# Best NueMD Alternatives for Billing Companies

An honest 2026 roundup of NueMD alternatives for medical billing companies facing the December 2026 shutdown, with billing-company-first criteria.

URL: https://medibilling.app/best/nuemd-alternatives
Last reviewed: 2026-07-27

# Best NueMD Alternatives for Billing Companies

## Short answer

NueMD shuts down December 31, 2026. AdvancedMD, which acquired the platform in 2018, has confirmed that software access and support end on that date, and NueMD customers are being directed to AdvancedMD or told to find something else. For a billing company, the deadline is the whole story: payer enrollment, staff training, and a legacy A/R closeout all have to finish before the platform goes dark, which means cutting over by October to leave room for a 90-day closeout.

NueMD was a functional billing and practice management platform at a lower per-provider price than the larger suites, with its own clearinghouse. The replacement has to do at least that much, at a price a billing company can absorb, and be ready to take over the book on a fixed clock.

Six options are worth evaluating: Medi (billing-company-first, per-claim pricing), AdvancedMD (NueMD's parent and its promoted upgrade path), CollaborateMD (billing-company-positioned, per-provider), Tebra (practice management plus billing, per-provider), DrChrono (EHR plus billing, per-provider), and CareCloud (full suite plus managed RCM). Medi and CollaborateMD are the billing-company-first options; the rest were built around the practice with billing-company support added. Each is covered below, including where it beats Medi.

## Why billing companies leave NueMD

For most of NueMD's life the reason to leave was the same reason to leave any aging platform. After AdvancedMD acquired it in 2018, NueMD stopped getting the investment a billing platform needs to stay current, and phone support wound down earlier in 2026. The December 31, 2026 sunset turned a slow drift into a forced exit. These are the pressures billing companies name:

- **Hard deadline, no extension.** There is no option to stay on NueMD past December 31, 2026. A forced timeline carries pressure a voluntary migration never does.
- **Per-provider pricing that only climbs.** NueMD's fee scaled with provider headcount across the book. As clients added providers, the platform cost grew with them, even when those providers generated no new billing work.
- **A clearinghouse that dies with the platform.** Payer enrollment ran through NueMD's own clearinghouse, which goes offline on December 31. Every enrollment relationship held through it ends that day and has to be rebuilt from scratch at the new platform's clearinghouse.
- **Thin multi-practice depth.** NueMD was practice-management-first. Cross-practice denial queues, all-book A/R views, and functional-role work assignments were never the point of the product.

The [NueMD migration guide](/migration/nuemd) covers the operating-continuity plan, the October 1 cutover target, and the day-zero checklist.

## How to read this list

The vendors fall into two structural groups, and the group matters more than any single feature.

- **Billing-company-first** (Medi, CollaborateMD) treat the billing company as the primary workspace, with each practice a scoped tenant inside it. Cross-practice queues, all-book A/R, and functional-role permissions are built into the architecture.
- **Practice-first with billing** (AdvancedMD, DrChrono, Tebra, CareCloud) were designed around the practice as the primary user. Multi-client support exists in each, layered on a practice-first base.

Both groups can replace NueMD. The first fits a team that works across many unrelated clients by function. The second fits when your clients expect an EHR or full PM suite bundled into the billing relationship.

## The main options

| Vendor | Category | Pricing model | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Medi | Billing-company-first revenue cycle | Starts at $1.00/claim, drops to $0.90 and $0.80 once monthly volume passes the published thresholds; no monthly fee, no per-practice or per-provider fee; published at [/pricing](/pricing) | Per-claim pricing and cross-practice workflow depth, no EHR |
| AdvancedMD | Practice PM/EHR with billing-company tier | Published tiers: $429 (PM+Billing), $729 (PM+EHR), $999 (full bundle) per provider per month; per-encounter alternative also available; AdvancedBiller volume discounts require a quote | Clients who want EHR, scheduling, and billing from one vendor; NueMD's promoted upgrade |
| CollaborateMD | Billing-company-positioned PM | Does not publish pricing; a [BestNotes partner price sheet](https://www.bestnotes.com/cmd-pricing/) lists about $0.38 per claim (declining with volume) and about $54 per provider; billing tier by quote | Established billing-company infrastructure with a long track record |
| Tebra | Practice PM/EHR + billing | Billing Starter at $99 to $199 per provider per month per [Tebra's published pricing](https://www.tebra.com/pricing/overview), only under 100 claims/month; fuller EHR bundles run $399 to $799 above that | Clients who want EHR and billing from one vendor |
| DrChrono | iPad-first EHR + billing | Publishes add-on fees ($30/provider, $0.70/paper claim) per [DrChrono's pricing page](https://www.drchrono.com/plans-and-pricing/); base subscription is quote-only (EHR-first) | Practices that want a mobile-first EHR bundled with billing |
| CareCloud | Full-service PM/EHR + managed RCM | Does not publish pricing; [Business News Daily estimates](https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/16248-carecloud-medical-software.html) about $349 (Central) to $629 (Complete) per provider, with Concierge RCM at about 3 to 7% of collections | Practices that want to fully outsource billing to one vendor |

