Ambient AI scribes listen to a doctor-patient conversation and turn it into a finished clinical note, saving physicians the after-hours typing that's a major driver of burnout. Abridge and Nabla are two of the biggest names in that category, and each lists the other as its closest competitor. Both are now enterprise-only, demo-and-contract sales — there's no public pricing page for either — so the real decision comes down to scale, specialty coverage and how deeply each integrates into the systems a hospital already runs on.
Abridge: the independently-verified market leader
Abridge listens to the conversation and writes the clinical documentation automatically, with a feature called Linked Evidence that ties every line of the generated note back to the exact moment in the conversation it came from — useful for trust and for audit. It has native integration with Epic (through Haiku/Hyperspace), the dominant hospital electronic health record system, and is deployed at 300+ health systems including Mayo Clinic, Johns Hopkins and Kaiser Permanente.
Pricing: no public pricing; enterprise sales scaled to health-system size and deployment scope. Abridge was valued at $5.3B in its latest funding round, which signals a company built for large, drawn-out enterprise sales cycles rather than a quick self-serve trial.
Pick Abridge if: you want the option with the strongest independent validation — it's been KLAS Market Leader for Ambient AI for two years running, a ranking from an independent research firm, not a vendor claim — and you're already running Epic.
Watch out for: it's enterprise-only with no self-serve tier, and its track record is strongest at large hospital-system scale — a small independent practice will have a harder time getting proportionate attention or pricing.
Nabla: broader specialty and language coverage
Nabla is an ambient assistant that drafts clinical notes and medical codes automatically during the visit, covering 50+ medical specialties and — notably — strong multilingual support, including bilingual or mixed-language encounters. It integrates with a wider spread of EHR systems: Epic, athenahealth, Oracle/Cerner, NextGen and Greenway, and is active at 190+ health organizations with 100,000+ users.
Pricing: no public pricing since a 2026 shift to demo/contract-only sales — it did previously publish per-month tiers, so ask directly whether any self-serve option still exists for smaller practices.
Pick Nabla if: you serve a multilingual patient population, need coverage across a broad range of medical specialties, or you're on an EHR other than Epic and need that native integration.
Watch out for: its efficiency and burnout-reduction metrics are vendor-reported without disclosed methodology, and it doesn't have an independent market-leader ranking as strong as Abridge's KLAS position.
Side-by-side
| Abridge | Nabla | |
|---|---|---|
| Independent validation | KLAS Market Leader, Ambient AI (2 years running) | No equivalent independent ranking cited |
| EHR integration | Native Epic (Haiku/Hyperspace) | Epic, athenahealth, Oracle/Cerner, NextGen, Greenway |
| Scale | 300+ health systems (Mayo Clinic, Johns Hopkins, Kaiser) | 190+ organizations, 100,000+ users |
| Specialty/language coverage | Not the headline differentiator | 50+ specialties, strong multilingual/bilingual support |
| Standout feature | Linked Evidence (notes traced to source conversation) | Broad EHR + multilingual coverage |
| Pricing | Enterprise only, contact sales | Enterprise only since 2026, contact sales |
The honest verdict: if independent validation and deep Epic integration at large-hospital scale matter most, Abridge's KLAS ranking and 300+ health-system footprint are hard to match. If your patient population is multilingual, spans many specialties, or you run an EHR other than Epic, Nabla's broader integration list and language support are the better fit on paper. A third option worth a look in the same evaluation is Suki, which leans harder into active voice-command control and automated medical coding (ICD-10, HCC, CPT) for teams where billing accuracy is the bigger pain point than ambient note-taking itself. None of the three publish self-serve pricing, so budget for a real sales process — and ask each vendor for reference customers at your actual system size, since all three lean on large flagship names that may not reflect what a smaller practice would experience.