REFERENCE RANGES — 2026 EDITION
Healthcare marketing benchmarks: reference ranges by specialty
HOW TO READ THIS
How to read a reference range
What a practice in your specialty actually looks like — median, quartile and top decile — measured by the institutions with a real denominator. Every figure below was read in the primary document itself rather than in someone's summary of it, and every one names its source in the row.
These are industry baselines, not our clients' numbers — those stay sealed. What we publish is the reference range and where it came from. How we rank a source, and which sources we refuse to use, is set out at /sources. What decides where a practice lands in these ranges — before anyone runs a campaign — is at /insights.
JUMP TO
- DENTAL GROUPS AND DSOS →
- SPECIALTY DENTAL →
- VETERINARY GROUPS →
- DERMATOLOGY GROUPS →
- BEHAVIORAL HEALTH →
- URGENT CARE →
- MULTI-SPECIALTY MSOS →
- EYE CARE GROUPS →
- PE-BACKED PLATFORMS →
REFERENCE RANGE
Dental groups and DSOsYOUR SECTION
WHO WE TREAT →Production and collections — not revenue.
| MEASURE | BASELINE | SPREAD | SOURCE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross billings per owner GP | avg $965,660 · median $893,510 | Q1 $583,410 · Q3 $1,198,710 · n=423 | ADA HPI, 2026 Survey of Dental Practice, Tbl 5 |
| Gross billings per owner specialist | avg $1,213,040 · median $993,490 | n=126 | ADA HPI, Tbl 5 |
| Gross billings per visit, solo GP | avg $576.30 · median $480.70 | Q1 $334.50 · Q3 $764.00 | ADA HPI, Tbl 9 |
| Gross billings per practice hour | avg $621.10 · median $529.20 | solo GP | ADA HPI, Tbl 9 |
| New patients / location / month | avg 39 · top 10% 82 | 45–65 strong · 65–81 approaching top | Henry Schein One, 2026 Catalyst Index |
| New patients / month / practice | avg 46 (2025) · 43 (2024) | different population, different mean | Planet DDS, 2026 Outlook |
| Distribution of monthly new patients | 0–19: 38.8% · 20–39: 19.0% · 40–59: 14.9% · 60–79: 9.5% · 80+: 17.7% | the curve behind both averages | Planet DDS, 2026 Deep Dive |
| Daily production per provider | $8,764 (2025) · $8,436 (2024) | hygienist $1,058 | Planet DDS |
| Revenue per chair — DSO | avg $205,690 · median $156,741 | across 59,139 chairs | Planet DDS |
| Revenue per chair — solo | avg $236,286 · median $184,502 | solos out-earn groups per chair | Planet DDS |
| Friday vs Tuesday production | $7,388 vs $10,152 | Friday 27% lower | Planet DDS |
| National dental expenditure | $189B (2024) | 3.6% of total health spend | CMS, National Health Expenditure Accounts |
Two credible sources report 39 and 46 new patients per month; a practising operator with three decades in the field reports 12–20 as typical. All three are right, and for groups running 6 to 25 locations the spread between their own sites is usually wider than the spread between those three figures. The distribution row shows why — 38.8% of practices sit under 20, and a long right tail pulls the mean up. Any single “industry average” for this metric conceals more than it reveals.
WHERE DOES YOUR NUMBER SIT
Locate one of your own figures on these ranges
Pick a row from Dental groups and DSOs, enter your figure, and a red mark lands on the scale the source actually published. 3 of these 12 rows publish enough of a distribution to place a number; the rest do not — and this says so rather than guessing. An average is not a percentile, and no figure here has been interpolated, smoothed or invented to fill a gap the source left open.
Every measure in the table above is set out below with the points its source actually published, and whether those points can place a number at all.
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 3 ORDERED POINTS Gross billings per owner GP
BASELINE avg $965,660 · median $893,510 SPREAD Q1 $583,410 · Q3 $1,198,710 · n=423 SOURCE ADA HPI, 2026 Survey of Dental Practice, Tbl 5
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dental groups and DSOs where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Gross billings per owner specialist
This source publishes the average ($1,213,040) and the median ($993,490) — and nothing between them. An average is not a rank, so only the ranked point bounds you — and it bounds one side. Above a published top decile is above the 90th percentile; how far above is not published, and no exact percentile follows.
BASELINE avg $1,213,040 · median $993,490 SPREAD n=126 SOURCE ADA HPI, Tbl 5
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dental groups and DSOs where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 3 ORDERED POINTS Gross billings per visit, solo GP
BASELINE avg $576.30 · median $480.70 SPREAD Q1 $334.50 · Q3 $764.00 SOURCE ADA HPI, Tbl 9
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dental groups and DSOs where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Gross billings per practice hour
This source publishes the average ($621.10) and the median ($529.20) — and nothing between them. An average is not a rank, so only the ranked point bounds you — and it bounds one side. Above a published top decile is above the 90th percentile; how far above is not published, and no exact percentile follows.
BASELINE avg $621.10 · median $529.20 SPREAD solo GP SOURCE ADA HPI, Tbl 9
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dental groups and DSOs where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION New patients / location / month
This source publishes the average (39) and the top decile (82) — and nothing between them. An average is not a rank, so only the ranked point bounds you — and it bounds one side. Above a published top decile is above the 90th percentile; how far above is not published, and no exact percentile follows.
BASELINE avg 39 · top 10% 82 SPREAD 45–65 strong · 65–81 approaching top SOURCE Henry Schein One, 2026 Catalyst Index
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dental groups and DSOs where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION New patients / month / practice
This row publishes an average (46) and no distribution behind it. An average is not a percentile — it cannot tell you where you sit among practices, and treating it as a midpoint is how half a market ends up believing it is behind.
BASELINE avg 46 (2025) · 43 (2024) SPREAD different population, different mean SOURCE Planet DDS, 2026 Outlook
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dental groups and DSOs where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 5 BINS, EACH WITH ITS OWN SHARE Distribution of monthly new patients
BASELINE 0–19: 38.8% · 20–39: 19.0% · 40–59: 14.9% · 60–79: 9.5% · 80+: 17.7% SPREAD the curve behind both averages SOURCE Planet DDS, 2026 Deep Dive
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dental groups and DSOs where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Daily production per provider
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE $8,764 (2025) · $8,436 (2024) SPREAD hygienist $1,058 SOURCE Planet DDS
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dental groups and DSOs where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Revenue per chair — DSO
This source publishes the average ($205,690) and the median ($156,741) — and nothing between them. An average is not a rank, so only the ranked point bounds you — and it bounds one side. Above a published top decile is above the 90th percentile; how far above is not published, and no exact percentile follows.
