Compare head to head
The comparison grid we would build for a client. Best score in each row is underlined — but read the category first, because comparing a companion vendor to a full-service clinic will mislead you.
Select up to 3 vendors
1 selected
| Vendor | 7.1 Transcarent Navigation & orchestration |
|---|---|
| Category | Navigation & orchestration |
| Scores | |
| Clinical rigor | 6.4 |
| Outcomes evidence | 6.2 |
| Cost control | 8.4 |
| Data & reporting | 8.1 |
| Integration | 8.8 |
| Member experience | 7.3 |
| Commercial | |
| PMPM range | $12–$32 |
| Pricing model | PMPM across the full eligible population, often with risk-based components |
| Performance guarantees | Savings guarantees are central to the model |
| Minimum lives | 5,000 |
| Term | 36 months |
| Termination notice | 120 days |
| Clinical | |
| Prescribes | No |
| Step therapy | Yes |
| Prior authorization | Yes |
| BMI threshold | Fully employer-configurable |
| Off-ramp protocol | Managed through the downstream clinical partner |
| Evidence | |
| Evidence level | White paper |
| Follow-up | Varies by employer engagement |
| Assessment | |
| Best for | Large employers running several point solutions who need consistent policy enforcement and routing across all of them. |
| Watch out | Savings guarantees are measured against a baseline the vendor helps construct. Negotiate the baseline methodology first — it matters more than the guarantee. |
| Verdict | Strong infrastructure for multi-vendor environments at 5,000+ lives. Redundant if you have a single clinical partner. Negotiate the savings baseline methodology before anything else. |