Five companies, and what each one publishes about itself.
We index nine continence HCPCS codes. That is our whole scope, and the difference this page is trying to show is one of shape rather than one of size.
Every column beside ours is a real company with a real website, and every cell under it is either something that company states on its own pages or a record that we went looking and did not find it. Read the table alongside the note underneath, which says exactly what we did and did not do to fill those cells in.
| PayorTransparency | Clarify Health | DeductibleData | Serif Health | Trek Health | Turquoise Health | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Continence-specific code logic | Nine codes, with shared quantity ceilings modelled | Healthcare outcomes companyverified 2026-08-06 | General-purpose negotiated-rate dataset extractionverified 2026-08-06 | Market-wide rate lookup by code, payer, or marketverified 2026-08-06 | AI platform for payer performanceverified 2026-08-06 | Market-wide platform for prices, contracts, and transactionsverified 2026-08-06 |
| Coverage rules alongside rates | Coverage criteria and documentation rules on the same page as the rate | not published | not published | not published | Centralises payer medical policies and prior authorization requirementsverified 2026-08-06 | Payer policies integrated to contractsverified 2026-08-06 |
| Medicare benchmark built in | Medicare DMEPOS allowable, benchmarked on every code | not published | Commercial TiC rates only, directing Medicare and Medicaid pricing to CMS channelsverified 2026-08-06 | Adds benchmarks like percent of Medicareverified 2026-08-06 | Benchmarks Medicare reimbursement ratesverified 2026-08-06 | Medicare fee schedules included in Clear Ratesverified 2026-08-06 |
| Published pricing | Structure published, figures on a call | not published | $164/moverified 2026-08-06 | not published | not published | not publishedverified 2026-08-06 |
| Code-set depth vs market breadth | Nine codes in one category, not five million across the market | 5.6T price transparency ratesverified 2026-08-06 | 16 billing code types, including CPT, HCPCS, MS-DRG and NDCverified 2026-08-06 | Includes rate types most vendors exclude, such as CSTM and LOCAL codesverified 2026-08-06 | Benchmarks negotiated reimbursement against major payersverified 2026-08-06 | Built-in crosswalks across DRG, APC, HCPCS and custom codesverified 2026-08-06 |
How we checked this
Every cell in this table is one of two things. Either it is something the named company states in its own published material, in which case the cell carries a source and the date we last checked it, or the cell reads not published. There is no third option and there is no estimate anywhere in the table.
That phrase is a statement about the public record rather than about the company. It means we went looking on their own pages and did not find them saying it. We publish no estimate of what a competitor charges, and no figure a competitor does not publish itself, which is why only one of the five shows a price. A figure from an old blog post, a band inferred from a sales conversation, or a number one vendor prints about another are all the same thing wearing different clothes, and none of them belongs in a column headed with somebody else’s name.
One row is deliberately less specific than our own product is, and it is worth saying why. We benchmark against the Medicare DMEPOS fee schedule, so the natural header for that row would name DMEPOS. None of the five addresses DMEPOS specifically in any of the material cited here. Under a DMEPOS header, cells that talk about Medicare fee schedules in general would invite you to read them as an assessment of DMEPOS coverage that nobody actually made. So the row reads Medicare benchmark built in, and the DMEPOS wording stays in our own column, which is the one column we are entitled to be that specific about.
If a cell looks thin next to what you know about that company, the reason is that their published material is thin on that point, not that we judged them. The fix for a thin cell is a better citation. Tell us what we missed and we will read it.