FDNA vs Ibex Medical Analytics
FDNA vs Ibex Medical Analytics, compared side by side on 20 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: FDNA is on 59/100 and Ibex Medical Analytics on 64/100.
Where each one leads
FDNA
Leads on none of the measures we hold for both companies.
Ibex Medical Analytics
- our overall score: 64/100 against 59/100
- agent readiness: 31/100 against 21/100
- domain rating: 52/100 against 45/100
- headcount: 99 against 43
- funding raised: $104M against $25.0M
- LinkedIn following: 14,109 against 3,123
At a glance
| Measure | FDNA | Ibex Medical Analytics |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Detecting rare diseases early with the help of AI Imagine a world where every person’s genome serves as their medical record to guide health decisions. | AI-powered platform for cancer diagnostics in digital pathology. |
| Category | Healthcare, Medical Imaging, Phenotype, Facial | Healthcare, Medical Imaging, Pathology, HealthTech |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2B |
| Offering | Software | Software |
| Founded | 2010 | 2017 |
| Headquarters | Boston, United States | Tel Aviv, Israel |
| Status | Active | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | FDNA | Ibex Medical Analytics |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 43 | 99 |
| Headcount growthLast 12 months | +15.0% | +17.3% |
| Total funding | $25.0M | $104M |
| Latest round | Seed | Series C |
| LinkedIn followers | 3,123 | 14,109 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | FDNA | Ibex Medical Analytics |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 59/100 | 64/100 |
| Traction | 53/100 | 60/100 |
| Team | 70/100 | 70/100 |
| Community | 8/100 | Not published |
| Search visibility | 33/100 | 34/100 |
| Quality | 68/100 | 70/100 |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | F (21/100) | F (31/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 45/100 | 52/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | FDNA | Ibex Medical Analytics |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | AWS | Google Cloud |
| CMS | WordPress | Not detected |
| Frameworks | Jquery, Tailwind CSS | Not detected |
| Analytics | Google Analytics 4 | Not detected |
| Support stack | Not detected | HubSpot |
FDNA vs Ibex Medical Analytics: common questions
Which is better, FDNA or Ibex Medical Analytics?
On our 0-100 score Ibex Medical Analytics rates higher (64/100 against 59/100). 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 20 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do FDNA and Ibex Medical Analytics compare on the numbers?
Ibex Medical Analytics leads on our overall score (64/100 against 59/100), agent readiness (31/100 against 21/100), domain rating (52/100 against 45/100), headcount (99 against 43), funding raised ($104M against $25.0M), LinkedIn following (14,109 against 3,123).
Read the full FDNA review and pricing or the Ibex Medical Analytics review and pricing. You can also browse other FDNA alternatives we track.