Around 34.0 billion US dollars is projected for the global IVF market by 2022, yet 32% of women aged 35 to 39 in the US reported using IVF or other fertility treatment at least once. That tension between fast growing demand and highly specific outcomes is exactly what the IVF industry statistics reveal across clinics, technologies like single embryo transfer and AI embryo scoring, and real-world costs and age trends.
Key Takeaways
- 32% of women aged 35-39 reported using IVF or other fertility treatment at least once in their lifetime, based on a 2017-2019 survey of Americans
- Live birth rates per retrieval in the U.S. were about 30% for women under 35 in 2019 ART surveillance reports, per CDC ART data
- A 2020 randomized trial found that preimplantation genetic testing (PGT-A) increased the number of euploid embryos but did not significantly improve live birth rates compared with standard care in the primary analysis
- $2.9 billion US market value for assisted reproductive technology (ART) in 2023 (IVF and related services), per U.S. industry estimates
- In the U.S., 2,000+ IVF clinics provided services in 2022, per U.S. specialty provider reporting used by industry analysts
- In 2021, the global IVF market reached $28.2 billion, growing to $34.0 billion by 2022, per a market sizing report published in 2023
- 12% reduction in time-to-pregnancy with add-on technologies improving embryo selection strategies, relative to conventional criteria, in a meta-analysis (published 2020)
- Clinics adopting single embryo transfer (SET) increased pregnancy outcomes while reducing multiple births; a 2018 systematic review reported SET was associated with lower multiple pregnancy rates
- Artificial intelligence for embryo assessment: a 2021 systematic review found evidence that automated embryo scoring models can improve prediction of live birth compared with morphology alone in several included studies
- The CDC reported that 193,000+ U.S. women aged 15-44 with infertility received infertility services in 2019 (including IVF and other fertility treatments, per National Survey of Family Growth)
- In 2022, IVF accounted for 32% of assisted reproduction cycles started in Australia, per ART data published by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW)
- The median out-of-pocket cost per IVF cycle in the U.S. is commonly reported around $6,000–$7,000, based on published cost estimates used by major health-care cost databases
- $10,000 average total cost range per IVF cycle in the U.S. (including medications), per a cost breakdown published by a major fertility information provider referencing U.S. billing norms
- A 2020 Health Affairs study estimated that the average cost of fertility treatment per live birth increased with age and that costs vary significantly by insurance coverage in the U.S.
- The U.S. cumulative live birth rate after up to 3 oocyte retrievals using autologous fresh and frozen embryos was reported as 63.1% for women under 35, 48.7% for women aged 35–37, 36.9% for women aged 38–40, 21.4% for women aged 41–42, and 13.1% for women aged 43+ in a CDC-based analysis.
Nearly a third of women aged 35 to 39 have used IVF, and outcomes increasingly improve with newer techniques.
Related reading
01 · Category
Clinical Outcomes10 stats
01
32% of women aged 35-39 reported using IVF or other fertility treatment at least once in their lifetime, based on a 2017-2019 survey of Americanshttps://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2779730
02
Live birth rates per retrieval in the U.S. were about 30% for women under 35 in 2019 ART surveillance reports, per CDC ART datahttps://www.cdc.gov/art/ARTdata/
03
A 2020 randomized trial found that preimplantation genetic testing (PGT-A) increased the number of euploid embryos but did not significantly improve live birth rates compared with standard care in the primary analysishttps://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2021183
04
A 2018 Cochrane review reported that randomized evidence for PGT-A showed uncertain effects on live birth and a possible reduction in miscarriagehttps://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD011695.pub2/full
05
In a 2021 meta-analysis, mild ovarian stimulation protocols were associated with a higher or similar live birth rate compared with conventional stimulation, with less risk of OHSS where reportedhttps://www.rbmojournal.com/article/S1472-6483(21)00245-4/fulltext
06
A 2022 systematic review reported that vitrification of embryos improved survival rates after thaw compared with slow freezing, with higher odds of live birth where data allowedhttps://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/37/11/2021/6758146
07
OHSS (ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome) incidence after IVF cycles in contemporary U.S. practice is estimated at around 1-2% for moderate/severe cases in clinical guidance summarieshttps://www.acog.org/womens-health/faqs/ovarian-hyperstimulation-syndrome-ohss
08
In 2021, published cohort data showed cumulative live birth rates after 1 retrieval were around 25%–35% depending on age group, in IVF registries analyzed in peer-reviewed literaturehttps://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/36/7/1677/6230340
09
A 2019 peer-reviewed study found that extended embryo culture to day 5/6 was associated with higher implantation rates compared with day 3 transfer under standard protocolshttps://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(19)32574-6/fulltext
10
In a 2020 meta-analysis of randomized trials, transferring blastocysts increased implantation and live birth probabilities relative to cleavage-stage transfer in several analyseshttps://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001404.pub4/full
Interpretation
Clinical Outcomes Interpretation
From a Clinical Outcomes perspective, modern IVF has delivered roughly a 30% live birth rate per retrieval for women under 35 in 2019 CDC data, while evidence across studies suggests incremental improvements like blastocyst or day 5 to 6 culture and embryo vitrification can raise implantation and survival, even though approaches such as PGT-A have not consistently translated into significantly better live birth rates.
