Fertility
“IVF has the potential to change healthcare forever, but greed stands in the way”
By Lorin Gu, founding partner at Recharge Capital

Finding common ground and embracing technology has the potential to fundamentally redefine fertility treatment, says Lorin Gu.
Reproductive technology is one of the fastest growing healthcare sectors in the country. From 2015-2020, the US in vitro fertilisation (IVF) market grew from 231k cycles a year to 326k cycles a year, representing a CAGR of 7.13 per cent.
In addition to growing demand, IVF technology is also improving, with the rate of successful pregnancies increasing from ~30 per cent to ~45 per cent over the same period.
While reproductive technology has experienced significant growth in recent years, a 45 per cent success rate at an average price of US$20-25k per cycle means that IVF remains an inaccessible option for most people who wish to conceive.
To tackle part of this problem, many start-ups have created AI solutions to further increase the success rate of IVF while decreasing the number of cycles required for fertilisation.
The offerings from these companies mainly revolve around utilising AI to provide accurate embryo selection, implantation prediction, and end to end clinical workflow software.

In short, these companies allow embryologists to make non-biased, high quality decisions, while saving them from spending precious time in the lab on laborious data entry and manual processes. The appealing new innovations of these companies have drawn in nearly US$100m in funding from top investors.
There is clear excitement and conviction around reproductive technology, and it will be very exciting to see these solutions reach their full potential once they receive FDA approval.
However, while we should be optimistic about these developments, there is an important caveat that could potentially derail the growth of fertility technology.
Although all reproductive practices claim that they want to increase their success rates, there is an intrinsic conflict of interest between fertility clinics’ profit seeking business model and technologies that promote higher success.
Over the past five to ten years, there has been drastic consolidation in the IVF space, primarily driven by the entrance of private equity groups and expansion of large clinic chains.
Looking at data from the ~450 US clinics that report to the CDC, over half are held by only eight chains. When these stakeholders are added into the mix, the end goal almost always turns to profit rather than service. There are three main factors driving this relationship.
First, we can start with whether or not clinics really need to increase their success rate in order to attract more patients. In general, the fertility treatment industry is significantly supply constrained with outsized demand.
In the US there are about 450 clinics and 1,700 reproductive endocrinologists to fulfil the demand of 10.85 million females that are infertile in reproductive age. This would equate to roughly 22,000 cycles per clinic, while in reality the average cycle per clinic is only around 700.
While there are more nuances that factor into the demand, such as cost, social acceptance, and other medical conditions, the stark disparity in these numbers makes it fairly obvious that clinics are not compelled to increase their success rate due to the supply constraints of the industry.
Second, we can look at the typical customer acquisition cost for an IVF clinic. The average CAC per cycle ranges between US$1,000-US$3,500, or 5 per cent to 17.5 per cent of revenue per an average cost of a US$20k cycle.
These numbers are significant compressors of profitability, and clinics want to keep the customer acquisition cost low. As a result, retaining an existing patient that has failed their first cycle treatment could be extremely cost efficient.
Finally, we can look at the cost associated with software integration. The average cost to integrate software at a clinic ranges between US$180k-US$370k, compared to an average annual revenue of US$9m. Conservatively, this adds up to around 2 per cent to 4 per cent of revenue.
The question then becomes whether or not this is an additional add on to existing software or this software takes over the complete clinic flow. The latter is clearly more attractive, while the former could be problematic at a profit standpoint.
Given these factors, it is easy to see the potential conflict of interest between profit seeking operating model and technologies providing higher success.
While there are many reasons to be bullish on the tech companies revolutionising workflow in fertility clinics, prices in the industry will only be reduced if technology is allowed to come in to help. In order to resolve this conflict of interest, clinics and startups must work together to find a solution that benefits all parties.
While it may cost clinics some profits in the short term, finding common ground and embracing this technology has the potential to fundamentally redefine fertility treatment across the globe.
Lorin Gu is a founding partner at the New York-based venture capital firm Recharge Capital. Prior to founding Recharge, he previously worked at Cyrus Capital, a US$4b+ hedge fund in New York, and the Blackstone Group. Lorin is also the founder of Recharge Foundation, founding chair at Peterson Institute of International Economics’ Global Future Council, and an executive board member at the Museum of Art and Design, and the New York Foundation for the Arts.
Fertility
No clear evidence common embryo transfer techniques improve IVF success, review finds

