The brain-computer interfaces race has moved from research labs to regulators and investors. A brain-computer interface (BCI) is a device that records signals from the nervous system and turns them into commands for a computer, or sends signals back, for example to restore some vision. Elon Musk’s Neuralink gets most of the attention, but rivals using very different approaches have already reached regulatory milestones of their own. For investors and hospitals, the real contest is over which approach reaches safe, reimbursed medical use first.
Four companies, four approaches
Neuralink implants its N1 device with a surgical robot that inserts thin electrode threads into the brain’s cortex, the most invasive approach. In June 2025 it raised $650 million in a Series E round, Fierce Biotech reported, and had trial sites in the US, Canada and Abu Dhabi. Its first patients, people with severe paralysis, use the implant to control a computer cursor.
Synchron avoids open brain surgery. Its Stentrode, a stent-like mesh of electrodes, is inserted through the jugular vein and placed in a blood vessel next to the brain’s motor area. In 2021 it became the first company to receive US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval to start a clinical trial of a permanently implanted BCI, Fortune reported, ahead of Neuralink. Patients have used it to text and browse with their thoughts.
Precision Neuroscience, co-founded by Neuralink co-founder Benjamin Rapoport, uses an ultra-thin film with 1,024 electrodes that rests on the surface of the brain without penetrating tissue. In April 2025 the FDA cleared its Layer 7 Cortical Interface for implantation of up to 30 days, MedTech Dive reported, allowing commercial use in settings such as brain mapping during surgery. A permanent wireless version still needs clinical trials.
Science Corporation, founded by former Neuralink president Max Hodak, started with vision. Its PRIMA system is a tiny wireless chip implanted under the retina that works with special glasses. In a trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine in October 2025, 84% of 38 patients with advanced age-related macular degeneration regained the ability to read letters, numbers or words. The device received a European CE mark and launched commercially in Europe in mid-2026, Ophthalmology Times reported.
Invasive versus less invasive
The trade-off is between signal quality and risk:
- Penetrating electrodes (Neuralink) sit closest to individual neurons and capture the most detailed signals, but require open brain surgery.
- Surface films (Precision) record from the brain’s surface with less risk of tissue damage.
- Blood-vessel implants (Synchron) need no skull opening but record weaker, less detailed signals.
- Retinal implants (Science) work outside the brain, targeting one specific disease.
Each approach also needs software: machine-learning models that decode noisy neural signals into intended movements or words, which is one reason AI advances have accelerated the field. Our coverage of the AI chip race shows how fast that computing side is moving.
The business case
The first markets are medical and relatively small: people with paralysis, ALS (a disease that destroys motor neurons), stroke damage or blindness from retinal disease. To build a business, a BCI company needs three things beyond working technology: regulatory approval for long-term implantation, reimbursement from insurers or national health systems, and surgeons and hospitals willing to adopt the procedure.
That is why the less invasive approaches have moved faster commercially. A device that can be implanted by existing specialists in existing operating rooms is easier to scale than one that needs a dedicated surgical robot. Neuralink’s advantage is funding and engineering speed; its rivals’ advantage is a simpler path to clinical use.
Neural data and privacy
BCIs also raise new questions about data. Neural signals can reveal information about health and possibly intentions, and today’s privacy laws were not written with them in mind. Some jurisdictions, including Colorado and California, have added neural data to their privacy laws. Companies that collect and process such data will face growing pressure to show how it is stored, who can access it and whether it is ever used beyond treatment.
Our take
The BCI race is not one race but several: restoring movement, communication and vision are different markets with different winners. The least invasive devices are likely to reach paying patients first, while Neuralink’s high-bandwidth approach is a longer and riskier bet. Claims about consumer “mind control” devices are far ahead of the evidence; for the next decade this is a medical-device business. Investors should watch reimbursement decisions as closely as technical demos.