CertifyOS vs Medallion (2026)
The credentialing head to head is a build versus run decision. CertifyOS is infrastructure: an API first, NCQA certified credentials verification organisation certified for all eleven verification services, integrating more than 600 primary sources over a data layer of two million plus pre verified NPIs, built to be embedded so credentialing events push into your systems by webhook rather than living in another portal. Medallion is an operations partner: credentialing, payer enrollment, state licensing, privileging, and continuous monitoring run as a service, with AI agents paired with human credentialing specialists who review critical stages and handle exceptions. Honesty about the AI belongs up front: in both products the durable asset is the verification network and data layer rather than a model, and this index grades AI centrality accordingly, C for CertifyOS and B for Medallion. If your failure mode is credentialing trapped in someone else's portal while you build product, start with CertifyOS. If your failure mode is owning credentialing operations you would rather hand off, start with Medallion.
- You are building on top: RESTful endpoints and webhooks push credentialing completion and provider termination events into your systems in real time, positioning it as infrastructure other healthcare software builds on, with EHR and interoperability graded A on this index.
- Verification coverage in writing: NCQA certification across all eleven verification services, more than 600 integrated primary sources, and a data layer of over two million pre verified NPIs.
- AI where it actually helps the data: duplicate resolution, taxonomy mapping, address standardization, and pre submission error detection applied inside the platform.
- You want operations off your desk: credentialing, payer enrollment, state licensing, privileging, and ongoing compliance monitoring delivered as a running service rather than an API to integrate.
- The oversight model is explicit: AI agents are paired with credentialing specialists who review critical stages and handle exceptions, graded A on this index's autonomy and oversight axis.
- One vendor across buyer types: serves health systems, digital health companies, payers, and provider groups, with setting coverage graded A.
This comparison is published by AI Health Index, an independent research platform that compares healthcare AI vendors objectively. CertifyOS and Medallion 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 | CertifyOS | Medallion |
|---|---|---|
| Primary category | Healthcare Administrative Automation | Healthcare Administrative Automation |
| Founded | 2020 | 2020 |
| Headquarters | New York, New York, United States | San Francisco, California, United States |
| Website | certifyos.com | medallion.co |
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 CertifyOS its top capability grade on EHR and Interoperability Depth. Set against Medallion, CertifyOS grades higher on Security Certifications and Trust Center, AI Liability and Recourse and EHR and Interoperability Depth. 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, July 2026
The AI Health Index awards Medallion its top capability grade on Autonomy and Oversight Model and Setting and Specialty Coverage. Set against CertifyOS, Medallion grades higher on several axes, including AI Centrality, Autonomy and Oversight Model and Clinical and Operational Evidence. Its thinnest published disclosure sits on 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, July 2026
Questions buyers ask
Should we choose CertifyOS or Medallion?
On the axes where the AI Health Index separates them, CertifyOS grades higher on Security Certifications and Trust Center, AI Liability and Recourse and EHR and Interoperability Depth, and Medallion grades higher on several axes, including AI Centrality, Autonomy and Oversight Model and Clinical and Operational Evidence. Medallion 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 CertifyOS and Medallion differ most?
The widest separation the AI Health Index records between CertifyOS and Medallion is on Security Certifications and Trust Center, where CertifyOS grades B and Medallion grades C. That axis sits in the Regulatory and Compliance group, so it should carry the most weight for a buyer whose binding constraint is where regulatory exposure sits and who carries it.
Where do CertifyOS and Medallion grade the same?
The AI Health Index grades CertifyOS and Medallion the same on several axes, including Model and Technology Transparency, Model Supply Chain Disclosure and AI Safety and PHI Stewardship. 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 CertifyOS and Medallion not disclosed?
At the last review, at least one of CertifyOS and Medallion published thin or absent detail on 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 Healthcare Administrative Automation page.
Source counts, NPI volumes, and service descriptions are vendor published. In credentialing, the durable asset is typically the verification network and dataset rather than a model, and this index grades AI centrality down across the lane on that basis; neither grade is a criticism of product quality. Neither vendor publishes full pricing, and neither publishes a security attestation on record with this index, which deserves attention given both hold sensitive provider data at scale.