Carenostics vs Navina (2026)
Both read the record to tell a clinician something they did not know about the patient in front of them, and the difference is what happens next. Carenostics finds people who already have chronic disease that nobody has diagnosed, and the output is a clinical finding that should lead to a workup. Navina assembles a consolidated patient portrait at the point of care from the record, exchanges, claims and care gap files, surfacing suspected conditions with the evidence attached, and the output frequently ends in documentation and risk adjustment as well as care. Both are legitimate. The distinction matters because in a demonstration they look identical. Ask Carenostics what proportion of surfaced patients get diagnosed and treated, and ask Navina what proportion of suspected conditions clinicians confirm. The two answers describe different products.
- It surfaces undiagnosed chronic disease from existing record data, which is a detection problem rather than a documentation one, and it owns the model doing it.
- The target is a patient whose disease is present and unrecorded, so the output is a clinical finding rather than a coding opportunity.
- Model ownership means accuracy questions have a single accountable party rather than routing to a partner.
- It assembles a consolidated patient portrait at the point of care from the record, exchanges, claims and care gap files, with the evidence attached to every insight.
- Named and typed certifications, plus native bidirectional integration, mean the insight reaches the clinician inside the appointment rather than in a worklist afterwards.
- For a risk bearing group, working the whole panel through the visit is broader than detecting one class of disease.
This comparison is published by AI Health Index, an independent research platform that compares healthcare AI vendors objectively. Carenostics and Navina are each graded against the same capability taxonomy, from each vendor's own public materials and the regulatory record, under the AI Health Index verification standard. No vendor pays for placement, and no vendor has reviewed this page. How this evidence is graded
Plain facts
| Fact | Carenostics | Navina |
|---|---|---|
| Primary category | Clinical Decision Support | Clinical Decision Support |
| Founded | Not recorded | 2018 |
| Headquarters | Not recorded | New York, New York, United States |
| Website | carenostics.com | navina.ai |
Side by Side
Each record in one paragraph
Written to be quoted whole. Each paragraph states what the AI Health Index verified about the vendor, with the caveats attached. Generated from this pair’s live capability grades, so it moves when a grade moves.
The AI Health Index awards Carenostics its top capability grade on AI Centrality and Deployment Model and Data Residency. Set against Navina, Carenostics grades higher on Model Supply Chain Disclosure, AI Safety and PHI Stewardship and Deployment Model and Data Residency. Its thinnest published disclosure sits on several axes, including HIPAA and BAA Posture, Security Certifications and Trust Center and AI Liability and Recourse. Grades reflect evidence the AI Health Index could verify at the last review, so a low grade records disclosure the vendor has not published rather than a capability it has been shown to lack.
Source: AI Health Index, August 2026
The AI Health Index awards Navina its top capability grade on AI Centrality, Autonomy and Oversight Model and EHR and Interoperability Depth. Set against Carenostics, Navina grades higher on several axes, including Autonomy and Oversight Model, Model and Technology Transparency and Clinical and Operational Evidence. Grades reflect evidence the AI Health Index could verify at the last review, so a low grade records disclosure the vendor has not published rather than a capability it has been shown to lack.
Source: AI Health Index, August 2026
Questions buyers ask
Should we choose Carenostics or Navina?
On the axes where the AI Health Index separates them, Carenostics grades higher on Model Supply Chain Disclosure, AI Safety and PHI Stewardship and Deployment Model and Data Residency, and Navina grades higher on several axes, including Autonomy and Oversight Model, Model and Technology Transparency and Clinical and Operational Evidence. Navina leads on the greater share of scored axes, but the split means the decision turns on which constraint is binding rather than on an overall winner.
Where do Carenostics and Navina differ most?
The widest separation the AI Health Index records between Carenostics and Navina is on Deployment Model and Data Residency, where Carenostics grades A and Navina grades C. That axis sits in the Integration and Deployment group, so it should carry the most weight for a buyer whose binding constraint is how the product lands in the stack already in place.
Where do Carenostics and Navina grade the same?
The AI Health Index grades Carenostics and Navina the same on AI Centrality, FDA and Regulatory Status and AI Governance and Bias Disclosure. Neither holds an advantage the index can evidence on those axes, so they should not carry weight in a selection between these two.
What have Carenostics and Navina not disclosed?
At the last review, at least one of Carenostics and Navina published thin or absent detail on several axes, including HIPAA and BAA Posture, Security Certifications and Trust Center and AI Liability and Recourse. The AI Health Index treats an absent disclosure as a gap in the public record rather than a failure of the product, so these are the axes to get in writing during diligence instead of inferring from the grade.
Related comparisons
Other published head to head assessments involving these vendors or their closest peers. The full set for this category is on the Clinical Decision Support page.
The incentive difference between these two is worth stating precisely. Detecting undiagnosed disease and surfacing suspected conditions for documentation look similar in a demonstration and are not the same product: one ends in a diagnosis and a treatment plan, the other can end in a code. Ask Navina what proportion of surfaced suspected conditions clinicians confirm, and ask Carenostics what proportion of surfaced patients are subsequently diagnosed and treated. Neither publishes a subgroup analysis. Carenostics publishes no retention or secondary use position; Navina publishes no hosting, residency or governance framework.