BASELINE avg $205,690 · median $156,741 SPREAD across 59,139 chairs SOURCE Planet DDS
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dental groups and DSOs where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Revenue per chair — solo
This source publishes the average ($236,286) and the median ($184,502) — and nothing between them. An average is not a rank, so only the ranked point bounds you — and it bounds one side. Above a published top decile is above the 90th percentile; how far above is not published, and no exact percentile follows.
BASELINE avg $236,286 · median $184,502 SPREAD solos out-earn groups per chair SOURCE Planet DDS
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dental groups and DSOs where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Friday vs Tuesday production
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE $7,388 vs $10,152 SPREAD Friday 27% lower SOURCE Planet DDS
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dental groups and DSOs where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION National dental expenditure
This row publishes a single figure ($189B) with no distribution behind it. There is nothing here to place a number against.
BASELINE $189B (2024) SPREAD 3.6% of total health spend SOURCE CMS, National Health Expenditure Accounts
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for dental groups and DSOs, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
READING
THE QUESTION THE BENCHMARKS CANNOT ANSWER
Where a figure reaches the top of what a source publishes, the published record stops. We
would like to know what you attribute it to.
This appears when a figure entered above lands at or above the highest rank its source published — the top decile, or the top quartile where the source goes no further. Fewer than one in ten practices reach a published top decile. That is arithmetic, not a compliment.
A published benchmark records where the top of a range sits and stops there. It cannot say what the practices standing at that line actually do, because nobody asked them. So this is the plain question: what are the three things you would say account for it? Answer in your own words — the specific decision, not the category it belongs to.
REFERENCE RANGE
Specialty dentalYOUR SECTION
WHO WE TREAT →Starts and referrals — a referral is not a lead. In orthodontics, “retention” means retainers.
| MEASURE | BASELINE | SPREAD | SOURCE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case starts, solo ortho | median 334 | calendar 2022 | 2023 JCO Orthodontic Practice Study, Tbl 1 |
| New-patient consultations | median 471 | observation patients 243 | JCO, Tbl 1 |
| Active treatment cases | median 700 | patients per day 50 | JCO, Tbl 1 |
| Gross income, solo ortho | median $1,800,000 | expenses $910,000 · net $741,771 · overhead 56% | JCO, Tbl 1 |
| Usual case fee | child $6,000 · adult $6,480 | net income per case $1,041 | JCO, Tbl 1 |
| Payment terms | 24 months · 14% initial | 62% of patients routinely billed | JCO, Tbl 1 |
| Sources of referrals | GPs 40% · patients 30% · internet 10% · specialists 5% | median % of referrals | JCO, Tbl 9 |
| Case starts by region | South 536 · Midwest 374 · West Central 329 · NE 319 · Pacific 306 | medians | JCO, Tbl 3 |
| Gross billings per owner, pediatric | median $964,880 (2025) | avg $1,086,290 · Q1 $566,210 · Q3 $1,327,430 | ADA HPI, Tbl 7 |
| Patient acquisition cost, pediatric | $44.47 under $1.65M · $25.42 above | 2.97% vs 1.23% of collections | Cain Watters, from client books |
The ADA has gone dark on four of five dental specialties. In the 2026 Survey of Dental Practice only pediatric dentistry cleared the reporting threshold (n=70) — oral surgery n=20, endodontics n=20, orthodontics n=24, periodontics n=27 were all suppressed. A practical consequence worth knowing: any “2025 average orthodontic, endodontic or oral-surgery practice revenue” figure in circulation cannot have come from the ADA.
WHERE DOES YOUR NUMBER SIT
Locate one of your own figures on these ranges
Pick a row from Specialty dental, enter your figure, and a red mark lands on the scale the source actually published. One of these 10 rows publishes enough of a distribution to place a number; the rest do not — and this says so rather than guessing. An average is not a percentile, and no figure here has been interpolated, smoothed or invented to fill a gap the source left open.
Every measure in the table above is set out below with the points its source actually published, and whether those points can place a number at all.
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Case starts, solo ortho
Only a median is published here (334). You can see which side of it you fall on — which is to say which half of the field you are in — and that is the whole of what this source supports. No quartile, no decile, no exact percentile.
BASELINE median 334 SPREAD calendar 2022 SOURCE 2023 JCO Orthodontic Practice Study, Tbl 1
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for specialty dental groups where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION New-patient consultations
Only a median is published here (471). You can see which side of it you fall on — which is to say which half of the field you are in — and that is the whole of what this source supports. No quartile, no decile, no exact percentile.
BASELINE median 471 SPREAD observation patients 243 SOURCE JCO, Tbl 1
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for specialty dental groups where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Active treatment cases
Only a median is published here (700). You can see which side of it you fall on — which is to say which half of the field you are in — and that is the whole of what this source supports. No quartile, no decile, no exact percentile.
BASELINE median 700 SPREAD patients per day 50 SOURCE JCO, Tbl 1
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for specialty dental groups, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Gross income, solo ortho
Only a median is published here ($1,800,000). You can see which side of it you fall on — which is to say which half of the field you are in — and that is the whole of what this source supports. No quartile, no decile, no exact percentile.
