Coding, retrieval & compliance
Datavant
The most externally validated vendor in the directory for coding and retrieval throughput, with two 2026 Best in KLAS wins.
- Capture model
- Retrospective coding and retrieval at volume; also sold as an outsourced service
- AI approach
- Clinical Insights Platform; NLP predictions reviewed by certified coders
- RADV & audit
- Compliance solutions; audit-grade coding review
- Submission lifecycle
- Coding and retrieval focused
- Best fit
- Plans that hand off retrieval and coding volume
- 2026 Best in KLAS
- Risk Adjustment (Coding, Retrieval and Compliance Solutions), 90.5; Outsourced Coding, 94.9 vs a category average of 88.4 (announced February 4, 2026)
- Scale
- 4.5 million charts coded annually at a cited 98% coding accuracy
KLAS gave Datavant two 2026 awards, both announced February 4, 2026: Risk Adjustment (Coding, Retrieval and Compliance Solutions) at 90.5, and Outsourced Coding at 94.9 in a category averaging 88.4. Datavant’s own announcement puts its volume at 4.5 million charts coded a year with 98% coding accuracy. The products doing that work are the Clinical Insights Platform and Datavant Connect, with the engine acquired from Apixio underneath.
The job Datavant fits is volume. When the question is how many records get pulled and how many charts get coded before a deadline, no other vendor here carries as much independent validation. It is also not sold as an encounter-workflow or per-diagnosis tracking product, and buyers who need those usually run Datavant alongside something else rather than instead of it.
Choose it when
Plans and large groups that need retrieval and coding volume handled reliably, in software or as an outsourced service.
Look elsewhere when
Buyers who need point-of-care prompting or per-diagnosis 277CA-to-MOR visibility as the primary job.
Related profiles
Sources
Positioning summarized from public materials current in August 2026. What a given customer receives depends on contract and scope, so confirm the details with the vendor. Spot an error? Tell us and we will correct it. Back to the full comparison →