Common IVF preparation techniques used before embryo transfer have no proven effect on pregnancy rates, according to a review.
Researchers said evidence for the widely used practices remains uncertain because available studies are limited and generally of low quality.
Embryo transfer is the final and most vulnerable stage of IVF, when an embryo is placed into the womb. Only around one in three transfers results in pregnancy.
Practice varies between clinics, with some routinely using preparation techniques such as adjusting bladder fullness while others do not consider them necessary.
Dr Ryosuke Akino, practising obstetrician-gynaecologist from Kato Ladies Clinic, said: “To an extent, this is a case of tradition driving practice rather than the evidence.
“Current practices in this area often reflect local protocols, clinician preference, and historical convention rather than strong, high-quality evidence.”
The Cochrane review analysed 11 studies involving 2,524 women undergoing embryo transfer.
Researchers looked at three preparation techniques used by fertility clinics: having women arrive with a full bladder to straighten the angle between the uterus and cervix, removing cervical mucus and using a technique called afterloading.
Afterloading is a technique used to guide the embryo through the cervix.
The review found no reliable evidence that any of the three approaches improved pregnancy rates compared with standard care.
Researchers rated the evidence as low or very low certainty because the trials were small and had methodological weaknesses. They found no grounds to recommend any of the techniques over standard care.
There was also limited information about possible side effects.
The review team, which included methodologists and practising obstetrician-gynaecologists, said full bladder preparation and cervical mucus removal were generally considered safe, with no clear evidence of harm or major complications.
Dr James Brown, obstetrician-gynaecologist from Women’s Health and Research Institute Australia, said: “While these techniques are generally considered safe, it’s still important to test their effectiveness.”
Akino and Brown added: “A full bladder can be uncomfortable, although it may ease catheter insertion in certain uterine positions and reduce procedural difficulty.
“Mucus removal is usually quick, but if done roughly and causes bleeding, it may affect the woman’s experience.
“Overall, the risks are minor and relate mostly to discomfort and procedural factors rather than clinical harm.”
The authors said embryo transfer has changed relatively little despite major advances elsewhere in IVF.
Research has instead focused more heavily on embryo quality and genetic factors, which have a greater bearing on treatment success than transfer technique.
Embryo transfer also depends heavily on the person carrying out the procedure and can be difficult to standardise, making large, rigorous clinical trials harder to design.
Researchers said women may also be reluctant to risk valuable embryos by taking part in randomised studies comparing different transfer techniques.
Dr Noyuri Yamaji from Showa Medical University in Japan said: “Sixteen years of research still haven’t answered a basic IVF technique question.
“This is a critical step in the IVF process and these small changes and techniques have the possibility to make a massive difference, but we won’t know more until more robust, better-quality trials are conducted.”
All the studies assessed were carried out in high-income countries, meaning the findings may not necessarily apply to other healthcare settings and populations.
The authors said further research could be particularly valuable in resource-limited settings, where these procedures are inexpensive and simple to change and basic procedural standardisation could matter more than advanced technical modifications.
Insight
Natural Cycles receives sixth FDA clearance for fertility algorithm