BASELINE median $1,800,000 SPREAD expenses $910,000 · net $741,771 · overhead 56% SOURCE JCO, Tbl 1
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for specialty dental groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Usual case fee
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE child $6,000 · adult $6,480 SPREAD net income per case $1,041 SOURCE JCO, Tbl 1
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for specialty dental groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Payment terms
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE 24 months · 14% initial SPREAD 62% of patients routinely billed SOURCE JCO, Tbl 1
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for specialty dental groups, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Sources of referrals
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE GPs 40% · patients 30% · internet 10% · specialists 5% SPREAD median % of referrals SOURCE JCO, Tbl 9
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for specialty dental groups where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Case starts by region
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE South 536 · Midwest 374 · West Central 329 · NE 319 · Pacific 306 SPREAD medians SOURCE JCO, Tbl 3
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for specialty dental groups where performance varies by location — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 3 ORDERED POINTS Gross billings per owner, pediatric
BASELINE median $964,880 (2025) SPREAD avg $1,086,290 · Q1 $566,210 · Q3 $1,327,430 SOURCE ADA HPI, Tbl 7
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for specialty dental groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Patient acquisition cost, pediatric
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE $44.47 under $1.65M · $25.42 above SPREAD 2.97% vs 1.23% of collections SOURCE Cain Watters, from client books
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for specialty dental groups where cost per new patient is climbing — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
READING
THE QUESTION THE BENCHMARKS CANNOT ANSWER
Where a figure reaches the top of what a source publishes, the published record stops. We
would like to know what you attribute it to.
This appears when a figure entered above lands at or above the highest rank its source published — the top decile, or the top quartile where the source goes no further. Fewer than one in ten practices reach a published top decile. That is arithmetic, not a compliment.
A published benchmark records where the top of a range sits and stops there. It cannot say what the practices standing at that line actually do, because nobody asked them. So this is the plain question: what are the three things you would say account for it? Answer in your own words — the specific decision, not the category it belongs to.
REFERENCE RANGE
Veterinary groupsYOUR SECTION
WHO WE TREAT →Clients, not patients. The pet is the patient; the owner is the revenue unit.
| MEASURE | BASELINE | SPREAD | SOURCE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross revenue per FTE vet — companion exclusive | median $616,667 | Q1 $411,111 · Q3 $867,901 | AVMA 2025 Economic State of the Profession |
| — companion predominant | median $608,553 | Q1 $351,500 · Q3 $760,887 | AVMA 2025, p.47 |
| — mixed animal | median $416,250 | Q1 $277,500 · Q3 $597,396 | AVMA 2025 |
| — all US practices | $554,982 (2024) | down in real terms from ~$600,000 in 2019 | 2025 AVMA Practice Owners Survey |
| Gross revenue per practice | ~$1.5M (2024) | average | AVMA Practice Owners Survey |
| Revenue and visits, LTM | $2.2M revenue · 10.1K visits | revenue +2.1% · visits −2.9% | Vetsource, n=6,184 practices |
| Active clients per practice | 3,351 (2024) | falling ~95 per year since 2019 | AVMA Practice Owners Survey |
| Active clients per FTE vet | 1,499 (2024) | falling ~15 per year | AVMA |
| Revenue per exam room | median $371,500 | companion exclusive · $444,668 all-practice avg | AVMA 2025, p.47 |
| Revenue mix | exams 23.5% · pharmacy 13.6% · lab 12.2% · vaccines 12% · surgery 11.9% | imaging 7% · dentistry 6.3% | 2024 AVMA Owner Survey |
| Average practice profile | 3,845 sq ft · 3.5 exam rooms · 2.76 FTE vets | — | AVMA |
Seven independent datasets — five private, two federal — agree on the same structure: visits down roughly 2–3%, revenue up roughly 2–3%, price doing all the work. The cleanest is the Bureau of Economic Analysis real quantity index, which fell in 2025 while nominal spend rose 3.48%.
WHERE DOES YOUR NUMBER SIT
Locate one of your own figures on these ranges
Pick a row from Veterinary groups, enter your figure, and a red mark lands on the scale the source actually published. 3 of these 11 rows publish enough of a distribution to place a number; the rest do not — and this says so rather than guessing. An average is not a percentile, and no figure here has been interpolated, smoothed or invented to fill a gap the source left open.
Every measure in the table above is set out below with the points its source actually published, and whether those points can place a number at all.
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 3 ORDERED POINTS Gross revenue per FTE vet — companion exclusive
BASELINE median $616,667 SPREAD Q1 $411,111 · Q3 $867,901 SOURCE AVMA 2025 Economic State of the Profession
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for veterinary groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 3 ORDERED POINTS — companion predominant
BASELINE median $608,553 SPREAD Q1 $351,500 · Q3 $760,887 SOURCE AVMA 2025, p.47
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for veterinary groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 3 ORDERED POINTS — mixed animal
BASELINE median $416,250 SPREAD Q1 $277,500 · Q3 $597,396 SOURCE AVMA 2025
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for veterinary groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION — all US practices
This row publishes a single figure ($554,982) with no distribution behind it. There is nothing here to place a number against.
BASELINE $554,982 (2024) SPREAD down in real terms from ~$600,000 in 2019 SOURCE 2025 AVMA Practice Owners Survey
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for veterinary groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Gross revenue per practice
This row publishes an average (~$1.5M) and no distribution behind it. An average is not a percentile — it cannot tell you where you sit among practices, and treating it as a midpoint is how half a market ends up believing it is behind.
BASELINE ~$1.5M (2024) SPREAD average SOURCE AVMA Practice Owners Survey
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for veterinary groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Revenue and visits, LTM
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE $2.2M revenue · 10.1K visits SPREAD revenue +2.1% · visits −2.9% SOURCE Vetsource, n=6,184 practices
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for veterinary groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Active clients per practice
This row publishes a single figure (3,351) with no distribution behind it. There is nothing here to place a number against.
BASELINE 3,351 (2024) SPREAD falling ~95 per year since 2019 SOURCE AVMA Practice Owners Survey
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for veterinary groups where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Active clients per FTE vet
This row publishes a single figure (1,499) with no distribution behind it. There is nothing here to place a number against.
BASELINE 1,499 (2024) SPREAD falling ~15 per year SOURCE AVMA
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for veterinary groups where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Revenue per exam room
This source publishes the median ($371,500) and the average ($444,668) — and nothing between them. An average is not a rank, so only the ranked point bounds you — and it bounds one side. Above a published top decile is above the 90th percentile; how far above is not published, and no exact percentile follows.
BASELINE median $371,500 SPREAD companion exclusive · $444,668 all-practice avg SOURCE AVMA 2025, p.47
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for veterinary groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Revenue mix
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE exams 23.5% · pharmacy 13.6% · lab 12.2% · vaccines 12% · surgery 11.9% SPREAD imaging 7% · dentistry 6.3% SOURCE 2024 AVMA Owner Survey
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for veterinary groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Average practice profile
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE 3,845 sq ft · 3.5 exam rooms · 2.76 FTE vets SOURCE AVMA
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for veterinary groups, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
READING
THE QUESTION THE BENCHMARKS CANNOT ANSWER
Where a figure reaches the top of what a source publishes, the published record stops. We
would like to know what you attribute it to.
