Population health & analytics · Point-of-care payer data and EHR apps
Vim
Vim is a point-of-care platform that puts health plan care gaps, risk alerts and third-party apps inside provider EHR workflows.
Strong fit
- Health plans that want care gap and risk alerts inside provider EHRs
- Practices on small or niche EHRs that payers struggle to reach
- Digital health companies that want one way into many EHRs
Weak fit
- Groups that want a full analytics warehouse
- Buyers who need a public price list
- Hospitals looking for inpatient tools
Bottom line
Vim is a good choice for health plans and digital health companies that want their data and apps to show up inside provider EHRs at the visit. It is less useful as a stand-alone analytics platform. Buyers should expect to price it through a sales process.
Score breakdown
Weights: Outcomes 35% · Product 30% · Implementation 20% · Pricing clarity 15%.
Oron Afek, Asaf David and Yael Peled founded Vim in 2015 under the name BookMD. Afek is chief executive and David is chief technology officer, and the company has teams in the US and Israel.
Vim puts health plan data inside the EHR while the clinician sees the patient. Its alerts show open care gaps and possible diagnoses, it can write codes back into the note, and it can pull visit notes for the plan during the session.
Vim Connect lets other software companies place their apps inside EHR workflows through one integration. Its marketplace offers vetted apps such as the Heidi scribe and GoodRx affordability tools.
Humana ran a 180-day pilot with 28 provider groups on small EHRs, sending diagnosis and quality alerts from its claims through Vim. Vim says providers in the pilot captured risk scores and closed gaps more efficiently.
Walgreens, Anthem, Optum Ventures and Frist Cressey Ventures backed a $60 million round in 2021. Evolent Care Partners and MaxHealth are among the provider customers.
Navina fits when a primary care group wants an AI chart summary before each visit. Innovaccer and Arcadia fit when the buyer needs a full population health data platform.
Competitor landscape
| Vendor | Overall | Ease of implementation |
|---|---|---|
| Navina | 7.9 | 7.4 |
| Innovaccer | 7.4 | 7.0 |
| Vim | 7.3 | 7.8 |
| Arcadia | 7.0 | 6.7 |
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | Vim prices by contract with health plans and app developers. |
| What usually drives cost | For Vim, cost depends on the number of practices and EHRs reached, the workflows used, and whether you embed your own app. |
| What to ask before you buy | Ask Vim which EHRs your network uses that it supports, how gap closure is reported, and what a pilot costs. |
| Note | Vim says EHR vendors pay nothing to add its marketplace. |
| Published pricing | Vim does not publish a price list. |
Leadership
Methodology
| Weight | Factor | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| 35% | Customer outcomes | Whether buyers get measurable operational or clinical-workflow results after go-live |
| 30% | Product | Capability depth, reliability, and fit for the job the category buys |
| 20% | Implementation | How hard it is to stand up, integrate, train, and stabilize |
| 15% | Pricing clarity | Whether a buyer can model total cost without a mystery quote |
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Highly recommend | Strong outcomes and product with manageable caveats |
| Recommend | Solid fit for the right buyer; know the tradeoffs |
| Conditional | Only with a specific use case or heavy caveats |
| Not recommended | Avoid for most buyers in this category |
Read our full methodology for how we weight scores and assign recommend labels.