Medspa Valuation Multiples Dashboard (2026 Update)
Medical aesthetics remains one of the strongest-performing categories in healthcare M&A, driven by cash-pay revenue, recurring treatment demand, and limited reimbursement exposure. Even as broader healthcare deal volumes stabilize, elective aesthetics continues to command premium interest, with dermatology platforms supported by medspa ancillaries trading in the 12–15× EBITDA range, according to Scope Research.
Because most medspas operate as add-ons rather than full-service platforms, valuations typically align with benchmarks in elective care, such as dermatology and plastic surgery. Current data from Scope research shows elective providers often achieve 7–11× EBITDA, with scale, membership models, and diversified treatments with medspas providing a major push toward the upper end.
What You’ll Learn in This Article
Current EBITDA and revenue multiples most applicable to medspa transactions
How medspa valuations compare with dermatology, plastic surgery, and elective-care benchmarks
Key operational, financial, and market factors that drive valuation premiums
How scale, membership models, and service mix influence achievable deal multiples
What 2026 deal activity, regulatory trends, and buyer behavior mean for medspa M&A
Current Medspa & Dermatology-Linked Valuation Benchmarks
Because medspas are rarely sold as standalone PE platforms, valuation data for the category is best inferred from dermatology and elective-care comparables. The segments share operational profiles: cash-pay revenue, retail pricing, strong marketing dependence, and high variability in margins based on service mix and provider compensation models.
Medspa-Related EBITDA Multiples
| Segment / Comparable Category | Platform Multiples | Add-On Multiples | Notes & Relevance to Medspa |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dermatology | 12–15× | 4–7× | Large integrated dermatology platforms trade 12–15×; smaller practices transact 4–7× depending on scale, cosmetic mix, and ancillaries. Highly relevant because medspa ancillaries drive top-tier cosmetic valuations. |
| Plastic Surgery | 9–12× | 5–9× | Fully aligned with the FOCUS plastic-surgery category table. Elective, cash-pay, aesthetics-driven—closest clinical comparable for medspa multiples. |
| Medtech / Digital Aesthetics | 8.2–14.4× | N/A | Device-heavy medspa models (laser platforms, RF devices, subscription plans) map most closely to medtech multiples. |
| Elective Healthcare (General) | 10–14× | 4–9× | General elective-care comps reflect consumer-driven economics, pricing power, and recurring treatment demand—core valuation drivers for medspas. |
Source: works cited combined with guidance from internal bankers, based generally on knowledge and experience. Actual pricing varies with each transaction based on many factors. Intended for educational purposes only and not a guarantee of any outcome.
Standalone medspa businesses generally align closer to add-on dermatology multiples (4–7× EBITDA) unless they exhibit true platform characteristics—multi-location scale, strong brand equity, recurring membership revenue, and device-based operating leverage—at which point valuations may approach the lower end of dermatology platform ranges (10–12× EBITDA).
Revenue Multiples for Medspa-Comparable Segments (2026)
Medspa revenue multiples track closely with other elective-service categories. Given high variability in provider compensation, consumable costs, and machine utilization rates, EBITDA is the dominant pricing metric. Still, revenue multiples help anchor expectations for smaller or early-stage operators.
| Segment | $1–5M Revenue | $6–10M Revenue | $10–50M Revenue |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dermatology | 2.2× | 3.1× | 3.5× |
| Medical Practices (General) | 2.6× | 3.3× | 4.1× |
| Plastic Surgery | 2.6× | 3.5× | 4.2× |
| Medtech / Aesthetic Devices | 3.2–3.6× | 4.0–4.4× | 4.6–5.0× |
Source: works cited combined with guidance from internal bankers, based generally on knowledge and experience. Actual pricing varies with each transaction based on many factors. Intended for educational purposes only and not a guarantee of any outcome.
Projection for medspa transactions: Most medspas trade between 1.5–3.5× revenue, depending on margin consistency, volume of recurring clients, treatment mix, and ability to scale across multiple sites.
What Drives Premium Valuations in the Medspa Market
Across all health services, value creation is shifting toward businesses with recurring revenue, diversified offerings, and lower reimbursement exposure. Medspas naturally benefit from this trend, but the premium tiers concentrate around a few attributes.
1. Membership and Subscription Models
Recurring monthly membership revenue is one of the strongest predictors of valuation uplift. While not explicitly quantified in core industry tables, PitchBook’s Q3 2025 data highlights investor prioritization of predictable utilization and consumer loyalty metrics across all discretionary segments.