This appears when a figure entered above lands at or above the highest rank its source published — the top decile, or the top quartile where the source goes no further. Fewer than one in ten practices reach a published top decile. That is arithmetic, not a compliment.
A published benchmark records where the top of a range sits and stops there. It cannot say what the practices standing at that line actually do, because nobody asked them. So this is the plain question: what are the three things you would say account for it? Answer in your own words — the specific decision, not the category it belongs to.
REFERENCE RANGE
Dermatology groupsYOUR SECTION
WHO WE TREAT →One practice, two businesses. Medical runs on encounters and wRVU; cosmetic runs on consults, units and syringes.
| MEASURE | BASELINE | SPREAD | SOURCE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Medicare allowed per dermatologist | median $188,072 | 10th pct $26,773 · 90th pct $777,069 | CMS Medicare PUF CY2024, n=12,616 |
| Services per dermatologist | median 2,522 | 90th pct 9,236 | CMS PUF CY2024 |
| Beneficiaries per dermatologist | median 496 | 90th pct 1,336 | CMS PUF CY2024 |
| Reimbursement spread by procedure | Mohs 1st stage $581.52 · AK destruction (addl) $6.22 | why mix beats volume | CMS, by Geography and Service, CY2024 |
| Mohs by provider type | PAs and NPs render ~33% of biopsies, ~0% of Mohs | 18 of 934,948 services nationally | CMS PUF CY2024 |
| Medspa revenue per location | median $1,860,000 | 75th $2,340,000 · 90th $4,250,000 | Zenoti, 2026 Benchmark Report (CY2025) |
| Medspa average ticket | median $216 | 75th $346 · 90th $484 | Zenoti CY2025 |
| Staff utilization | median 38% | 90th pct 80% — widest gap in any vertical | Zenoti CY2025 |
| Rebooking within 24 hours | 40% average | 69% top earners · 54% top quartile | Zenoti (CY2024) |
| Revenue per service hour | median ~$420 | top decile ~$700 · bottom quartile ~$295 | CorralData, Q1 2026 |
| Paid media spend | ~5% of revenue | 59% Meta / 41% Google | CorralData, Q1 2026 |
The top-decile dermatologist bills 4.1× the median on only 2.7× the patients. The gap is service mix, not panel size — which is why dermatology groups with a cosmetic line are read as two businesses rather than one, and it is stated by Medicare's own claims file, with no vendor anywhere in the chain.
WHERE DOES YOUR NUMBER SIT
Locate one of your own figures on these ranges
Pick a row from Dermatology groups, enter your figure, and a red mark lands on the scale the source actually published. 4 of these 11 rows publish enough of a distribution to place a number; the rest do not — and this says so rather than guessing. An average is not a percentile, and no figure here has been interpolated, smoothed or invented to fill a gap the source left open.
Every measure in the table above is set out below with the points its source actually published, and whether those points can place a number at all.
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 3 ORDERED POINTS Medicare allowed per dermatologist
BASELINE median $188,072 SPREAD 10th pct $26,773 · 90th pct $777,069 SOURCE CMS Medicare PUF CY2024, n=12,616
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dermatology groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Services per dermatologist
This source publishes the median (2,522) and the 90th percentile (9,236) — and nothing between them. Two ordered points tell you which side of each you fall on — and each published rank is a real bound, since a figure the source calls the top decile is reached by one in ten. What they cannot give you is an exact percentile: everything between the two is unpublished, and filling it in would be invention.
BASELINE median 2,522 SPREAD 90th pct 9,236 SOURCE CMS PUF CY2024
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dermatology groups where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Beneficiaries per dermatologist
This source publishes the median (496) and the 90th percentile (1,336) — and nothing between them. Two ordered points tell you which side of each you fall on — and each published rank is a real bound, since a figure the source calls the top decile is reached by one in ten. What they cannot give you is an exact percentile: everything between the two is unpublished, and filling it in would be invention.
BASELINE median 496 SPREAD 90th pct 1,336 SOURCE CMS PUF CY2024
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dermatology groups where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Reimbursement spread by procedure
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE Mohs 1st stage $581.52 · AK destruction (addl) $6.22 SPREAD why mix beats volume SOURCE CMS, by Geography and Service, CY2024
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for dermatology groups, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Mohs by provider type
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE PAs and NPs render ~33% of biopsies, ~0% of Mohs SPREAD 18 of 934,948 services nationally SOURCE CMS PUF CY2024
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for dermatology groups, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 3 ORDERED POINTS Medspa revenue per location
BASELINE median $1,860,000 SPREAD 75th $2,340,000 · 90th $4,250,000 SOURCE Zenoti, 2026 Benchmark Report (CY2025)
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dermatology groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 3 ORDERED POINTS Medspa average ticket
BASELINE median $216 SPREAD 75th $346 · 90th $484 SOURCE Zenoti CY2025
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dermatology groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Staff utilization
This source publishes the median (38%) and the 90th percentile (80%) — and nothing between them. Two ordered points tell you which side of each you fall on — and each published rank is a real bound, since a figure the source calls the top decile is reached by one in ten. What they cannot give you is an exact percentile: everything between the two is unpublished, and filling it in would be invention.
BASELINE median 38% SPREAD 90th pct 80% — widest gap in any vertical SOURCE Zenoti CY2025
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for dermatology groups, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Rebooking within 24 hours
This source publishes the average (40%) and the top quartile (54%) — and nothing between them. An average is not a rank, so only the ranked point bounds you — and it bounds one side. Above a published top decile is above the 90th percentile; how far above is not published, and no exact percentile follows.
BASELINE 40% average SPREAD 69% top earners · 54% top quartile SOURCE Zenoti (CY2024)
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dermatology groups where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 3 ORDERED POINTS Revenue per service hour
BASELINE median ~$420 SPREAD top decile ~$700 · bottom quartile ~$295 SOURCE CorralData, Q1 2026
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dermatology groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Paid media spend
This row publishes a single figure (~5%) with no distribution behind it. There is nothing here to place a number against.