Natural Cycles has received its sixth FDA clearance for an updated fertility algorithm designed to personalise digital contraception.
The regulator cleared the company’s next-generation NC° Fertility Algorithm, which combines statistical modelling with machine learning to predict fertile and non-fertile days.
Natural Cycles said the algorithm was trained on tens of millions of real-world fertility data points and adapts to individual cycle patterns.
“People don’t just want effective birth control; they want a method that fits naturally into their lives,” said Dr Elina Berglund Scherwitzl, chief executive and co-founder of Natural Cycles.
“One of the unique advantages of a software-based contraceptive is that it can continue to evolve.
“As our scientific understanding of fertility grows and we continue to learn from more than a decade of real-world data, we can responsibly refine the technology through rigorous research, clinical validation, and FDA review.
“This latest clearance is the result of that work, helping us give many users more flexibility while maintaining the effectiveness they rely on.”
Evidence supporting the FDA clearance showed that the updated system maintained the app’s established safety and effectiveness while giving many users more Green Days.
Green Days are those on which the app confirms that pregnancy protection is not needed.
The birth control app remains 98 per cent effective when used as intended and 93 per cent effective with typical use, according to the company.
Natural Cycles said these rates place it in the same effectiveness category as the combined oral contraceptive pill.
Typical use includes mistakes or inconsistent use, while intended use means following the method correctly.
Digital contraception uses technology and physiological data, such as body temperature, to provide personalised fertility predictions.
Natural Cycles said its updated algorithm can identify fertile and non-fertile days more precisely than traditional fertility awareness methods, which may classify larger parts of the cycle as potentially fertile.
The changes provide more Green Days while maintaining effectiveness, improve performance for people with irregular cycles and better handle lower-quality temperature or biomarker data, the company said.
A biomarker is a measurable biological signal, such as body temperature, that provides information about processes taking place in the body.
Natural Cycles also said the system can personalise its predictions more quickly as a user’s menstrual cycle changes over time.
“Years ago, the question was whether digital contraception could work. Today, Natural Cycles has demonstrated robust clinical and real-world evidence that it can,” said Dr Kerry Krauss, senior medical adviser at Natural Cycles.
“The next chapter for digital contraception is making it more personalised and easier to use while maintaining the same high standard of safety.
“This FDA clearance demonstrates how advances in AI and machine learning can improve the user experience while preserving the scientific rigour expected of a regulated medical device.”
Natural Cycles has filed a patent application covering key innovations in the updated algorithm.
The decision follows the FDA’s first De Novo clearance of the company’s birth control app in 2018.
Later clearances allowed the app to integrate with the Oura Ring in 2021 and Apple Watch in 2023.
In 2024, the FDA cleared a Predetermined Change Control Plan, creating a regulatory pathway for future hardware integrations.
Natural Cycles said the plan has since enabled the launch of its NC° Band and other hardware integrations, including a Garmin connection introduced in March 2026.
A further clearance in 2025 allowed the birth control app to be offered both over the counter and by prescription.
The company has also received regulatory authorisations in more than eight markets worldwide, including Europe, Canada, Brazil, Australia, South Korea and Singapore.
Fertility
Fertility startup American Baby Company secures US$4m

A fertility startup has raised US$4m and will open its first lower-cost IVF clinic in West Palm Beach later this year.
It will offer a full IVF cycle, including medications, for US$8,995.
Around 12 per cent of American couples struggle with infertility, according to the company, but only 14 per cent of them receive IVF because of the cost.
A single IVF cycle costs an average of US$23,500, it said, with the cost nearly doubling if further cycles are needed.
Co-founder and chief executive Van Spina said: “We’re building ABC around a straightforward premise: IVF has become unnecessarily expensive, and many patients are priced out before they ever have a real chance to start a family.”
“This is personal for me. My fiancée and I went through IVF ourselves, including multiple failed cycles,” Spina continued, citing Jamie Rapp.
“That experience pushed me to build the kind of fertility company we wished had existed when we began treatment.”
The US$4m seed round was led by Wormhole Capital and Tower Research Ventures.
In a blog post, New York-based Tower Research described ABC as a new model for fertility care, praising its “evidence-based protocols, AI-assisted intake, and modern lab workflows.”
“When we met the team at The American Baby Company (ABC), we saw an opportunity to rethink how fertility care is delivered in the US from the ground up,” the post said.
Co-founder and chief medical officer Dr Paul Magarelli is a board-certified reproductive endocrinologist and one of the most prominent voices in the US on expanding access to fertility care, according to Tower.
Reproductive endocrinology is a branch of medicine concerned with hormones and fertility.
Magarelli developed the Clinical Fertility Physician certification programme, which trains generalist clinicians to deliver routine fertility procedures under specialist oversight.
Spina spent his early career as a technology investor at Warburg Pincus before founding an institutionally backed data business in private credit.
“We’re on a mission to become the place Americans go to start their families,” Spina said.
“Our 10-year goal is to help make 250,000 babies per year.”
Entrepreneur2 days agoUK femtech investment surges 194% in a decade, research finds
Fertility2 weeks agoFertility startup American Baby Company secures US$4m
Insight2 weeks agoNatural Cycles receives sixth FDA clearance for fertility algorithm
Wellness7 days agoCancer patient receives ‘landmark’ treatment in world-first
Insight2 weeks agoExperimental treatment significantly slows progression of fatal brain disease in women, study finds
Sponsored Content2 weeks agoThe room is filling up at WHW Europe 2026 with super early bird pricing ending this Friday
Insight1 week agoJohnson & Johnson offers to pay US$5.5bn to settle talc cancer lawsuits
Wellness2 weeks agoPlanetary Health Diet lowers heart risk in older women, study finds












Pingback: IVF provider launches its first clinics in Southeast Asia - FemTech World
Pingback: Recharge Capital launches US$200m women’s health investment vehicle with backing from Peter Thiel - FemTech World