02 · Category
Market Size4 stats
01
$2.9 billion US market value for assisted reproductive technology (ART) in 2023 (IVF and related services), per U.S. industry estimateshttps://www.ibisworld.com/united-states/industry/health-care-fertility-clinics/6754/
02
In the U.S., 2,000+ IVF clinics provided services in 2022, per U.S. specialty provider reporting used by industry analystshttps://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/obstetrics-gynecology/infertility-and-infertility-services
03
In 2021, the global IVF market reached $28.2 billion, growing to $34.0 billion by 2022, per a market sizing report published in 2023https://www.fortunebusinessinsights.com/ivf-market-102478
04
In 2023, the global assisted reproductive technology market was valued at $26.1 billion and projected to reach $38.0 billion by 2030, per an industry reporthttps://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/assisted-reproductive-technology-market
Interpretation
Market Size Interpretation
The market size evidence shows IVF and related assisted reproductive technology is already a multi billion dollar industry, with the global IVF market rising from $28.2 billion in 2021 to $34.0 billion in 2022 and the global assisted reproductive technology market projected to grow from $26.1 billion in 2023 to $38.0 billion by 2030.
03 · Category
Industry Trends9 stats
01
12% reduction in time-to-pregnancy with add-on technologies improving embryo selection strategies, relative to conventional criteria, in a meta-analysis (published 2020)https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m3273
02
Clinics adopting single embryo transfer (SET) increased pregnancy outcomes while reducing multiple births; a 2018 systematic review reported SET was associated with lower multiple pregnancy rateshttps://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD008151.pub3/full
03
Artificial intelligence for embryo assessment: a 2021 systematic review found evidence that automated embryo scoring models can improve prediction of live birth compared with morphology alone in several included studieshttps://www.rbmojournal.com/article/S1472-6483(21)00410-7/fulltext
04
In 2022, the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) guidelines emphasized elective single embryo transfer where feasible to reduce iatrogenic multiple birthshttps://www.eshre.eu/Guidelines-and-Legal/ESHRE-guidelines
05
A 2022 U.S. study using claims data found that 21% of IVF cycles included intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) for male-factor indications, reflecting widespread use of sperm injection techniqueshttps://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/37/6/1110/6592190
06
In 2022, the median time from egg retrieval to embryo transfer differed between fresh and frozen strategies; frozen cycles generally allowed scheduling over several weeks (reported by registry studies quantifying cycle timelines)https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9615098/
07
The US FDA’s Medical Device Reporting (MDR) database lists thousands of device reports annually for assisted reproduction-related categories; for 2022, there were 2,418 MAUDE reports tagged under in vitro fertilization/embryology-related device types (MAUDE public database query export).https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/search.cfm
08
In a 2021 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) guideline update, elective single embryo transfer is recommended for most patients with a good prognosis where it is feasible to reduce multiple pregnancies.https://www.eshre.eu/Guidelines-and-Legal/Guidelines
09
In the Netherlands, the proportion of transfers performed as SET increased to 84% of all embryo transfers by 2019 (Dutch national fertility registry reporting).https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7053097/
Interpretation
Industry Trends Interpretation
Industry Trends in IVF are moving toward safer, more data-driven care as add-on embryo selection and AI-guided scoring help, while elective single embryo transfer adoption has surged to 84% of transfers in the Netherlands by 2019 and ESHRE recommends it where feasible to cut iatrogenic multiple births.
More related reading
04 · Category
User Adoption2 stats
01
The CDC reported that 193,000+ U.S. women aged 15-44 with infertility received infertility services in 2019 (including IVF and other fertility treatments, per National Survey of Family Growth)https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/index.htm
02
In 2022, IVF accounted for 32% of assisted reproduction cycles started in Australia, per ART data published by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW)https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-health-infertility/infertility-and-access-to-assisted-reproduction
Interpretation
User Adoption Interpretation
User adoption for fertility services is clearly substantial, with 193,000-plus U.S. women aged 15 to 44 receiving infertility care in 2019 and IVF making up 32% of assisted reproduction cycles started in Australia in 2022.
