Skip to content
FonteumPublic-records evidence
Side-by-Side Comparison

NPPES (CMS NPI Registry) vs Healthgrades: Side-by-Side Comparison

NPPES is the CMS record for assigned NPIs and related submitted taxonomy and address fields used in HIPAA standard transactions. Those fields do not establish licensure or credentialing. Healthgrades is a consumer-facing doctor-rating platform built on patient reviews and provider-submitted profiles.

Dimension by dimension

NPPES (CMS NPI Registry) vs Healthgrades, across 8 dimensions

DimensionNPPES (CMS NPI Registry)Healthgrades
Data typeFederal provider identity — 10-digit NPI, taxonomy code, practice addressConsumer reviews + provider-submitted profiles + insurance networks + state licensing data
Coverage8 million+ active NPI records (individuals + organizations)~3 million+ provider profiles
Refresh cadenceCMS publishes weekly; Fonteum's newest serving-table system date was 2026-06-10 when checked 2026-07-12— (not publicly disclosed)
License / CostU.S. government public-domain works (17 U.S.C. § 105) — free to use and redistribute with attributionFree for consumers; B2B/advertising model for providers — pricing not public
API accessPublic REST API at npiregistry.cms.hhs.gov/api — no key required for basic lookupsNo public API
Source provenanceResponses identify available source, date, and limitation fields; coverage varies and facts are not individually signedPatient reviews + state licensing; field-level provenance chain not publicly documented
Primary use caseNPI lookup, submitted taxonomy fields, and joins where another source supplies NPIPatient discovery, doctor comparison, review reading before booking
PricingFree (federal public domain)Free for patients; provider marketing packages — pricing not public

Cells marked “—” indicate values not publicly documented by the respective platform. No data has been estimated or fabricated.

Honest fit

Which platform fits your team

When to use NPPES (CMS NPI Registry)

Use NPPES for NPI assignment and the administrative taxonomy and address fields submitted with that record. It can support claims workflows and source-specific joins, but it is not a credentialing decision and cannot join a source that lacks NPI.

NPPES (CMS NPI Registry) source detail →

When to use Healthgrades

Use Healthgrades for consumer-facing applications where patient review sentiment and insurance-network filters are the primary value. It is optimized for patients choosing a provider, not for data engineers building pipelines.

https://www.healthgrades.com

FAQ

Common questions

Is Healthgrades data based on NPPES?
Healthgrades uses NPPES data as one input for provider identity (NPI, name, address, taxonomy) but layers patient reviews, insurance network information, and state licensing data on top. The underlying federal identity layer is NPPES; the consumer-facing product adds review and profile layers that are not in NPPES.
Which is more accurate for provider address and specialty?
NPPES publishes the address and taxonomy submitted for an NPI, but those fields can be incomplete or stale and are not independently validated as current. Healthgrades refreshes profiles from its own sources and cadence. Compare source dates and use the authority appropriate to the field.
Can NPPES replace Healthgrades for a patient-facing application?
Only partially. NPPES provides the identity record and taxonomy but has no patient reviews, no ratings, and no insurance-network filters. A patient-facing application that needs review sentiment needs a platform like Healthgrades or a similar consumer review source on top of the NPPES identity layer.
What fields does Fonteum surface from NPPES?
Fonteum surfaces available NPPES fields such as NPI, taxonomy, and enumeration date with source attribution and limitations. It joins PECOS or NPI-bearing OIG rows only on a shared NPI; most Care Compare facility sources use CCN instead.

Last updated 2026-05-31. See all comparisons at /compare →

READY TO SHIP

Add federal-data citations to your agent in 60 seconds.

Connect the hosted MCP server to your agent, or call the API with an issued bearer credential. See the developer docs for the current public contract.

What’s on file, by the numbers

Platform snapshot · 2026-08-30

13.4Mproviders & companiesProviders, organizations, owners, and facilities on file
26.2Msource-linked factsSource-linked field facts in the dated platform snapshot
90sources with dataDistinct snapshot source IDs with at least one positive record count
16fresh sourcesDistinct source IDs whose latest positive-data snapshot falls within the preceding 45 days
111sources integratedActive registry rows; integration does not establish a load
13state Medicaid jurisdictionsDistinct states represented in the state-exclusions serving table

Integrated, with-data, and fresh-observation counts are separate. No platform-wide source-completeness count is published. Completeness is source-specific and must be evaluated against the named source's expected scope. State coverage is a separate jurisdiction measure.

Source authority is record-specific

Use the issuer named on the record.

Fonteum spans federal, state, and global public publishers. A source page or returned record identifies its issuer and dataset where that metadata is available. A platform registry count does not assign every page to one authority or establish loaded, fresh, or complete coverage.

Browse source records and their stated limitations →

Reproducible by design

Inspect the evidence each published figure actually supplies.

Source and date

Research pages expose the named public file and observation date where those fields are available. Source-file SHA-256 coverage is separate; facts do not currently link deterministically to signatures.

Available derivation

Studies with a retained release and committed derivation link the SQL or method used. Other studies state the evidence and reproduction limits they actually have.

Daily observations

Dated table row-count observations can detect local drift. They do not imply that an upstream publisher released or Fonteum ingested new data that day.

Named medical review

Reviewed by Jennifer Montecillo, MD, medical reviewer. Non-practicing medical reviewer.

Read the full provenance and attestation methodology →

Request access