How do telehealth platforms make money?

This blog post has been written by the person who has mapped the telehealth market in a clean and beautiful presentation

Telehealth platforms generate revenue through diverse monetization strategies that blend traditional healthcare billing with technology-driven subscription models.

The most successful companies employ hybrid B2B/B2C approaches, combining enterprise contracts with direct consumer payments to maximize market reach and revenue stability. Understanding these revenue mechanisms is crucial for entrepreneurs entering this $347 billion market and investors evaluating platform scalability.

And if you need to understand this market in 30 minutes with the latest information, you can download our quick market pitch.

What are the main ways telehealth platforms generate revenue today?

Telehealth platforms use six primary revenue streams: subscription fees, fee-for-service charges, enterprise licensing, insurance reimbursements, marketplace commissions, and value-added service premiums.

Subscription models dominate consumer-facing platforms, with mental health apps charging $30-$100 monthly and virtual primary care services offering unlimited consultations. Fee-for-service remains the largest single revenue source, with platforms billing $75-$150 per consultation through CPT codes 99202-99215 modified for telehealth delivery.

Enterprise licensing generates the most predictable revenue, with health systems and large employers paying $10-$50 per provider monthly for white-label platforms. Insurance reimbursement varies significantly by payer, with Medicare covering remote patient monitoring at $50-$200 monthly and private insurers following varying telehealth parity laws across 43 states.

Marketplace models extract 10-30% commissions from transactions between patients and independent providers. Value-added services like AI diagnostics ($2-$5 per interaction) and specialty consultations (dermatology at $199 per session) command premium pricing due to their specialized nature.

The most successful platforms combine multiple revenue streams rather than relying on single models, with Teladoc generating $2.57 billion through 58% B2B integrated care and 42% B2C BetterHelp subscriptions.

What are the most common business models used in telehealth and how do they work in practice?

B2B, B2C, B2B2C, and hybrid models each serve different market segments with distinct operational approaches and revenue characteristics.

If you want to build on this market, you can download our latest market pitch deck here

How do subscription-based models for patients or providers function, and what pricing strategies do successful platforms use?

Subscription models operate through tiered pricing structures that segment users by access level and service complexity, with successful platforms using value-based pricing tied to outcomes and convenience.

Provider-focused subscriptions charge monthly platform fees for scheduling, EHR integrations, and analytics, typically ranging $10-$50 per provider monthly. Patient-focused models offer Direct Primary Care (DPC) and Virtual Primary Care (VPC) subscriptions providing unlimited virtual visits, remote monitoring, and care coordination for $30-$100 monthly.

Tiered pricing strategies segment services into Basic (urgent care only), Plus (chronic management), and Premier (24/7 access plus specialist services). Premium specialty access commands higher prices, with dermatology instant consults at $199 per session and mental health therapy subscriptions at $260-$400 monthly for weekly sessions.

Freemium models offer basic triage free while charging for advanced features like second opinions and AI diagnostics in paid tiers. PMPM (Per Member Per Month) pricing for employers and payers ranges $0.30-$5 depending on population risk, with chronic care and remote monitoring commanding higher rates due to intensive service requirements.

Successful platforms anchor pricing on convenience and time savings rather than cost comparison to in-person visits, with BetterHelp achieving $1.04 billion revenue through $260-$400 monthly subscriptions despite 10% YoY decline reflecting market saturation.

What role do insurance reimbursements play in the revenue structure of telehealth companies, and how do platforms partner with payers?

Insurance reimbursements provide the foundation for sustainable telehealth revenue, with platforms pursuing credentialing strategies and value-based partnerships to secure predictable payment streams.

Medicare and Medicaid follow CMS site-of-service rules, covering remote patient monitoring through specific CPT codes requiring 16+ days of monitoring monthly. RPM generates $50-$200 monthly payments while e-visit codes enable asynchronous messaging reimbursement. Virtual check-ins and interprofessional consultations fall under Care Team-Based Services (CTBS) with established billing frameworks.

