Which service lines have the lowest commercial-to-Medicare ratio?
The one that started the company. Find the service line you are paid worst on, before someone else tells you.
Built on data every hospital and insurer is already required to publish
See what every hospital in your market is actually paid.
By payer. By procedure. Against Medicare and Medicaid. Your negotiated rates and your competitors’, side by side — so you can stop guessing where you stand, and start the renegotiation with the number in front of you.
Choose a revenue question
This is the product. Not a dashboard to interpret — a question you pick, and the dollar answer underneath it.
Which negotiated rates are below Medicare's published benchmark?
A commercial payer paying you less than Medicare. It happens, and it is hard to defend once it is on paper.
Which payers have the largest hospital-vs-payer rate differences?
Where what a payer publishes and what the hospital publishes do not agree.
Which procedures have the largest hospital-vs-payer differences?
The same question, one level down: which specific procedures carry the gap.
Which facilities differ most from Medicare's realized outpatient payments?
Not the published benchmark — what Medicare actually paid out.
Where do hospital and payer files disagree on published rates?
Two public sources describing the same contract. When they diverge, someone is working from the wrong number.
What was actually allowed?
The allowed amount, by payer and procedure, from published data.
What did patients owe?
The patient responsibility that sits behind the negotiated rate.
Every answer shows its work
You can see exactly which source produced each number, because a rate you cannot defend is a rate you cannot negotiate with.
Facility-reportedWhat the hospital publishes in its own machine-readable file.
Payer-reportedWhat the insurer publishes under Transparency in Coverage.
Medicare referenceThe published federal benchmark for the same code.
Medicare realizedWhat Medicare actually paid out, not just what it lists.
Medicaid referenceThe state layer almost nobody has normalized.
Provider identityThe federal registry and exclusion lists, so a rate is tied to the right facility.
The hard part isn’t the chart
It is getting two files that describe the same contract in different units onto one comparable scale — and refusing to publish a number when the evidence underneath it isn’t there.
01
Six public sources, normalized to one scale
Hospital machine-readable files, payer Transparency in Coverage files, Medicare’s published benchmark, what Medicare actually paid out, state Medicaid fee schedules, and the federal provider registry. Each arrives in its own format, its own units, and its own idea of what a “rate” is. Normalizing them is the product.
02
Identity is resolved, never invented
A third of the rural hospitals we scanned share a web domain with a sibling hospital. Before a single rate is indexed, the addresses and NPIs inside a file are matched against the hospital it claims to belong to. A match to a different hospital blocks the load outright. Insufficient evidence is held for human review rather than guessed at.
03
A source we can’t stand behind gets switched off
When a payer’s published index turned out to carry plans from four other states, we disabled that feed rather than let out-of-state rates be attributed to a local payer. When a payer’s own network stopped serving a file we already held a checksum-verified copy of, we kept using ours — and recorded that we had.
04
Built for the national payer set, not a sample
Rate files run to gigabytes and there are thousands of them. Ingestion runs as a staged pipeline across a fleet of workers with a column store behind it, so adding payers is a capacity decision rather than a rewrite.
None of this is visible in the answer you get. All of it is the reason the answer is worth taking to a negotiation.
Who this is for
Three different jobs, two different products. Start wherever you actually are.
State Offices of Rural Health
Every SHIP-eligible hospital in your state, ranked by what its published file is actually missing — so you can see where the award would do the most good before you spend it. Free, and yours whether or not we ever work together. SHIP is the federal Small Rural Hospital Improvement Program.
Get your state’s report →Critical access & small rural hospitals
Find out what CMS’s validator sees in your file — and, separately, whether the prices the rule requires are actually in it. Compliance is $13,000 a year, flat, and sized to fit inside a SHIP award.
See what it costs →Health systems & payers
Every negotiated rate in your market set against Medicare, Medicaid and the payer’s own published file, so the next contract conversation starts with the number instead of an argument about whose number is right.
Book 30 minutes →Price transparency compliance
A fixed-price product for critical access and small rural hospitals, and the one the company started with. We run your published file through CMS’s official validator, then check whether the prices the rule actually requires are in it — because those are two different questions.
660
of the 1,692 rural hospitals we scanned across 45 states publish a file with a compliance gap. Many of them pass CMS’s format check while carrying no usable price data underneath, so the validator tells the hospital it is fine. National scan of July 31, 2026.
Free
File check
Your published file through CMS’s official validator, plus the substance check underneath it. You get the result whether or not you ever buy anything. Check your file.
$13,000
Compliance, per year, flat
Critical access and small rural hospitals up to 49 staffed beds. All-inclusive, one price, no per-file or per-update charges, and sized to fit inside a SHIP award. See the published price list.