## AdvancedMD

AdvancedMD is NueMD's parent and the platform it is promoting, so the path is simple: stay in the family. Its Central Billing Office supports multi-client management under one login with per-provider reporting and user-level access controls, and the Claim Inspector scrubbing engine carries a published 95% first-pass acceptance guarantee. For clients who want EHR, scheduling, patient engagement, and billing from one vendor, AdvancedMD is a coherent answer and the closest like-for-like step up.

The counterpoint is cost. AdvancedMD publishes tiers at $429 (PM+Billing), $729 (PM+EHR), and $999 (full bundle) per provider per month, well above what NueMD ran, and the AdvancedBiller volume discounts require a quote, so you cannot model the real number before a sales call. Francisco Partners now owns AdvancedMD, and some billing companies report new fees and slower support; confirm current terms. After the Change Healthcare outage, AdvancedMD added Waystar as a preferred clearinghouse alongside its existing infrastructure, so enrollment has more moving parts than it once did.

For the full comparison, see [Medi vs AdvancedMD](/compare/advancedmd).

## CollaborateMD

CollaborateMD has sold to billing companies since 1999, and the product reflects it. The multi-client dashboard, role-based access, and single sign-on across client accounts are real features with a real customer base behind them. EHR integration is broad: twenty-plus HL7 connections with preferred partners at no added cost, plus Quest and LabCorp lab interfaces as add-ons. The published 99% first-pass acceptance rate points to genuine CCI, NCD/LCD, and modifier validation at the scrub layer. The company has run through the Change Healthcare outage, ICD-10, and repeated payer-portal overhauls, and that operational continuity is a credential Medi cannot match yet.

CollaborateMD does not publish pricing on its own site. A [BestNotes partner price sheet](https://www.bestnotes.com/cmd-pricing/) lists about $0.38 per claim (declining with volume) and about $54 per provider (declining); the Medical Billing and Labs tier is quote-only. Document storage is metered in megabytes per tier, and Capterra reviewers flag per-megabyte overage charges; check the limits against your document volume before committing.

For the full comparison, see [Medi vs CollaborateMD](/compare/collaboratemd).

## Tebra

Tebra, formed in 2021 from the Kareo and PatientPop merger, markets a billing-company offering directly: manage all clients in one dashboard regardless of EHR. The positioning is real, and the billing-payments suite includes RPA-driven ERA auto-posting, unapplied-payment posting, and per-client, per-provider, or per-payer billing rules. For a book whose clients want EHR, scheduling, and patient engagement alongside billing, Tebra is one of the most common replacements.

Per-provider pricing is the main adjustment from NueMD. Tebra publishes its billing-tier pricing: Billing Starter runs $99 to $199 per provider per month at [Tebra's pricing page](https://www.tebra.com/pricing/overview), only under 100 claims a month, with fuller EHR bundles at $399 to $799 once volume runs above that, with annual terms standard and multi-year discounts common. Adding providers inside a client raises the bill. The billing-company dashboard sits on Tebra's practice-first base, so test cross-client denial routing and all-book A/R aggregation in a live walkthrough rather than trusting the marketing page.

For the full comparison, see [Medi vs Tebra](/compare/medi-vs-tebra).

## DrChrono

DrChrono, now DrChrono by EverHealth after EverCommerce's 2021 acquisition, is an iPad-native EHR that bundles practice management, billing, and an optional managed RCM service (the Elite tier). The mobile-first depth is genuine; it was among the first EHRs in the iPhone and iPad App Store, and the product still reflects that. For practices that chart on tablets and want billing tied to the encounter, the integrated approach has real value, and that is where it beats Medi.