Private insurers like UHC and Aetna maintain broad "virtual health" definitions covering synchronous video, asynchronous messaging, RPM, and CTBS with place-of-service coding guidance. These payers reimburse therapy services (PT/OT) and support virtual check-ins under existing fee schedules, creating multiple revenue opportunities beyond basic consultations.

State parity laws require coverage parity in 43 states, though payment parity remains limited, creating revenue variability across markets. Platforms pursue master services agreements with payers, obtaining credentialing and contracting to streamline billing processes and reduce administrative overhead.

Value-based partnerships enable platforms to share savings from reduced ER visits and hospital readmissions, with embedded telehealth services generating 15-25% reductions in overall medical spend. These arrangements combine PMPM base payments with performance bonuses tied to utilization management and health outcomes.

Curious about how money is made in this sector? Explore the most profitable business models in our sleek decks.

How do telehealth platforms make money through employer-sponsored healthcare benefits or corporate wellness programs?

Employer-sponsored telehealth generates revenue through direct contracts and wellness program integration, reducing absenteeism and medical spend by 15-25% while creating predictable monthly revenue streams.

Direct contracts with employers involve platforms like Virgin Pulse and TELUS Health offering telemedicine as part of wellness benefits packages. These arrangements generate monthly fees per employee while reducing overall healthcare costs, with usage data showing 23% lower per-episode costs compared to in-person care for Penn Medicine employees.

Hybrid onsite/virtual clinic models combine physical presence with virtual follow-up care, with PPO plans covering 95% of telehealth costs. This approach enhances productivity while maintaining cost control, particularly effective for large employers with self-insured health plans seeking to manage utilization directly.

Corporate wellness market spending reached $69 billion in 2024, growing at 7% CAGR, with digital health offerings including mental health, fitness, and chronic care serving as key revenue drivers. Platforms position telehealth as productivity enhancement rather than just cost reduction, emphasizing reduced sick days and improved employee satisfaction scores.

Revenue models include per-employee monthly fees, utilization-based pricing, and shared savings arrangements where platforms receive bonuses for achieving specific health outcomes or cost reduction targets. The most successful implementations combine multiple services (urgent care, mental health, chronic management) into comprehensive packages priced at $5-$15 per employee monthly.

What are the main fee-for-service models used in telehealth, and how do they compare in terms of profitability and scalability?

Fee-for-service models use established CPT codes with telehealth modifiers, generating $50-$200 per consultation while managing utilization through caps and thresholds to control overuse risks.

Standard tele-visit fees follow CPT codes 99202-99215 with telehealth modifiers, billing the same rates as in-person visits in most states with telehealth parity laws. Originating site facility fees (Q3014) add revenue for platforms hosting virtual consultations, while remote patient monitoring and e-visit codes enable asynchronous care billing.

Profitability scales through lower marginal costs per additional consultation, with platforms encouraging volume while managing overutilization risks through visit caps or utilization thresholds. Monthly RPM caps help cover fixed costs while controlling per-service billing complexity, creating more predictable revenue streams than pure per-visit models.

Add-on services enhance per-encounter revenue through specialty consultations, AI-assisted triage ($2-$5 per interaction), and diagnostic imaging interpretation. Second opinion services command premium fees of $150-$300 per case, particularly for complex conditions requiring specialist review.

Scalability challenges include provider capacity constraints and regulatory variations across states, with successful platforms using hybrid models combining fee-for-service with subscription elements to smooth revenue variability while maintaining growth potential through volume increases.

If you want actionable data about this market, you can download our latest market pitch deck here

How do platforms monetize value-added services like mental health, chronic condition management, AI diagnostics, or second opinions?

Value-added services command premium pricing through specialized expertise and technology differentiation, with mental health subscriptions, chronic care PMPM models, and AI diagnostic fees creating high-margin revenue streams.

Which platforms currently generate significant revenue through white-label or SaaS licensing to clinics, hospitals, or providers?