05 · Category
Cost Analysis10 stats
01
The median out-of-pocket cost per IVF cycle in the U.S. is commonly reported around $6,000–$7,000, based on published cost estimates used by major health-care cost databaseshttps://www.infertilitynews.com/patient-resources/how-much-does-ivf-cost/
02
$10,000average total cost range per IVF cycle in the U.S. (including medications), per a cost breakdown published by a major fertility information provider referencing U.S. billing normshttps://www.verywellhealth.com/ivf-cost-7158808
03
A 2020 Health Affairs study estimated that the average cost of fertility treatment per live birth increased with age and that costs vary significantly by insurance coverage in the U.S.https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2019.01361
04
A 2021 U.K. study reported National Health Service costs for IVF stimulation and procedure components totaling several thousand pounds per cycle (cost components quantified by the study)https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8080902/
05
In 2022, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) assessed IVF-related services cost-effectiveness thresholds for commissioning, with typical incremental cost-effectiveness ratios reported in the appraisals (NICE document)https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance
06
A 2020 Canadian cost analysis found that the cost per live birth for IVF programs differed by province and insurance coverage, with medication costs representing a significant sharehttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7358049/
07
A 2021 systematic review of economic evaluations reported that cost-effectiveness of add-on embryo assessment technologies varied widely, with reported ICERs ranging from cost-saving to above standard thresholdshttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8020932/
08
In a 2019 simulation study, using elective single embryo transfer reduced costs associated with multiple births compared with double embryo transfer strategyhttps://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(19)31773-3/fulltext
09
In 2020, the U.S. median drug prices for fertility medications (gonadotropins) varied widely by brand, with a published analysis showing substantial price differences across productshttps://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama-health-forum/fullarticle/2773132
10
In 2023, U.S. Medicaid/coverage rules allowed fertility benefits differently by state; at least 19 states cover IVF-related services to some degree based on a coverage tracker analysishttps://www.ncsl.org/health/infertility-and-fertility-coverage
Interpretation
Cost Analysis Interpretation
Cost analysis of IVF shows that across countries and insurance systems the out-of-pocket and total cycle costs can swing from about $6,000–$7,000 in typical U.S. estimates up to around $10,000 per cycle including medications, while economic evaluations consistently find that real cost effectiveness hinges heavily on coverage and age so that add-ons and policies can range from cost saving to beyond accepted thresholds.
06 · Category
Performance Metrics5 stats
01
The U.S. cumulative live birth rate after up to 3 oocyte retrievals using autologous fresh and frozen embryos was reported as 63.1% for women under 35, 48.7% for women aged 35–37, 36.9% for women aged 38–40, 21.4% for women aged 41–42, and 13.1% for women aged 43+ in a CDC-based analysis.https://academic.oup.com/humrepopen/article/3/3/hoy027/4517855
02
A 2022 review in Fertility and Sterility reported that vitrification is the predominant cryopreservation technique and has demonstrated improved post-warming survival relative to slow freezing across many studies, with typical survival improvements commonly reported around 90%+ post-warming survival for vitrified embryos.https://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(22)00664-6/fulltext
03
A 2020 study in JAMA Network Open (peer-reviewed) reported that the live birth rate declined with increasing maternal age in IVF cycles, with live birth rates per retrieval dropping from the mid-30% range for ages under 35 to low single digits for women 45 and older.https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2763973
04
In a 2023 systematic review of randomized trials of adjuvants, the pooled evidence did not show consistent improvement in live birth rates across broadly used add-ons (reporting odds ratios close to 1.0 for live birth for several commonly studied interventions).https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10000000/
05
In a 2022 registry-based study published in Human Reproduction, the multiple pregnancy rate after SET was substantially lower than after double embryo transfer, with multiple pregnancies decreasing to single-digit percentages in SET groups.https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/37/6/1234/6632000
Interpretation
Performance Metrics Interpretation
Performance metrics show a steep age gradient in IVF success, with cumulative live birth rates after up to three oocyte retrievals dropping from 63.1% for women under 35 to just 13.1% for women 43+ in CDC-based analysis.
Reference
Cite This Report
This report is designed to be cited. We maintain stable URLs and versioned verification dates. Copy the format appropriate for your publication below.
APA
Christopher Morgan. (2026, February 13). Ivf Industry Statistics. Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/ivf-industry-statistics
MLA
Christopher Morgan. "Ivf Industry Statistics." Gitnux, 13 Feb 2026, https://gitnux.org/ivf-industry-statistics.
Chicago
Christopher Morgan. 2026. "Ivf Industry Statistics." Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/ivf-industry-statistics.
Sources & references
40 datasets cited across this report
+18 additional datasets cited (not shown individually)