Biobeat vs EarlySense
Biobeat vs EarlySense, compared side by side on 16 data points: what each one does, how big it is, what it has raised, the tech running each site, and what users report. We score both out of 100 on traction, team and visibility: Biobeat is on 50/100 and EarlySense on 65/100.
Where each one leads
Biobeat
- agent readiness: 45/100 against 22/100
- headcount: 72 against 18
- headcount growth: +28.0% against -27.2%
- LinkedIn following: 18,881 against 10,030
EarlySense
- our overall score: 65/100 against 50/100
At a glance
| Measure | Biobeat | EarlySense |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Med-tech company with AI-powered remote patient monitoring using wearable sensors. | EarlySense provides a continuous patient monitoring solution to enhance safety and reduce risk for general care patients. |
| Category | Healthcare, Biomarkers, Patient, Monitor | Healthcare, Monitor, Patient, MedTech |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2B |
| Offering | Hardware, Software | Hardware, Software |
| Founded | 2016 | 2004 |
| Headquarters | Tel Aviv, Israel | Ramat Gan, Israel |
| Status | Active | Inactive |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | Biobeat | EarlySense |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 72 | 18 |
| Headcount growthLast 12 months | +28.0% | -27.2% |
| Total funding | Not published | $131M |
| Latest round | Not published | Series F |
| Valuation | Not published | $325M |
| LinkedIn followers | 18,881 | 10,030 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | Biobeat | EarlySense |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 50/100 | 65/100 |
| Traction | 19/100 | 53/100 |
| Team | 70/100 | 70/100 |
| Community | Not published | 15/100 |
| Search visibility | 33/100 | 30/100 |
| Quality | 58/100 | Not published |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | D (45/100) | F (22/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 42/100 | 38/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | Biobeat | EarlySense |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Self Managed | Not detected |
| CMS | WordPress | Not detected |
| Frameworks | Jquery | Not detected |
| Analytics | Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity | Not detected |
| Support stack | HubSpot | Not detected |
Biobeat vs EarlySense: common questions
Which is better, Biobeat or EarlySense?
On our 0-100 score EarlySense rates higher (65/100 against 50/100). The score weights traction, team, visibility and profile completeness, so it reflects company strength rather than which product suits you. We compare the two on 16 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do Biobeat and EarlySense compare on the numbers?
Biobeat leads on agent readiness (45/100 against 22/100), headcount (72 against 18), headcount growth (+28.0% against -27.2%), LinkedIn following (18,881 against 10,030). EarlySense leads on our overall score (65/100 against 50/100).
Read the full Biobeat review and pricing or the EarlySense review and pricing. You can also browse other Biobeat alternatives we track.