BASELINE ~5% of revenue SPREAD 59% Meta / 41% Google SOURCE CorralData, Q1 2026
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dermatology groups where cost per new patient is climbing — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
READING
THE QUESTION THE BENCHMARKS CANNOT ANSWER
Where a figure reaches the top of what a source publishes, the published record stops. We
would like to know what you attribute it to.
This appears when a figure entered above lands at or above the highest rank its source published — the top decile, or the top quartile where the source goes no further. Fewer than one in ten practices reach a published top decile. That is arithmetic, not a compliment.
A published benchmark records where the top of a range sits and stops there. It cannot say what the practices standing at that line actually do, because nobody asked them. So this is the plain question: what are the three things you would say account for it? Answer in your own words — the specific decision, not the category it belongs to.
REFERENCE RANGE
Behavioral healthYOUR SECTION
WHO WE TREAT →Census and admissions — not new patients. Length of stay, levels of care, verification of benefits.
| MEASURE | BASELINE | SPREAD | SOURCE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Median clients per facility | SU with OTP 185 · outpatient MH 15 · inpatient MH 19 · residential MH 7 | March 2024 | SAMHSA N-SUMHSS 2024, Tbls SU12/SU13/MH12 |
| Median length of stay | hospital detox 4d · short-term residential 21d · long-term residential 36d | IOP 40d · non-intensive outpatient 53d | SAMHSA TEDS 2023, Tbl E-4 |
| Average daily census | 17,575 on 23,987 available beds | occupancy 73% | Universal Health Services, FY2025 10-K |
| Average inpatient length of stay | 13.7 days (2025) · 13.6 (2024) | — | UHS FY2025 10-K |
| Same-facility growth | revenue +4.9% · patient days +2.1% · admissions +2.3% | FY2025 | Acadia Healthcare FY2025 10-K |
| Outpatient session rates | self-pay $139.75 · insurance $99.75 | insurance = 58.8% of sessions, up from 55.8% | SimplePractice, 2025 report |
| Facility scale reference | 8,040 clinicians · 572 centers | new center 4,000–5,000 sq ft, 12–15 clinicians | LifeStance FY2025 10-K |
| Inpatient psychiatric margin | average −5% | more than half of 1,738 facilities negative | NABH, from CMS HCRIS |
This is three businesses wearing one name. Residential, intensive outpatient and outpatient therapy differ by an order of magnitude in census, length of stay and economics — and an opioid-treatment-programme split matters more than the residential-versus-outpatient one.
WHERE DOES YOUR NUMBER SIT
Locate one of your own figures on these ranges
Pick a row from Behavioral health, enter your figure, and a red mark lands on the scale the source actually published. Not one of these 8 rows publishes enough of a distribution to place a number — and this says so rather than guessing. An average is not a percentile, and no figure here has been interpolated, smoothed or invented to fill a gap the source left open.
Every measure in the table above is set out below with the points its source actually published, and whether those points can place a number at all.
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Median clients per facility
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE SU with OTP 185 · outpatient MH 15 · inpatient MH 19 · residential MH 7 SPREAD March 2024 SOURCE SAMHSA N-SUMHSS 2024, Tbls SU12/SU13/MH12
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for behavioral health operators where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Median length of stay
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE hospital detox 4d · short-term residential 21d · long-term residential 36d SPREAD IOP 40d · non-intensive outpatient 53d SOURCE SAMHSA TEDS 2023, Tbl E-4
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for behavioral health operators, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Average daily census
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE 17,575 on 23,987 available beds SPREAD occupancy 73% SOURCE Universal Health Services, FY2025 10-K
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for behavioral health operators where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Average inpatient length of stay
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE 13.7 days (2025) · 13.6 (2024) SOURCE UHS FY2025 10-K
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for behavioral health operators, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Same-facility growth
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE revenue +4.9% · patient days +2.1% · admissions +2.3% SPREAD FY2025 SOURCE Acadia Healthcare FY2025 10-K
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for behavioral health operators where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Outpatient session rates
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE self-pay $139.75 · insurance $99.75 SPREAD insurance = 58.8% of sessions, up from 55.8% SOURCE SimplePractice, 2025 report
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for behavioral health operators, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Facility scale reference
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE 8,040 clinicians · 572 centers SPREAD new center 4,000–5,000 sq ft, 12–15 clinicians SOURCE LifeStance FY2025 10-K
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for behavioral health operators, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Inpatient psychiatric margin
This row publishes an average (−5%) and no distribution behind it. An average is not a percentile — it cannot tell you where you sit among practices, and treating it as a midpoint is how half a market ends up believing it is behind.
BASELINE average −5% SPREAD more than half of 1,738 facilities negative SOURCE NABH, from CMS HCRIS
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for behavioral health operators where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
READING
THE QUESTION THE BENCHMARKS CANNOT ANSWER
Where a figure reaches the top of what a source publishes, the published record stops. We
would like to know what you attribute it to.
This appears when a figure entered above lands at or above the highest rank its source published — the top decile, or the top quartile where the source goes no further. Fewer than one in ten practices reach a published top decile. That is arithmetic, not a compliment.
A published benchmark records where the top of a range sits and stops there. It cannot say what the practices standing at that line actually do, because nobody asked them. So this is the plain question: what are the three things you would say account for it? Answer in your own words — the specific decision, not the category it belongs to.
REFERENCE RANGE
Urgent careYOUR SECTION
WHO WE TREAT →Visits per clinic per day. Walk-in led, not appointment led.
| MEASURE | BASELINE | SPREAD | SOURCE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Median total patient volume | 56 per day | 50th percentile | UCA 2022 Operations Benchmarking, n=775 |
| Median visits by type | provider 40 · occ-med 5 · workers' comp 4 · nurse 4 | 2022 | UCA 2022, p.9 |
| Average daily visits per center | 2023: 33.13 · 2024: 33.27 · 2025: 33.96 | — | Urgent Care Association |
| Pre-COVID baseline | 30 per clinic per day (2018–19) | April 2020 low: 17.8 | UCA 2021 Spring (Experity data) |
| Median commercial net revenue per visit | $163.91 | bottom-quartile states $130.30 · top $221.72 | Experity — 17,410,492 commercial visits |
| Median allowed by CPT | 99202 $112 · 99203 $145 · 99204 $179 · 99205 $213 | 2023 | FAIR Health, national commercial claims |
| Global fee (S9083) by region | Midwest $110 · South $152 · West $159 · Northeast $167 | 2022 average allowed | FAIR Health |
| Minimum population per center | 18,000 · suburban median 20,000 | — | National UC Realty |
There is no NAICS code for urgent care, so unlike dentistry or veterinary medicine no federal revenue-per-establishment denominator exists for this vertical at all. Seasonality also runs a 39-point peak-to-trough swing, which makes any single annual visits-per-day figure an artefact of when it was measured.
