Arintra vs Maverick AI
Two Autonomous Medical Coding vendors, side by side. Facts from public sources; judgments are ours.
At a glance
Derived from public facts · a rough scale, not a ranking
| Arintra | Maverick AI | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Not published · Custom quotes | Not published · custom, tied to coding volume |
| Speed to go live | Native via Epic Toolbox and athenahealth Marketplace | customers typically live within 90 days |
| Automation model | Autonomous agents · direct-to-bill autonomous coding | Autonomous agents · direct-to-bill autonomous coding |
| Built for | Mid-size groups, Enterprise systems | Mid-size groups, Enterprise systems, Billing companies |
| Security posture | HITRUST, HIPAA | HIPAA |
| Company maturity | 6 yrs (est. 2020) | 7 yrs (est. 2019) |
| Financial backing | $21.5M · Series A | $11.5M (per PitchBook) · Seed plus strategic investment |
| Named customers | 2 named | 1 named |
| Published results | Specific numbers public | Specific numbers public |
| Documented integrations | 2 listed | 1 listed |
| Third-party validation | None found | None found |
Bottom line
- Pick Arintra if you code high volumes in Epic or athenahealth and want autonomous coding without changing clinician workflow.
- Pick Maverick AI if you want charts coded and sent to billing without human coders, with 85 percent direct-to-bill.
Arintra
Autonomous medical coding that runs inside your EHR
- Founded
- 2020
- HQ
- Austin, TX
- Stage
- Series A
- Raised
- $21.5M
What it does
- Fully autonomous coding from clinical documentation
- Works inside Epic and athenahealth, no workflow change
- Denial reduction and revenue capture on automated claims
- Coding audit trails and compliance documentation
- Specialty coverage across outpatient service lines
Where it's strong
- Published customer results are specific and strong: 5.1% revenue lift and 43% fewer denials on automated claims at Mercyhealth.
- Direct-to-billing autonomy rather than coder-assist, which is where the cost savings actually are.
- In-EHR operation means no new workqueue tool for HIM teams to learn.
What buyers should weigh
- Small named customer list so far; ask for references in your specialty mix and payer mix.
- A Series A vendor carries more long-term viability risk than Solventum or Optum for a core RCM function.
- Verify coverage for your setting; published wins skew toward outpatient and professional coding.
Named customers
Mercyhealth · Reid Health
Integrations
Maverick AI
Real-time autonomous medical coding for revenue cycle teams
- Founded
- 2019
- HQ
- n/a
- Stage
- Seed plus strategic investment
- Raised
- $11.5M (per PitchBook)
What it does
- Real-time autonomous coding via the mCoder platform
- 85%+ direct-to-bill rate without human touch
- Codes most cases in seconds
- Reported 95% coding accuracy
- Streams coded results straight to billing systems
Where it's strong
- Real-time coding with a published 85%+ direct-to-bill rate, ahead of the batch processing common in the category.
- Proven at national scale through the RadNet implementation across US imaging sites.
- The Infinx investment and partnership give it a distribution channel into established RCM operations.
What buyers should weigh
- Widely cited reports of a $47M 2025 raise belong to competitor Nym, not Maverick; Maverick's disclosed funding is about $11.5M, so weigh vendor financial durability.
- Public proof points are concentrated in radiology; ask for evidence in other specialties.
- Roughly 15% of cases still route to human coders, so plan for a review workflow.
Named customers
RadNet
Integrations
Compare against the rest of Autonomous Medical Coding
Deciding between these two?
First Pass tracks Autonomous Medical Coding every week: funding, launches, and what changed since this page was written.