For a billing company, the question is whether DrChrono was built for you. Its primary tenant is the practice, so its operator view is the practice's, and cross-client queues and all-book A/R have to be assembled outside the product. Permissions are scoped to a single practice rather than the billing company. DrChrono publishes only add-on fees ($30 per provider, $0.70 per paper claim) at [DrChrono's pricing page](https://www.drchrono.com/plans-and-pricing/); its base subscription is quote-only, and the Elite managed service is typically quoted at 3 to 8 percent of collections. Worth evaluating if your clients are already on DrChrono or specifically want a mobile-first EHR; a poor fit if your team works across unrelated client practices.

For the full comparison, see [Medi vs DrChrono](/compare/drchrono).

## CareCloud

CareCloud (Nasdaq: CCLD) is a publicly traded health IT company serving 45,000-plus providers with an integrated EHR, practice management, billing, and patient engagement suite. Its Concierge service supplies the billing staff at a percentage of collections; third-party analysis cites 3 to 7 percent, though CareCloud does not publish the figure. For a practice that wants to hand billing off entirely to one vendor, Concierge is a coherent option.

Two things to factor in. First, a March 2026 security incident: CareCloud reported unauthorized access to one of its six EHR environments in a Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 24, 2026. The forensic scope was ongoing at filing, and the number of affected patient records had not been disclosed as of this writing. It is a matter of public record; ask CareCloud for the current remediation status before signing. Second, on pricing: CareCloud does not publish pricing; [Business News Daily estimates](https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/16248-carecloud-medical-software.html) about $349 (Central) to $629 (Complete) per provider, with Concierge RCM estimated at about 3 to 7% of collections.

For the full comparison, see [Medi vs CareCloud](/compare/carecloud).

## Medi

Medi is a billing-company-first revenue cycle platform built by a working biller, not a PE portfolio. Pricing is per claim, not per provider and not per practice: starts at $1.00 per claim, no monthly fee, and moves to $0.90 and then $0.80 at the volume marks published on the pricing page. Adding providers inside an existing client never changes the fee, and neither does adding a client practice. The full schedule, including EDI rates for larger books, is at [/pricing](/pricing), with no quote required to model your cost.

Claim submission is $1.00 per claim regardless of how many service lines it carries, with ERA included at no additional charge. Eligibility, claim-status, COB (in controlled rollout), and other transaction rates are listed in full at [/pricing](/pricing).

For the NueMD move, the clearinghouse change is the largest shift. NueMD runs its own clearinghouse, and every enrollment held through it ends December 31, 2026. Medi routes through Stedi for 837 claim submission, 835 ERA, 270/271 eligibility, 276/277 claim status, and 277CA acknowledgments. Re-enrollment at Stedi is a separate process per payer, and the payers set the timelines, with Medicare and state Medicaid the slowest. Start enrollment on contract day one; the cutover math is in "How to choose" below.

Migration is free with a 12-month commitment, otherwise a one-time $100 per practice capped at $3,000 for the book. Data export is always free, and there is no termination fee.

Medi is not an EHR and does not chart, schedule, submit prior authorizations, or code automatically. Clients who want those from their billing software need a platform-first vendor. The [pricing calculator](/tools/pricing-calculator) models your specific book, and the [demo](/demo) is the right next step before any migration decision.

## How to choose your NueMD replacement

The December 31, 2026 deadline changes the math compared to a voluntary move. Five questions decide it for a billing company:

- **How does the replacement price at your provider count?** NueMD was low-cost per provider, and AdvancedMD at published per-provider rates is a real step up. A per-claim model lands better when your clients' provider headcounts vary and keep growing, since the fee tracks claim volume, not headcount.
- **How long is payer enrollment at the new clearinghouse?** Every alternative uses a different clearinghouse than NueMD, and the payers set the timelines, which cannot be bought down. Budget two to four weeks for commercial payers and six to eight weeks or longer for Medicare and state Medicaid, and do not plan to start enrollment in November.
- **Can you finish the legacy A/R closeout before December 31?** The forward-only pattern runs a 60 to 90 day closeout in NueMD after cutover. October 1 gives 90 days; November 1 leaves 60 with no margin if anything slips. The [NueMD migration guide](/migration/nuemd) covers the timing.
- **Do your clients expect an EHR from the same vendor?** If yes, AdvancedMD, Tebra, DrChrono, or CareCloud fit. If they bring their own EHR and want billing only, Medi or CollaborateMD are the right shapes.
- **Does cross-practice depth matter day to day?** If your team is organized by function, with posters working every client's ERAs and denial leads working every client's queue, you want that architecture native, not layered on a practice-first base.