WHERE DOES YOUR NUMBER SIT
Locate one of your own figures on these ranges
Pick a row from Urgent care, enter your figure, and a red mark lands on the scale the source actually published. Not one of these 8 rows publishes enough of a distribution to place a number — and this says so rather than guessing. An average is not a percentile, and no figure here has been interpolated, smoothed or invented to fill a gap the source left open.
Every measure in the table above is set out below with the points its source actually published, and whether those points can place a number at all.
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Median total patient volume
Only a median is published here (56). You can see which side of it you fall on — which is to say which half of the field you are in — and that is the whole of what this source supports. No quartile, no decile, no exact percentile.
BASELINE 56 per day SPREAD 50th percentile SOURCE UCA 2022 Operations Benchmarking, n=775
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for urgent care networks where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Median visits by type
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE provider 40 · occ-med 5 · workers' comp 4 · nurse 4 SPREAD 2022 SOURCE UCA 2022, p.9
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for urgent care networks where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Average daily visits per center
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE 2023: 33.13 · 2024: 33.27 · 2025: 33.96 SOURCE Urgent Care Association
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for urgent care networks where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Pre-COVID baseline
This row publishes a single figure (30) with no distribution behind it. There is nothing here to place a number against.
BASELINE 30 per clinic per day (2018–19) SPREAD April 2020 low: 17.8 SOURCE UCA 2021 Spring (Experity data)
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for urgent care networks, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Median commercial net revenue per visit
This source publishes the median ($163.91) and the bottom quartile ($130.30) — and nothing between them. Two ordered points tell you which side of each you fall on — and each published rank is a real bound, since a figure the source calls the top decile is reached by one in ten. What they cannot give you is an exact percentile: everything between the two is unpublished, and filling it in would be invention.
BASELINE $163.91 SPREAD bottom-quartile states $130.30 · top $221.72 SOURCE Experity — 17,410,492 commercial visits
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for urgent care networks where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Median allowed by CPT
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE 99202 $112 · 99203 $145 · 99204 $179 · 99205 $213 SPREAD 2023 SOURCE FAIR Health, national commercial claims
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for urgent care networks where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Global fee (S9083) by region
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE Midwest $110 · South $152 · West $159 · Northeast $167 SPREAD 2022 average allowed SOURCE FAIR Health
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for urgent care networks where performance varies by location — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Minimum population per center
Only a median is published here (20,000). You can see which side of it you fall on — which is to say which half of the field you are in — and that is the whole of what this source supports. No quartile, no decile, no exact percentile.
BASELINE 18,000 · suburban median 20,000 SOURCE National UC Realty
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for urgent care networks, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
READING
THE QUESTION THE BENCHMARKS CANNOT ANSWER
Where a figure reaches the top of what a source publishes, the published record stops. We
would like to know what you attribute it to.
This appears when a figure entered above lands at or above the highest rank its source published — the top decile, or the top quartile where the source goes no further. Fewer than one in ten practices reach a published top decile. That is arithmetic, not a compliment.
A published benchmark records where the top of a range sits and stops there. It cannot say what the practices standing at that line actually do, because nobody asked them. So this is the plain question: what are the three things you would say account for it? Answer in your own words — the specific decision, not the category it belongs to.
REFERENCE RANGE
Multi-specialty MSOsYOUR SECTION
WHO WE TREAT →Encounters, wRVU, service lines, referral leakage and capture.
| MEASURE | BASELINE | SPREAD | SOURCE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Median total medical revenue per FTE physician | primary care $760,383 | nonsurgical $697,712 · surgical $687,652 | MGMA DataDive Financials & Operations (2024 data) |
| Median total operating cost per FTE physician | $620,098 → $801,938 | +29.3% over five years | MGMA DataDive Cost and Revenue |
| Median loss per physician, system-affiliated | more than $249,000 | revenue $719,901 vs expenses $1,036,238 | AMGA 2023 (5,700+ clinics) |
| Median investment per provider | $175,517 (2023) → $161,592 (2024) | physicians + APCs | AMGA 2024 (7,500+ clinics) |
| Hospital / IDS practice subsidy | $302,160 per FTE physician | +39.7% in one year | MGMA DataDive Cost and Revenue |
| Cost growth vs inflation, 2011–2024 | CPI +39.5% vs operating cost +71.6% / +83.3% | physician-owned / hospital-owned | MGMA DataDive |
| Median surgical specialist compensation | ~$585,000 (2024) | +5.57% year over year | MGMA Provider Compensation (220,000+) |
| Referral loop closure | 34.8% of scheduling attempts completed | 38.9% had no documented status at all | Patel et al., J Gen Intern Med 2018, n=103,737 |
The referral figure is the most important number on this page. It was measured inside a single integrated health system — where capture should be easiest — across 103,737 scheduling attempts. In nearly four cases in ten, the system could not establish whether the patient was ever seen.
WHERE DOES YOUR NUMBER SIT
Locate one of your own figures on these ranges
Pick a row from Multi-specialty MSOs, enter your figure, and a red mark lands on the scale the source actually published. Not one of these 8 rows publishes enough of a distribution to place a number — and this says so rather than guessing. An average is not a percentile, and no figure here has been interpolated, smoothed or invented to fill a gap the source left open.
Every measure in the table above is set out below with the points its source actually published, and whether those points can place a number at all.
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Median total medical revenue per FTE physician
Only a median is published here ($760,383). You can see which side of it you fall on — which is to say which half of the field you are in — and that is the whole of what this source supports. No quartile, no decile, no exact percentile.