2. Integrated Dermatology or Plastic Surgery Anchors
Data from Scope Research shows dermatology platforms still command 12–15× EBITDA, with cosmetic and medspa services cited as key value drivers for the highest tiers of buyer interest. Medspas tied to MD-led practices or surgical centers often earn a 1–3× EBITDA premiums relative to stand-alone sites due to physician supervision advantages, higher-acuity procedures, cross-selling opportunities, and built-in referral pathways.
3. Multi-Location Scale
Private equity strongly prefers 3–8+ site operators with consistent SOPs and central administrative functions. PitchBook notes scale and operating leverage are among the main factors sustaining premium valuations across elective-care segments, even as deal volumes normalize in 2026.
4. Service Line Diversity & Device ROI
In higher-performing medspas, a substantial portion of EBITDA is commonly generated by device-based services such as laser hair removal, body contouring, and RF microneedling, where utilization efficiency materially impacts profitability.
5. Brand Strength & Local Market Density
As competition intensifies, brand equity and regional density matter more: high digital engagement boosts lifetime value, density reduces marketing CAC, cluster strategies increase buyer confidence in post-close performance. Bain’s 2025 Healthcare Private Equity Report reinforces that in competitive segments, exit value maximization depends heavily on clear, documented value-creation levers, including branding, pricing, and scale economics.
Market Conditions Impacting Medspa M&A in 2026
Medspa M&A in 2026 is shaped by steady consumer demand for aesthetic services, stabilizing financing conditions, and renewed investor interest in cash-pay healthcare segments with predictable margins. While broader healthcare deal volumes have moderated, elective-care categories continue to attract competitive bidding, particularly for multi-location operators with strong brand equity and recurring membership revenue.
Deal Activity & Investor Sentiment
Despite lower overall healthcare deal volumes compared with the 2021 peak, reports show renewed sponsor interest in elective-care segments, especially those with consumer-pay economics and limited reimbursement exposure. PitchBook confirms that while dermatology deal count dipped in 2025 due to GLP-1-related demand questions, elective services with strong cash-pay components remain comparatively resilient and still command competitive processes for A-level assets.
Macroeconomic Factors
Medspas have benefited from stabilizing inflation, consumer willingness to invest in appearance and wellness, and limited insurance complexity relative to other healthcare segments. Medspa valuations have not experienced the same degree of compression seen in payer-driven or reimbursement-risk specialties because the economic model is fundamentally consumer-driven.
Regulatory Environment
While medspas operate outside the physician practice management (PPM) corporate practice of medicine constraints, PitchBook highlights rising scrutiny in areas such as dermatology and aesthetic practice transactions. California’s new MSO restrictions create some spillover concern, but these predominantly affect physician practices, not non-medical spas. Still, buyers increasingly require clean compliance documentation, scope-of-practice clarity, and properly supervised injectables programs.
Medspa Valuation Outlook for 2025–2026
The following outlook highlights the key forces shaping medspa valuations over the next 12–18 months:
| Trend | Outlook / Impact |
|---|---|
| Increasing roll-up activity | Dermatology and plastic surgery platforms continue to attract strong sponsor interest, positioning medspas as high-value add-on acquisitions within larger elective-care ecosystems. |
| Potential for premium recovery in 2026 | PitchBook projects an increase in PE exits in 2026 as 7+ year-held assets return to market, creating competitive tension and supporting stronger multiples across elective-care verticals. |
| Technology and AI influencing multiples | Device-heavy medspas using subscription models, AI-driven consultations, and operational automation may see elevated buyer interest similar to trends in healthcare IT. |
| Consumer demand remains the core driver | Demand for injectables, laser treatments, skin rejuvenation, and non-surgical body contouring continues to rise at mid- to high-single-digit rates, underpinning investor confidence even in a selective deal environment. |
Outlook
Valuations in the medspa sector remain strong relative to many other healthcare segments, buoyed by recurring revenue, strong consumer demand, and favorable unit economics. While stand-alone medspas typically transact at 4–7× EBITDA, operators with scale, diversified treatments, recurring memberships, and links to dermatology or plastic surgery practices can reach 10–12× EBITDA, aligning with premium elective care benchmarks.
As investors continue to seek defensible, margin-stable assets with limited reimbursement risk, medspas remain a compelling category for both platform formation and add-on growth strategies.
Learn More
FOCUS Investment Banking specializes in maximizing transaction value for healthcare practice owners through our proven quarterback approach to M&A advisory.
If you’d like to learn more about our healthcare investment banking services, contact Eric Yetter ([email protected]) or Andy Snyder ([email protected]).
Sources