## Where Medi fits, and where it does not

Medi fits the billing company that owns the billing layer independently of its clients' clinical software, works across more than a handful of practices, and wants per-claim pricing that steps down at published volume tiers instead of pricing that climbs with provider headcount. A client with ten providers costs the same as one with two; only claim volume moves the bill.

Medi is the wrong choice in two cases. If your clients want EHR, scheduling, or patient engagement from their billing vendor, Medi does not include those modules and will not add them. And if you need a long reference-customer list or a formal security certification before signing, Medi does not hold SOC 2 Type II or HITRUST and will not claim otherwise; CollaborateMD's track record is the stronger answer there.

If the billing-company-first architecture fits, the next steps are the [demo](/demo), the [pricing details](/pricing), and the [pricing calculator](/tools/pricing-calculator) to model your book against the deadline. For the wider software decision beyond this migration, see the [best medical billing software for billing companies](/best/medical-billing-software-for-billing-companies) roundup.

## Frequently asked questions

### What are the best NueMD alternatives for billing companies?

Six platforms are worth evaluating, but the December 31 deadline changes how to run the comparison: shortlist by clearinghouse enrollment lead time first, not by feature list, because every option here uses a different clearinghouse than NueMD and the payers set that clock, not the vendor. AdvancedMD, as NueMD's own parent, is the only option with any continuity in that enrollment relationship; every other choice starts payer enrollment from zero on contract day one.

### Do I have to move to AdvancedMD when NueMD shuts down?

No. AdvancedMD is the path its parent company is promoting, but nothing requires you to take it. Any RCM platform that fits your workflows is a valid replacement. The factors that matter are enrollment timeline at the new clearinghouse, pricing-model fit with your client book, and whether the platform is built around a billing company or a single practice.

### How much time do I actually have for the NueMD migration?

Less than it looks. The hard deadline is December 31, 2026, and the cutover and enrollment math in "How to choose" above backs into an October 1 cutover with enrollment starting the day you sign. For a billing company with five or more practices, that puts the contract decision in June or July. Waiting until September leaves no room for the delays that always happen. The [NueMD migration guide](/migration/nuemd) lays out the full timeline.

### What happens to my open claims when NueMD shuts down on December 31?

They lose their platform context. Follow-up notes, denial threads, payer contact history, and in-flight appeal documentation are not recoverable from a retired system. The protection is a forward-only migration that finishes the closeout well before the deadline, with every open claim's working state written down before cutover. Anything still open at December 31 has to be re-entered by hand in the new system or written off. The [NueMD migration guide](/migration/nuemd) has the full day-zero checklist.

### Does moving to a new platform mean re-enrolling with every payer?

Yes. NueMD's enrollments are tied to its own clearinghouse submitter IDs and do not carry to any other platform. Every 837 and 835 enrollment has to be re-established at the new clearinghouse, on timelines the payers set, not the vendor. Start on contract day one with your top three payers by claim volume and work down the list. The [NueMD migration guide](/migration/nuemd) has the per-payer enrollment windows.

## How we sourced these prices

Pricing for other vendors comes from their public pricing pages where they publish one, and from third-party aggregators, reseller materials, and customer reports where they do not. Gated figures are approximate, may not reflect negotiated or current rates, and can change without notice; confirm with each vendor directly. Where a vendor does not publish pricing, this page says so rather than presenting an estimate as fact. Medi's own pricing is published in full at [/pricing](/pricing).

Sources: [Capterra Medical Billing Software](https://www.capterra.com/medical-billing-software/) · [G2 Medical Billing](https://www.g2.com/categories/medical-billing) · [Software Advice Medical Billing](https://www.softwareadvice.com/medical/) · [AdvancedMD Software Pricing](https://www.advancedmd.com/software-pricing/) · [NueMD Sunset Notice](https://www.advancedmd.com/nuemd/) · [CareCloud Form 8-K (SEC, March 24, 2026)](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1582982/000149315226013239/form8-k.htm)