For investment and diligence teams
Pressure-test reimbursement assumptions before you underwrite them
Deal models lean on reimbursement assumptions that rarely get market context until late in the process. OmniRate turns payer-published negotiated rates into code-level market comparisons, so diligence teams can place a target on the curve, compare markets, and flag the assumptions that need confirmatory work.
Questions a rate-informed diligence pass should answer
The point is not to admire the market data. It is to decide, code by code and payer by payer, which assumptions in the model deserve belief and which deserve follow-up.
Where does the target sit against the market?
Compare the negotiated rates attached to a target's providers against the distribution for the same codes, payers, and geography, so the underwriting case rests on the market's shape instead of a single blended assumption.
Is the upside thesis a payer story or a market story?
Use medians, tails, and payer spread to see whether projected rate improvement reflects a genuinely lagging contract position or just normal variation across the local market.
Which assumptions need confirmatory work?
Published rates cannot settle every question. Use them to identify the specific codes, payers, and provider entities where management's numbers and the disclosed market disagree, and take that short list into confirmatory diligence.
Use the evidence for what it actually shows
Payer-published rates are disclosed contract positions, not paid claims. Diligence built on them holds up when that boundary stays visible in the work product.
What it supports
- Market context for the codes and geographies that drive revenue
- Rate positions of comparable provider organizations, by payer
- Payer and plan context around a target's disclosed rates
- Exportable comparisons for the deal file
What it does not prove
- What a payer actually paid on any claim
- A target's realized revenue or collection rates
- Contract terms, bonuses, or value-based arrangements
- That every published rate is comparable without review
From data room question to reviewable comparison
01
Frame the market
Filter to the billing codes, payers, and geographies that matter for the thesis, and read the distribution before looking at any single organization.
02
Place the target on the curve
Compare the rates linked to the target's providers, and to comparable organizations, against the market spread to see whether the current position is lagging, ordinary, or already at the tail.
03
Hand off the open questions
Export the comparisons, note where published rates and the model disagree, and route those specific items into confirmatory diligence on claims, contracts, and management materials.
Deal teams
Pressure-test reimbursement assumptions in a model, compare targets across markets, and walk into management meetings with specific, code-level questions.
Portfolio operators
Compare rate positions across portfolio companies and their local markets to prioritize where contracting attention is worth the effort.
Advisors and diligence providers
Run repeatable market and rate analyses across engagements without maintaining a raw transparency-file pipeline for each one.
Common questions from diligence teams
Bring market context into the model before the term sheet
Sign up, pay by card, and start querying the current month's rates — no demo call, no sales cycle, no procurement to schedule.