leukemia treatment.

What OpenEvidence Actually Does, and How It Differs From a General Chatbot

OpenEvidence isn't a general-purpose model with a medical skin on top. It runs on two search modes: Quick Consult, which returns a cited answer in seconds for a bedside question, and Deep Consult, introduced in mid-2025, which takes several minutes to synthesize a longer answer with a fuller set of references. Both pull from direct licensing agreements with NEJM (signed February 2025), all eleven JAMA specialty journals (signed June 2025), plus The Lancet, NCCN, ACC, AAFP, ACEP, ADA, AAOS, AAOHNS, and more than 300 other publications, alongside FDA and CDC sources. That licensed-content grounding, with inline citations back to the source study, is the core differentiator from a general LLM like the free-to-clinicians version of ChatGPT, which draws on broad web training data rather than a fixed set of licensed medical journals.

Access itself is gated the same way for every user: a doctor signs up with a National Provider Identifier (NPI) number, which OpenEvidence verifies against public registries before granting free access. That verification step is also what makes the platform valuable as ad inventory — advertisers aren't paying to reach a generic audience, they're paying to reach a confirmed, licensed prescriber.

Why 40% of U.S. Physicians Are Using OpenEvidence Daily

CEO Daniel Nadler told CNBC in January 2026 that more than 40% of U.S. physicians now use OpenEvidence daily, with the platform live across more than 10,000 hospitals and medical centers and over 757,000 verified physicians registered. Monthly clinical queries topped 20 million in January 2026, up from roughly 18 million in December 2025.

That adoption curve is what's actually pricing the company, not just the dollar figures. OpenEvidence sidestepped the usual hospital-IT procurement cycle by selling directly to individual doctors as consumers — free access in exchange for an NPI license lookup — rather than negotiating enterprise contracts the way UpToDate and DynaMed built their businesses over the past two decades. That go-to-market choice is a big reason growth compounded so fast between rounds.

How OpenEvidence Actually Makes Money

OpenEvidence doesn't charge physicians a subscription. Its primary revenue comes from pharmaceutical and medical device advertising shown in the few seconds it takes an AI answer to generate — inventory that reportedly commands CPMs between $70 and over $1,000, well above typical consumer ad rates, because it reaches roughly 600,000 U.S. prescribers at the exact moment they're deciding on a treatment. The U.S. digital pharma ad market is estimated at $20-25 billion a year, which is the pool OpenEvidence is competing for.

The company reported revenue north of $100 million in 2025, and industry analysis from Sacra put its annualized run-rate near $150 million exiting the year — up from about $7.9 million in 2024, an increase of more than 1,800% in twelve months — with gross margins close to 90% on the ad business. Since April 2025, OpenEvidence has also layered in continuing medical education (CME) credits, opening a second revenue channel through accreditation partnerships, alongside early enterprise licensing deals with health systems.

What the headline misses

A $12 billion valuation and a 40% daily-usage stat don't say anything about whether the answers are reliable, and independent researchers have started to check. A pilot study posted on medRxiv found OpenEvidence's accuracy on complex subspecialty scenarios fell to roughly 41% for its "Deep Consult" mode and 34% for "Quick Consult," and a separate critique published on PubMed flagged specific errors in how the platform summarized medication-related evidence. That doesn't mean the product is unreliable in routine use, but it does mean the accuracy claims underlying the valuation haven't been independently validated at the same pace as the funding rounds.

There's also the advertising question. OpenEvidence says its answer-generation system is walled off from its ad-serving system, but researchers studying the model have described a "prior-shifting" risk: a physician who sees a drug ad during one patient's search may carry that exposure — consciously or not — into how they frame the next patient's case. One read on this: a free, ad-supported model is what let OpenEvidence outgrow subscription incumbents like UpToDate so quickly, but it's the same structural tension that has dogged pharma advertising in medical journals for decades, just moved into a chat interface doctors now open dozens of times a day.

Why OpenEvidence Moved Its Headquarters to Miami

OpenEvidence started in Cambridge, Massachusetts, the traditional home turf for a Harvard-network AI startup, and relocated its headquarters to Miami in 2025 — a move first reported by the Boston Globe on October 21, 2025. Company filings list its principal address as 215 NW 24th Street, 3rd Floor, Miami, FL 33127, in the Wynwood-adjacent design district. Nadler has not publicly detailed his reasoning for the move, though he purchased a $38 million penthouse at Miami Beach's Surf Club months before the relocation was confirmed.

Whatever the exact motivation, the Miami-based company's relocation adds one more nine-figure-plus AI valuation to South Florida's growing roster of health-tech and AI startups, alongside the fintech and defense-adjacent names tracked on our South Florida funding tracker. It's a notable data point given how few AI companies at this valuation tier are headquartered outside the Bay Area or New York, and it comes as more of the region's venture activity gets covered on our Miami VC firms page.

OpenEvidence vs. UpToDate and the Rest of Clinical AI

OpenEvidence's core pitch against a general chatbot is source control: its model is trained on peer-reviewed medical literature rather than the open web, with inline citations to the studies behind each answer. That's also its pitch against UpToDate, which built a two-decade-old subscription business on editor-written topic reviews rather than a conversational interface. Here's how the main clinical AI and reference tools stack up on price and positioning.

Sources: company pricing pages, Fierce Healthcare and independent clinical AI reviews, 2026.

The bigger long-term risk to that table isn't Glass Health or DynaMed — it's OpenAI and Anthropic building healthcare-specific products of their own. OpenAI's ChatGPT for Clinicians already competes directly for the same NPI-verified physician audience, and it's free. This likely means OpenEvidence's moat has to hold on licensed-content quality and citation trust rather than price, since a free, general-purpose competitor with far more capital can match "free" indefinitely.

Is OpenEvidence's $12 Billion Price Tag Justified?

At $12 billion against roughly $100-150 million in 2025 revenue, OpenEvidence is trading somewhere between 80x and 120x revenue, depending on which figure you use — a multiple that only makes sense if investors believe the ad-supported, physician-as-consumer model scales toward the full $20-25 billion U.S. digital pharma ad market, not just today's revenue run-rate. That's a much larger bet than the usage numbers alone justify, since 40% daily adoption and 90% gross margins describe engagement and unit economics, not proof the company can capture a meaningful share of that ad spend at scale.

The four back-to-back rounds also show a specific investor pattern: Sequoia, Kleiner Perkins, and GV each participated in multiple rounds rather than being replaced by new late-stage entrants, which is one signal that early backers are still confident in the trajectory rather than looking for an exit. Thrive Capital and DST Global leading the Series D at double the prior valuation is the more recent read on where growth-stage investors are pricing healthcare AI as a category in early 2026.

It also helps to see OpenEvidence next to its closest healthcare-AI peers rather than in isolation. Abridge, the ambient AI scribe company, was valued at $5.3 billion in a $300 million Series E in June 2025 and added a $316 million extension in April 2026, while Ambience Healthcare raised $243 million at a $1.25 billion valuation in July 2025. Both sell into hospital IT budgets through traditional enterprise sales cycles; OpenEvidence, selling free access directly to individual physicians and monetizing through advertising instead of software licenses, reached more than double Abridge's valuation on a business model neither of those two companies uses.