White-label and SaaS licensing creates predictable recurring revenue through implementation fees and monthly subscriptions, with platforms like vDoctor and MyTelemedicine generating substantial enterprise revenue from turnkey solutions.

White-label platforms enable agencies and health systems to integrate branded telehealth solutions, charging clients licensing fees plus per-user monthly subscriptions. Implementation fees range $20,000-$100,000 for complete HIPAA-compliant suites, while recurring SaaS licensing costs $10-$50 per provider monthly depending on feature complexity and user volume.

Maintenance and customization retainers provide additional revenue streams, with clients paying for ongoing technical support, feature updates, and platform modifications. Large health systems often require extensive customization for EHR integration and workflow optimization, generating project-based revenue exceeding initial licensing fees.

Successful white-label providers focus on smaller health systems and independent practices lacking resources for custom platform development. MyTelemedicine reports strong adoption among rural hospitals and specialty clinics seeking rapid telehealth deployment without development overhead or regulatory compliance burdens.

Revenue predictability improves through multi-year contracts and automatic renewal clauses, with successful platforms achieving 85-90% client retention rates. The model scales efficiently as additional users require minimal marginal cost while generating proportional monthly recurring revenue increases.

Wondering who's shaping this fast-moving industry? Our slides map out the top players and challengers in seconds.

How do telehealth platforms use marketplace models, connecting patients with independent providers and charging commissions or referral fees?

Marketplace models extract 10-30% transaction commissions by facilitating patient-provider connections, with hybrid approaches charging both providers and patients to maximize revenue per transaction.

Commission structures typically range 10-30% of consultation fees, with platforms providing payment processing, scheduling infrastructure, and quality assurance in exchange for transaction fees. Higher commission rates apply to specialized services like mental health therapy or chronic disease management due to increased platform support requirements.

Hybrid commission models charge both providers and patients, such as 15% of consultation fees plus $5 listing fees for providers, while patients pay consultation fees plus platform access charges. This dual-sided approach increases revenue per transaction while maintaining competitive pricing for end users.

Premium placement fees enable providers to gain visibility advantages through featured listings, priority search results, and promotional placement. These subscription-style fees range $50-$200 monthly per provider, creating predictable revenue streams independent of transaction volume.

Successful marketplace platforms focus on specific specialties or geographic regions to build network effects and reduce competition. Quality control through provider credentialing, patient reviews, and outcome tracking justifies commission fees while building platform trust and user retention.

If you need to-the-point data on this market, you can download our latest market pitch deck here

What are some examples of the most profitable telehealth startups or companies as of 2025, and what models are they using?

The most profitable telehealth companies combine B2B enterprise contracts with B2C subscriptions, achieving scale through hybrid models that diversify revenue sources and reduce customer acquisition costs.

Teladoc Health leads with $2.57 billion revenue (down 1% YoY), generating 58% from B2B integrated care subscriptions and 42% from B2C BetterHelp mental health services. This hybrid approach provides enterprise contract stability while capturing direct consumer growth, though BetterHelp experienced market saturation challenges in 2024.

Amwell achieved $254.4 million revenue through 45% SaaS subscriptions, 46% AMG per-service visits, and 9% enterprise solutions. Their balanced model reduces dependence on any single revenue stream while maintaining growth through both technology licensing and direct service delivery.

BetterHelp generated $1.04 billion revenue through pure B2C mental health subscriptions at $260-$400 monthly, achieving 82% patient satisfaction despite 10% revenue decline reflecting market maturation. The platform's success demonstrates the viability of specialized subscription models in high-demand therapeutic areas.

Livongo (pre-merger) reached C$0.43 billion revenue through chronic care PMPM subscriptions and value-based contracts, focusing on diabetes and hypertension management with outcome-based pricing models. Their success validated chronic disease management as a sustainable telehealth revenue source.

These leaders demonstrate that profitability requires either significant scale (Teladoc's $2.5B+ revenue) or specialized focus (BetterHelp's mental health dominance), with hybrid models providing the most resilient revenue structures during market fluctuations.

