Hebbia powers 33% of top asset managers

Diving deeper into

Hebbia

Company Report
33% of the top global asset managers by AUM are customers
Analyzed 5 sources

This is the clearest sign that Hebbia has found a beachhead where accuracy matters enough to support premium pricing. Large asset managers buy tools very slowly, run long security reviews, and test outputs against real analyst work, so winning a third of the top firms means Hebbia is not being treated like a generic chatbot, but like workflow software for diligence, memo writing, and portfolio research inside core investment processes.

  • Hebbia is selling into the part of finance where a wrong answer can change an investment decision. Its product is built to read full document sets, pull data from VDRs, filings, research libraries, and internal systems, and turn that into diligence grids, memos, pitch materials, and monitoring outputs. That is much closer to analyst execution than simple enterprise search.
  • The customer mix also explains the Bloomberg level pricing. Hebbia says full platform seats start around $10,000 per year and Lite seats around $3,000 to $3,500, while TechCrunch reported about $13M in revenue and usage by roughly 30% of asset managers in mid 2024. In practice, a few high value users inside each firm can justify the spend if the software shortens deal work by hours every day.
  • The closest comparison is AlphaSense, which is also strong in financial research, but competes more on proprietary content breadth and search across broker research, filings, transcripts, and internal knowledge bases. Hebbia is pushing further into workflow completion, where the output is not just an answer on screen, but a finished diligence artifact that an associate or VP would normally build by hand.

The next step is deeper entrenchment inside deal teams and portfolio teams, not broad seat expansion across whole firms. If Hebbia keeps converting research into repeatable agent workflows, it can become the system that financial institutions use for high stakes document work, while search oriented platforms remain the layer for finding information.