Infinx vs Valer (Voluware)
Two Prior Authorization vendors, side by side. Facts from public sources; judgments are ours.
At a glance
Derived from public facts · a rough scale, not a ranking
| Infinx | Valer (Voluware) | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Enterprise contract (custom) · Software plus services, quote-based | Not published · custom quotes for health systems |
| Speed to go live | Standard EHR integration project | customized to each workflow and EHR |
| Automation model | Tech-enabled service · AI agents plus expert staff | Software platform · single portal for all payers |
| Built for | Mid-size groups, Enterprise systems, Billing companies | Mid-size groups, Enterprise systems |
| Security posture | HITRUST, SOC 2 Type II, HIPAA | HITRUST |
| Company maturity | 14 yrs (est. 2012) | 14 yrs (est. 2012) |
| Financial backing | $186M reported · Growth (KKR minority stake 2024) | PE-backed (Hughes & Company) |
| Named customers | None public | 1 named |
| Published results | No public numbers | No public numbers |
| Documented integrations | 5 listed | 4 listed |
| Third-party validation | None found | None found |
Bottom line
- Pick Infinx if you want prior auth and revenue cycle work handled by a blend of AI and human specialists rather than buying software your staff must run.
- Pick Valer if your staff juggles dozens of payer portals and faxes for prior auths and you want one submission and tracking hub across all service lines.
Infinx
AI plus specialists for prior auth and patient access
- Founded
- 2012
- HQ
- San Jose, CA
- Stage
- Growth (KKR minority stake 2024)
- Raised
- $186M reported
What it does
- AI prior authorization determination, submission, and status tracking
- Eligibility verification and benefits checks in one platform
- Patient pay estimates before service
- Certified specialists work exceptions automation cannot resolve
- AR recovery and denial management services
Where it's strong
- The AI-plus-human model delivers completed authorizations, not just software your staff still has to work.
- Deep roots in high-volume prior auth specialties like radiology, labs, and cardiology.
- Trusted by more than 900 provider organizations, with KKR and Norwest backing.
What buyers should weigh
- Part of the value is outsourced labor, so compare its per-transaction economics against pure software options.
- Named customer references are rare in public materials; case studies are anonymized.
- Broad service catalog means implementation scope needs careful definition up front.
Integrations
Valer (Voluware)
Prior auth submission and tracking automation across payer portals
- Founded
- 2012
- HQ
- Huntington Beach, CA
- Stage
- PE-backed (Hughes & Company)
- Raised
- $7.6M disclosed
What it does
- Automated PA submission to 75+ payer portals
- Auto-completion of 1,000+ payer fax forms
- Automated status checking and verification
- Bi-directional EHR sync using standard 278/275 transactions
- Covers procedures, referrals, and services, not just drugs
- Reporting on turnaround times and staff productivity
Where it's strong
- Covers the messy middle of PA: portal and fax submissions that pure API-based tools cannot reach.
- Bi-directional Epic integration writes auth numbers and statuses back automatically.
- Workflow is configured per client rather than one-size-fits-all, which suits complex health system setups.
What buyers should weigh
- Small company with modest disclosed funding, so evaluate roadmap and support depth against bigger rivals.
- Portal and fax automation depends on payer sites staying stable; expect some maintenance lag when payers change portals.
- Per-client configuration means implementations take real effort compared with plug-and-play point tools.
Named customers
Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU)
Integrations
Compare against the rest of Prior Authorization
Deciding between these two?
First Pass tracks Prior Authorization every week: funding, launches, and what changed since this page was written.