BASELINE primary care $760,383 SPREAD nonsurgical $697,712 · surgical $687,652 SOURCE MGMA DataDive Financials & Operations (2024 data)
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for multi-specialty MSOs where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Median total operating cost per FTE physician
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE $620,098 → $801,938 SPREAD +29.3% over five years SOURCE MGMA DataDive Cost and Revenue
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for multi-specialty MSOs, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Median loss per physician, system-affiliated
Only a median is published here (more than $249,000). You can see which side of it you fall on — which is to say which half of the field you are in — and that is the whole of what this source supports. No quartile, no decile, no exact percentile.
BASELINE more than $249,000 SPREAD revenue $719,901 vs expenses $1,036,238 SOURCE AMGA 2023 (5,700+ clinics)
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for multi-specialty MSOs, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Median investment per provider
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE $175,517 (2023) → $161,592 (2024) SPREAD physicians + APCs SOURCE AMGA 2024 (7,500+ clinics)
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for multi-specialty MSOs, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Hospital / IDS practice subsidy
This row publishes a single figure ($302,160) with no distribution behind it. There is nothing here to place a number against.
BASELINE $302,160 per FTE physician SPREAD +39.7% in one year SOURCE MGMA DataDive Cost and Revenue
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for multi-specialty MSOs, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Cost growth vs inflation, 2011–2024
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE CPI +39.5% vs operating cost +71.6% / +83.3% SPREAD physician-owned / hospital-owned SOURCE MGMA DataDive
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for multi-specialty MSOs, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Median surgical specialist compensation
Only a median is published here (~$585,000). You can see which side of it you fall on — which is to say which half of the field you are in — and that is the whole of what this source supports. No quartile, no decile, no exact percentile.
BASELINE ~$585,000 (2024) SPREAD +5.57% year over year SOURCE MGMA Provider Compensation (220,000+)
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for multi-specialty MSOs, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Referral loop closure
This row publishes a single figure (34.8%) with no distribution behind it. There is nothing here to place a number against.
BASELINE 34.8% of scheduling attempts completed SPREAD 38.9% had no documented status at all SOURCE Patel et al., J Gen Intern Med 2018, n=103,737
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for multi-specialty MSOs where new patient volume is short of plan — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
READING
THE QUESTION THE BENCHMARKS CANNOT ANSWER
Where a figure reaches the top of what a source publishes, the published record stops. We
would like to know what you attribute it to.
This appears when a figure entered above lands at or above the highest rank its source published — the top decile, or the top quartile where the source goes no further. Fewer than one in ten practices reach a published top decile. That is arithmetic, not a compliment.
A published benchmark records where the top of a range sits and stops there. It cannot say what the practices standing at that line actually do, because nobody asked them. So this is the plain question: what are the three things you would say account for it? Answer in your own words — the specific decision, not the category it belongs to.
REFERENCE RANGE
Eye care groupsYOUR SECTION
WHO WE TREAT →Exams and capture rate. A clinical practice bolted to a retail business.
| MEASURE | BASELINE | SPREAD | SOURCE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross revenue per complete exam | median $306 | 90–99th pct $500 · 1st–9th ~$188 | MBA Key Metrics, n>1,900 practices |
| Collected exam revenue per exam | avg $90 · median $79 | insured patients $66 | MBA Key Metrics |
| Direct-pay exam fee | median $127 · avg $134 | 5th pct $68 · 95th pct $205 | MBA Key Metrics |
| Eyewear as % of gross revenue | 43% average | 90–99th pct 62% · 1st–9th 21% | MBA Key Metrics |
| Contact lens materials | 16% average | 90–99th pct 32% · 1st–9th 6% | MBA Key Metrics |
| Eyewear gross margin | 61% median (2.6× markup) | 90–99th pct 75% (4.0×) · $138 gross profit per Rx | MBA Key Metrics |
| Retail sale per pair | $227 median | — | MBA Key Metrics |
| Second-pair sales ratio | 10% median | 5th pct 1% · 95th pct 33% | MBA Key Metrics |
| Marketing spend per complete exam | median $4.11 · average $5.65 | effectively a published acquisition cost | MBA Key Metrics |
| Optical as % of office space | 25% median | smaller practices 30%+ · $1.5M+ practices 22% | MBA Key Metrics |
The MBA Key Metrics series publishes the full decile distribution for every metric, and discloses its own upward sampling bias in writing — which is rarer than it should be. It is also a 2015 edition with no free successor, so treat the levels as dated and the distribution shape as the durable finding.
WHERE DOES YOUR NUMBER SIT
Locate one of your own figures on these ranges
Pick a row from Eye care groups, enter your figure, and a red mark lands on the scale the source actually published. 3 of these 10 rows publish enough of a distribution to place a number; the rest do not — and this says so rather than guessing. An average is not a percentile, and no figure here has been interpolated, smoothed or invented to fill a gap the source left open.
Every measure in the table above is set out below with the points its source actually published, and whether those points can place a number at all.
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 3 ORDERED POINTS Gross revenue per complete exam
BASELINE median $306 SPREAD 90–99th pct $500 · 1st–9th ~$188 SOURCE MBA Key Metrics, n>1,900 practices
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for eye care groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Collected exam revenue per exam
This source publishes the average ($90) and the median ($79) — and nothing between them. An average is not a rank, so only the ranked point bounds you — and it bounds one side. Above a published top decile is above the 90th percentile; how far above is not published, and no exact percentile follows.
BASELINE avg $90 · median $79 SPREAD insured patients $66 SOURCE MBA Key Metrics
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for eye care groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 3 ORDERED POINTS Direct-pay exam fee
BASELINE median $127 · avg $134 SPREAD 5th pct $68 · 95th pct $205 SOURCE MBA Key Metrics
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for eye care groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
3 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Eyewear as % of gross revenue
This source publishes the average (43%), the top decile (62%) and the bottom decile (21%) — and nothing between them. Two ordered points tell you which side of each you fall on — and each published rank is a real bound, since a figure the source calls the top decile is reached by one in ten. What they cannot give you is an exact percentile: everything between the two is unpublished, and filling it in would be invention.
