Head-to-Head

DeepScribe vs Nabla

Last VerifiedJuly 22, 2026
Verdict

Both are enterprise scribes with real independent signal, pointed at different problems. DeepScribe built for complex specialty medicine: oncology as its center of gravity with a reported 40 percent of US cancer care visits, tuned models for six further specialties, more than 110 languages, and the highest independent rating in the lane at 98.8 on the KLAS Emerging Company Spotlight. Nabla built for the estate: named integrations across Epic, athenahealth, Oracle Health, NextGen, and Greenway, the widest footprint relative to this pairing, with a customer base weighted toward hospital systems and emergency departments and efficiency figures attributed to a published NEJM study. If your failure mode is specialty documentation that generalist scribes get wrong, oncology above all, start with DeepScribe. If your failure mode is a mixed EHR environment or an emergency and hospital medicine base that one contract has to cover, start with Nabla, and confirm its training default and BAA tier before deployment. Neither currently publishes pricing.

Select DeepScribe if
  • Specialty depth is the requirement: oncology first with a reported 5 million oncology visits a year and roughly 40 percent of US cancer care visits documented, plus tuned models for cardiology, urology, gastroenterology, orthopedics, neurology, and nephrology.
  • The evidence grades split in its favor: an A against Nabla's B, on a 98.8 KLAS Emerging Company Spotlight score with A plus marks across all six categories and an August 2025 Journal of Clinical Pathways study in oncology, where Nabla's NEJM attributed figures are held at B because study design and cohort were not captured.
  • Language and write back depth: conversations in more than 110 languages against Nabla's roughly 31, with bidirectional integration writing structured data into discrete EHR fields and HCC, CPT, and ICD-10 suggestions built into the note.
Select Nabla if
  • Estate coverage decides it: named integrations across Epic, athenahealth, Oracle Health, NextGen, and Greenway, where DeepScribe's integrations run Epic, athenahealth, NextGen, and eClinicalWorks; the Oracle Health and Greenway reach matters for mixed hospital and ambulatory environments.
  • Your base looks like its base: more than 85,000 clinicians at over 150 organizations, weighted toward hospital systems, emergency departments, and multi provider groups, across in person and telehealth encounters.
  • General coverage rather than specialty tuning: templates across more than 35 specialties customized through custom instructions and dot phrases, a fit for organizations whose documentation load is broad rather than concentrated in complex specialty care.
Attribute Matrix

Side-by-Side

Axis
D
DeepScribe
N
Nabla
AI Centrality
Autonomy and Oversight Model
Model and Technology Transparency
Clinical and Operational Evidence
AI Safety and PHI Stewardship
HIPAA and BAA Posture
Security Certifications and Trust Center
FDA and Regulatory Status
AI Governance and Bias Disclosure
EHR and Interoperability Depth
Deployment Model and Data Residency
Commercial Transparency
Setting and Specialty Coverage
Disclosure

Visit volumes and market share figures for both vendors are vendor published, including DeepScribe's oncology share and Nabla's clinician count. DeepScribe's KLAS scores are buyer survey based, and the Emerging Company Spotlight is a different KLAS instrument from the Best in KLAS category awards held elsewhere in this lane. Nabla's evidence grade is held at B because the design and cohort of the NEJM study it cites were not captured in retrieved materials. Two Nabla caveats matter for procurement: the free tier reportedly lacks a Business Associate Agreement, and session data is used for model training by default; confirm both, and whether training can be disabled contractually, before deployment. Neither vendor currently publishes pricing. Third party estimates place DeepScribe at $350 to $500 per provider per month with some reports near $750; Nabla previously published tiers, including a Pro plan reported near $119 per month, and has withdrawn them toward contract sales. All estimates are unconfirmed.

AI Health Index

An independent reference for evaluating AI vendors in healthcare. No vendor pays for inclusion, placement, or rating.

Index Status
Last index update
July 22, 2026
The AI Health Index is an editorial reference, not a regulatory body. Vendor data is verified against published sources and public regulatory filings. Figures labeled “Estimated” have not been confirmed by the vendor. See the Methodology page for evaluation standards and limitations.
© 2026 AI Health Index
3801 N Capital of Texas Hwy, Ste E240 · Austin, TX 78746