Which telehealth monetization models have been most widely adopted and successful in recent years, and why?

B2B enterprise contracts with subscription elements have proven most successful due to predictable revenue streams, lower customer acquisition costs, and reduced regulatory complexity compared to direct-pay consumer models.

Subscription-based enterprise models dominate because they provide monthly recurring revenue predictability while leveraging existing healthcare relationships. Health systems and large employers prefer PMPM pricing ranging $0.30-$5 per member, as these arrangements integrate with existing benefits administration and reduce utilization management overhead.

Hybrid B2B/B2C approaches succeed by combining enterprise contract stability with consumer growth potential. Teladoc's 58% B2B integrated care revenue provides foundation stability while 42% BetterHelp B2C revenue captures market expansion, though this model requires managing distinct customer acquisition strategies and service delivery approaches.

Value-based care contracts gain adoption through shared savings arrangements that align platform incentives with health outcomes. These models reduce insurance company risk while enabling platforms to capture upside from improved patient management, creating win-win scenarios that encourage long-term partnerships.

Fee-for-service models remain important but face sustainability challenges due to reimbursement variability and utilization management complexity. Successful platforms combine fee-for-service with subscription elements to smooth revenue variability while maintaining scalability through volume growth.

Planning your next move in this new space? Start with a clean visual breakdown of market size, models, and momentum.

What emerging telehealth business models are gaining traction for 2026 and beyond, especially with new technologies like AI and remote monitoring?

AI-driven platform fees, outcome-based contracts, embedded care hubs, and digital therapeutics licensing represent the fastest-growing monetization models, leveraging technology advancement and value-based care adoption.

• AI-Driven Platform Fees: Monthly premiums for AI triage, predictive analytics, and diagnostic assistance command $10-$50 additional monthly fees per provider, with platforms offering AI-enhanced capabilities as premium tiers rather than base services.
• Outcome-Based Contracts: Providers share savings from reduced hospitalizations through blended PMPM plus performance bonuses tied to specific health metrics, creating alignment between platform success and patient outcomes while reducing payer risk.
• Embedded Care Hubs: Virtual-first primary care integrated within employer EHR systems enables seamless workflow integration, with per-member PMPM billing ranging $15-$30 monthly for comprehensive primary care delivery including chronic management and preventive services.
• Digital Therapeutics Licensing: Prescription DTx applications licensed to payers through annual per-user fees of $200-$1000, with FDA approval enabling insurance reimbursement and creating sustainable revenue streams for evidence-based therapeutic interventions.
• Remote Monitoring as a Service: Comprehensive RPM programs combining devices, data analytics, and clinical oversight generate $100-$300 monthly per patient, with platforms providing turnkey solutions to providers lacking internal RPM capabilities.
• Virtual Specialty Networks: On-demand access to subspecialists through marketplace models charging 20-35% commissions for complex consultations, addressing provider shortage challenges while creating premium revenue opportunities for specialized care delivery.

These emerging models succeed by addressing specific healthcare system pain points while leveraging technology capabilities that were unavailable or immature in previous telehealth iterations, creating defensible competitive advantages through clinical integration and outcome demonstration.

Conclusion

Looking for the latest market trends? We break them down in sharp, digestible presentations you can skim or share.

Sources

1. Bask Health - Subscription Healthcare
2. TradingView - Amwell Q4 2024 Results
3. MobiHealthNews - Teladoc 2024 Results
4. TechTarget - Employer-Sponsored Telehealth Costs
5. FasterCapital - Telehealth Pricing Strategy
6. Quintuple Aim - PMPM Frameworks
7. PMC - Telehealth RPM Reimbursement
8. eHealth Virginia - Private Payer Policies
9. CHG Healthcare - Telehealth Trends
10. True Plan Advisors - Telemedicine Benefits
11. StreetInsider - Corporate Wellness Market
12. Companies Market Cap - Livongo Revenue
13. StartupForest - White Label Telemedicine
14. MyTelemedicine - White Label Solutions
15. SysCreations - Telehealth Marketplace