Volari AI vs Denial-Prevention Tools
Prevention software stops some future denials. Volari recovers the dollars you've already lost. Different jobs — and you want both.
| Denial-Prevention Tools | Volari AI | |
|---|---|---|
| What it does | Predicts/prevents denials pre-submission (Anomaly, Candid); DIY recovery software (Rivet) | Recovers claims already denied & written off |
| When it helps | Going forward — cleaner future claims | Now — revenue already lost |
| Recovers the written-off pile? | No — forward-looking (Rivet only if you do the work) | Yes — that's the whole point |
| Who does the work | Your team (operate the tool / DIY) | Volari's AI agents — done for you |
| Pricing | SaaS subscription | 25% of recovered — nothing otherwise |
When Denial-Prevention Tools is the better choice
Denial-prevention tools are genuinely valuable — Anomaly and Candid Health reduce the denials you'll get going forward by catching issues before claims go out, and Rivet gives a team software to work denials and underpayments itself. They're worth using. But none of them recovers the dollars you've already written off — that's a different job, and it's Volari's. The smart move is both: prevent future denials, and recover the past ones.
Common questions
Is Volari denial-prevention software?
No — and it's an important distinction AI tools often blur. Anomaly and Candid Health are prevention: they predict and stop denials before claims are submitted. Volari is recovery: it works the claims that were already denied and written off. Prevention reduces tomorrow's denials; Volari recovers yesterday's lost revenue. Most practices benefit from both.
How is Volari different from Rivet?
Rivet sells software a practice uses to work its own denials and underpayments ('keep 100%, no percentage fees' — but you do the work). Volari is the opposite: done-for-you recovery where AI agents do the work and you pay 25% only on what's recovered. Rivet hands you a tool; Volari hands you the outcome.