MedAI Verdict
All comparisons

Etiometry Platform vs Navina

Etiometry describes itself as a clinical intelligence platform for critical care clinicians, and names no other audience. A primary care or value-based group would not evaluate it. The vendor says Etiometry complies with the SOC 2 and HIPAA Trust Services Criteria, signs BAAs and holds ISO 27001 certification. Its data governance page names SMART-on-FHIR integration and no individual EHR.

Navina fits a primary care or value-based group that wants chart review, HCC risk-adjustment suggestions and care-gap closure inside athenahealth, Epic or Veradigm. Excerpted KLAS comments, all unrated, describe a per-member-per-month fee on the attributed population with extra fees for some modules. In them a director says support overpromises and underdelivers, and a vice president says Navina does a really good job on risk adjustment but is primarily focused on Medicare. The vendor cites the number one spot in the 2025 Best in KLAS clinician digital workflow category and shows HIPAA, SOC 2 and ISO 27001 badges.

Decision support · Reviewed November 2, 2026

Etiometry Platform logo

Etiometry Platform

by Etiometry · founded 2010

ICU data platform that aggregates monitor and EHR data and runs four FDA-cleared physiologic risk indices.

Navina logo

Navina

by Navina · founded 2018

AI copilot for chart review, risk adjustment and care gaps in primary care and value-based care groups.

When to pick each one

Etiometry Platform

  • Vendor describes it as built for critical care clinicians
  • Vendor states BAAs and ISO 27001
  • SMART-on-FHIR integration, no EHR named
Read the full Etiometry Platform review

Navina

  • athenahealth, Epic and Veradigm named
  • Chart review, HCC suggestions and care gaps
  • KLAS comments describe per-member-per-month pricing
Read the full Navina review

Score

Each row shows points earned of points available under the published rubric.

Etiometry Platform

38of 100

Competitive

Navina

36of 100

Competitive
Score by dimension for Etiometry Platform and Navina
DimensionEtiometry PlatformNavinaDifference
FDA clearance12 / 120 / 12+12
HIPAA / SOC2 / BAA10 / 1010 / 100
EHR integrations (count)0 / 5.61.7 / 5.6-1.7
Top-3 EHR coverage (Epic / Oracle / Athena)0 / 4.83.4 / 4.8-3.4
Bidirectional write-back0 / 1.20 / 1.20
Peer-reviewed papers0 / 210 / 210
RCT / meta-analysis / systematic review0 / 90 / 90
Funding & adoption signal3 / 128.4 / 12-5.4
Pricing transparency1.3 / 2.51.3 / 2.50
Years in market6 / 66 / 60

Scroll horizontally to see every column.

How scores are computed

Pricing

Etiometry Platform

TierMonthlyAnnualNotes
Enterprisen/an/aNo public price. Demo request only.

Navina

TierMonthlyAnnualNotes
Enterprisen/an/aNo public price.

Evidence

Etiometry Platform

FDA decisions

Show 6 more

Navina

FDA decisions

No FDA decision cited in our research as of November 2, 2026.

Compliance and integrations

Documented from each vendor’s own pages.

SpecEtiometry PlatformNavina
Free tierNo / unverifiedNo / unverified
HIPAAYesYes
SOC 2 Type IIYesYes
EHR integrationsNot specifiedathenahealth, Epic, Veradigm
Founded20102018
HQUSn/a

Scroll horizontally to see both columns.

Common questions

Open the full decision support comparison

Differential diagnosis, treatment guidance, drug interactions, evidence-grounded Q&A. The CDS landscape ranges from the UpToDate gold standard to physician-only OpenEvidence. We compared what clinicians actually use.