Cybersecurity for Connected Medical Devices: The Financial Strategy Angle

As medical devices become increasingly connected — collecting and transmitting data, receiving software updates, integrating with hospital networks — cybersecurity has become a core part of both regulatory expectations and financial planning for MedTech companies, rather than an optional add-on considered late in development. For finance and operations leaders at device companies, this shift raises a practical question that goes beyond engineering and regulatory strategy: how do you actually budget for it, in a way that holds up across multiple product cycles and years of post-market obligations?

This piece looks at that question specifically from the financial planning side — not as a substitute for regulatory or cybersecurity engineering guidance, but as a companion to it.

Why Cybersecurity Has Become a Budget Line, Not an Afterthought

Regulatory expectations around premarket cybersecurity documentation for connected devices have increased considerably in recent years, requiring companies to demonstrate security considerations throughout the design and development process, not just as a final check before submission. This shift means cybersecurity costs — secure architecture design, penetration testing, vulnerability management processes — need to be built into the product development budget from an early stage, rather than treated as a late-stage compliance cost.

For finance teams used to thinking about R&D spend in terms of engineering headcount, prototyping, and clinical costs, this can require an adjustment. Cybersecurity work threads through nearly every phase of development, and its costs don’t show up as a single identifiable milestone the way a clinical trial or a regulatory submission does. That makes it easy to underestimate in an early-stage model and easy to lose track of once a device is in market.

Categories of Cybersecurity-Related Cost

Cybersecurity spend for a connected device tends to fall into a few recurring categories, each with different timing and budget implications:

Secure software development practices integrated into the engineering process, which can add both direct cost and development time compared to a less security-focused approach. This includes threat modeling, secure coding standards, and code-level security review built into the engineering workflow rather than bolted on afterward.
Third-party penetration testing and security assessments, often required as part of premarket submissions and repeated periodically post-market. These engagements are typically discrete, quotable costs, which makes them easier to plan for than some of the more diffuse categories below — but the recurring nature of post-market testing is often underestimated.
Post-market vulnerability monitoring and patch management infrastructure, since cybersecurity obligations for connected devices generally continue well after initial market clearance. This includes the tooling and staff time needed to track newly disclosed vulnerabilities in third-party components, assess their relevance to the device, and develop and validate patches.
Incident response planning and, in the event of an actual security incident, the potentially significant costs of investigation, remediation, and required disclosures. Even companies that never experience a serious incident typically need to maintain a documented, tested response plan as part of their ongoing compliance posture.
Documentation and quality system integration, since cybersecurity activities generally need to be captured within a company’s broader quality management system rather than tracked as a separate, disconnected process. This adds a layer of ongoing documentation and audit-readiness cost that’s easy to overlook when budgeting purely for engineering and testing work.

Building This Into a Multi-Year Financial Plan

Because post-market cybersecurity monitoring and patch management are ongoing obligations, not one-time costs, they should be modeled as a recurring operating expense in the financial plan, similar to QMS maintenance costs discussed elsewhere in MedTech compliance planning. Companies that only budget for cybersecurity through the initial product launch, without accounting for the ongoing monitoring and update infrastructure required afterward, tend to face unplanned costs once the device is on the market and generating real usage and vulnerability data.

A useful discipline here is to separate the model into two distinct lines rather than a single lump “cybersecurity” number: a premarket, largely one-time investment tied to a specific product launch, and a post-market, recurring line that scales with the number of connected devices in the field and the pace of vulnerability disclosures across the software ecosystem the device depends on. The second line tends to grow over time, not shrink, as a company’s installed base and product portfolio expand — a pattern that’s worth reflecting explicitly in longer-range forecasts rather than assuming post-market costs will flatten out once a device stabilizes.

It’s also worth stress-testing the plan against a slower regulatory or engineering timeline. Cybersecurity remediation work has a way of extending development timelines when issues surface late in the process, and a financial plan that assumes a fixed development schedule without contingency for this can understate both cost and runway needs.

