Ceribell vs Shockwave Medical
Ceribell vs Shockwave Medical, compared side by side on 22 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: Ceribell is on 58/100 and Shockwave Medical on 66/100.
Where each one leads
Ceribell
Leads on none of the measures we hold for both companies.
Shockwave Medical
- our overall score: 66/100 against 58/100
- domain rating: 59/100 against 50/100
- headcount: 1,542 against 397
- funding raised: $200M against $1.0M
- LinkedIn following: 120,592 against 25,218
At a glance
| Measure | Ceribell | Shockwave Medical |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | AI-powered EEG device for rapid seizure detection in critical care. | Develops intravascular lithotripsy technology for treating calcified cardiovascular lesions. |
| Category | MedTech, HealthTech, AI-Driven Protein Design, Clinical Trials | MedTech, HealthTech, Medical Devices, Cardiovascular Devices |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2B |
| Offering | Hardware | Hardware |
| Founded | 2014 | 2011 |
| Headquarters | Sunnyvale, United States | Santa Clara, United States |
| Status | Active | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | Ceribell | Shockwave Medical |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 397 | 1,542 |
| Total funding | $1.0M | $200M |
| Latest round | Seed | Series D |
| LinkedIn followers | 25,218 | 120,592 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | Ceribell | Shockwave Medical |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 58/100 | 66/100 |
| Traction | 50/100 | 60/100 |
| Team | 60/100 | 70/100 |
| Community | 15/100 | 15/100 |
| Search visibility | 22/100 | 22/100 |
| Quality | 68/100 | 78/100 |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | D (41/100) | D (42/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 50/100 | 59/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | Ceribell | Shockwave Medical |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Google Cloud | Not detected |
| CDN | Not detected | Cloudflare |
| CMS | WordPress | WordPress |
| Frameworks | Bootstrap | Jquery |
| Analytics | Google Tag Manager | Google Tag Manager |
| Support stack | Not detected | HubSpot |
Ceribell vs Shockwave Medical: common questions
Which is better, Ceribell or Shockwave Medical?
On our 0-100 score Shockwave Medical rates higher (66/100 against 58/100). 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 22 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do Ceribell and Shockwave Medical compare on the numbers?
Shockwave Medical leads on our overall score (66/100 against 58/100), domain rating (59/100 against 50/100), headcount (1,542 against 397), funding raised ($200M against $1.0M), LinkedIn following (120,592 against 25,218).
Read the full Ceribell review and pricing or the Shockwave Medical review and pricing. You can also browse other Ceribell alternatives we track.