Example

Consider a fictionalized connected medical device company that budgeted appropriately for premarket cybersecurity testing and documentation but hadn’t built an ongoing budget line for post-market vulnerability monitoring and periodic patching. Once the device was on the market and a security researcher identified a vulnerability requiring a software update, the company had to scramble to fund and staff a response effort that hadn’t been anticipated in its operating budget — a cost that would have been far easier to absorb had it been planned for as a routine, ongoing expense from the start.

The scramble in this scenario is rarely just about the direct cost of the fix. It also tends to involve reallocating engineering time away from planned roadmap work, potential delays to other launches while the response effort is staffed, and the administrative burden of any required regulatory notifications — costs that compound the original budget gap rather than simply adding to it.

Coordinating Engineering, Regulatory, and Finance Early

Because cybersecurity requirements for connected devices sit at the intersection of engineering practice, regulatory expectation, and ongoing operating cost, it’s worth bringing these three functions together early in the product development process to build a realistic, comprehensive cybersecurity budget — rather than having engineering and regulatory teams define the requirements in isolation and hand finance a cost estimate after key architectural decisions have already been made.

In practice, this often means finance participating in early architecture and design discussions well before a budget is finalized, not just reviewing cost estimates after the fact. Architectural choices — such as how a device handles software updates, what third-party components it relies on, and how much of its security posture depends on infrastructure the company controls directly versus a vendor’s — have real, ongoing cost implications that are far cheaper to influence early than to revisit after a design is locked.

Cybersecurity as a Competitive and Trust Factor

Beyond regulatory compliance, strong cybersecurity practices have increasingly become a factor hospital and health system IT security teams evaluate directly during procurement, particularly for devices connecting to their networks. A company with a well-documented, mature approach to device security can sometimes move through customer IT security reviews meaningfully faster than a competitor without that same track record — meaning cybersecurity investment can have a measurable sales cycle benefit alongside its regulatory and risk management value.

For companies building a financial model that includes sales cycle assumptions, this is worth factoring in directly: a mature cybersecurity posture is, among other things, a sales enablement investment, and shortening procurement timelines with hospital IT security teams can have a real, quantifiable effect on revenue recognition timing.

Insurance and Risk Transfer Considerations

Given the potential financial exposure from a security incident involving a connected medical device — including investigation costs, remediation, potential regulatory penalties, and reputational harm — it’s worth evaluating cyber liability insurance coverage specific to connected device risk as part of the overall financial risk management strategy, rather than assuming general business insurance adequately covers this exposure.

As with the budgeting question generally, this is an area where it helps to loop in the right specialists early. Insurance brokers with specific experience in medical device or MedTech risk are generally better positioned than generalist providers to help identify appropriate coverage limits and to flag exclusions that could leave a meaningful gap in coverage for a connected-device-specific incident.

A Few Questions Worth Asking Before Finalizing the Budget

As a starting checklist, MedTech finance teams building out this part of the plan may find it useful to ask:

Does the model separate premarket cybersecurity investment from ongoing, post-market monitoring and patching costs, or are they combined into a single figure that understates the recurring obligation?
Does the post-market line scale with the installed base and product portfolio over time, or is it held flat regardless of growth?
Has engineering flagged which third-party components and dependencies the device relies on, and is there a plan — and a budget — for monitoring vulnerabilities in those components specifically?
Is there a documented, funded incident response plan, and has its cost been reflected in the operating budget rather than treated as a contingency that will be figured out if and when needed?
Has the company evaluated cyber liability insurance coverage specific to connected medical devices, rather than relying on general business coverage?

————————

About Herod CPA PLLC

Herod CPA PLLC provides forecasting, budgeting, and financial modeling to SaaS startups. We handle everything you need – from financial planning to metrics, forecasting, accounting, tax, audit, and CFO support – so you can scale with confidence. From forecasting ARR and cash runway to gross and net revenue retention, everything’s tailored to your stage and goals.