BASELINE 43% average SPREAD 90–99th pct 62% · 1st–9th 21% SOURCE MBA Key Metrics
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for eye care groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
3 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Contact lens materials
This source publishes the average (16%), the top decile (32%) and the bottom decile (6%) — and nothing between them. Two ordered points tell you which side of each you fall on — and each published rank is a real bound, since a figure the source calls the top decile is reached by one in ten. What they cannot give you is an exact percentile: everything between the two is unpublished, and filling it in would be invention.
BASELINE 16% average SPREAD 90–99th pct 32% · 1st–9th 6% SOURCE MBA Key Metrics
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for eye care groups, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Eyewear gross margin
This source publishes the median (61%) and the top decile (75%) — and nothing between them. Two ordered points tell you which side of each you fall on — and each published rank is a real bound, since a figure the source calls the top decile is reached by one in ten. What they cannot give you is an exact percentile: everything between the two is unpublished, and filling it in would be invention.
BASELINE 61% median (2.6× markup) SPREAD 90–99th pct 75% (4.0×) · $138 gross profit per Rx SOURCE MBA Key Metrics
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for eye care groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Retail sale per pair
Only a median is published here ($227). You can see which side of it you fall on — which is to say which half of the field you are in — and that is the whole of what this source supports. No quartile, no decile, no exact percentile.
BASELINE $227 median SOURCE MBA Key Metrics
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for eye care groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
PUBLISHED DISTRIBUTION — 3 ORDERED POINTS Second-pair sales ratio
BASELINE 10% median SPREAD 5th pct 1% · 95th pct 33% SOURCE MBA Key Metrics
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for eye care groups where growth has flattened — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
2 PUBLISHED POINTS — NOT A DISTRIBUTION Marketing spend per complete exam
This source publishes the median ($4.11) and the average ($5.65) — and nothing between them. An average is not a rank, so only the ranked point bounds you — and it bounds one side. Above a published top decile is above the 90th percentile; how far above is not published, and no exact percentile follows.
BASELINE median $4.11 · average $5.65 SPREAD effectively a published acquisition cost SOURCE MBA Key Metrics
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for eye care groups where cost per new patient is climbing — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Optical as % of office space
Only a median is published here (25%). You can see which side of it you fall on — which is to say which half of the field you are in — and that is the whole of what this source supports. No quartile, no decile, no exact percentile.
BASELINE 25% median SPREAD smaller practices 30%+ · $1.5M+ practices 22% SOURCE MBA Key Metrics
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for eye care groups, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
READING
THE QUESTION THE BENCHMARKS CANNOT ANSWER
Where a figure reaches the top of what a source publishes, the published record stops. We
would like to know what you attribute it to.
This appears when a figure entered above lands at or above the highest rank its source published — the top decile, or the top quartile where the source goes no further. Fewer than one in ten practices reach a published top decile. That is arithmetic, not a compliment.
A published benchmark records where the top of a range sits and stops there. It cannot say what the practices standing at that line actually do, because nobody asked them. So this is the plain question: what are the three things you would say account for it? Answer in your own words — the specific decision, not the category it belongs to.
REFERENCE RANGE
PE-backed platformsYOUR SECTION
WHO WE TREAT →Adjusted EBITDA, same-store growth, add-ons, entry and exit multiples. The one setting where acquisition cost and payback are native.
| MEASURE | BASELINE | SPREAD | SOURCE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Global healthcare PE deal value | record, more than $190B (2025) | 445 buyouts — second-highest on record | Bain, Global Healthcare PE Report 2026 |
| Provider and related services | ~$62B, up 57% year over year | healthcare IT within provider doubled to ~$32B | Bain 2026 |
| Exit value | $54B (2024) → $156B (2025) | exits above $1B: 16 → more than 40 | Bain 2026 |
| Sponsor-to-sponsor | more than 150 deals, more than $120B | more than 30 above $1B, versus 8 in 2024 | Bain 2026 |
| DSO platform multiples | buy practices 5–6× · sell platform 9–10× | down from 13–16× at the peak | Colao / Dykema |
Bain's deal counts exclude add-on transactions below $250 million — which is essentially every tuck-in a mid-market platform actually executes. Bain measures the top of the market accurately and the rollup middle not at all. Cited here for direction, not for a middle-market denominator.
WHERE DOES YOUR NUMBER SIT
Locate one of your own figures on these ranges
Pick a row from PE-backed platforms, enter your figure, and a red mark lands on the scale the source actually published. Not one of these 5 rows publishes enough of a distribution to place a number — and this says so rather than guessing. An average is not a percentile, and no figure here has been interpolated, smoothed or invented to fill a gap the source left open.
Every measure in the table above is set out below with the points its source actually published, and whether those points can place a number at all.
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Global healthcare PE deal value
This row publishes a single figure (more than $190B) with no distribution behind it. There is nothing here to place a number against.
BASELINE record, more than $190B (2025) SPREAD 445 buyouts — second-highest on record SOURCE Bain, Global Healthcare PE Report 2026
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for PE-backed platforms where growth has to read as a system — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Provider and related services
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE ~$62B, up 57% year over year SPREAD healthcare IT within provider doubled to ~$32B SOURCE Bain 2026
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five presentations are worked as differentials for PE-backed platforms, each one a ranked list of causes with what confirms and what rules out each. See the differentials →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Exit value
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE $54B (2024) → $156B (2025) SPREAD exits above $1B: 16 → more than 40 SOURCE Bain 2026
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for PE-backed platforms where growth has to read as a system — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION Sponsor-to-sponsor
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE more than 150 deals, more than $120B SPREAD more than 30 above $1B, versus 8 in 2024 SOURCE Bain 2026
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for PE-backed platforms where growth has to read as a system — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
SEPARATE FIGURES — NOT ONE DISTRIBUTION DSO platform multiples
This row publishes several figures side by side — separate categories, periods or components, not one distribution of a single measure. A number cannot be placed against them. The row is reproduced here exactly as published.
BASELINE buy practices 5–6× · sell platform 9–10× SPREAD down from 13–16× at the peak SOURCE Colao / Dykema
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for PE-backed platforms where growth has to read as a system — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
READING
THE QUESTION THE BENCHMARKS CANNOT ANSWER
Where a figure reaches the top of what a source publishes, the published record stops. We
would like to know what you attribute it to.
This appears when a figure entered above lands at or above the highest rank its source published — the top decile, or the top quartile where the source goes no further. Fewer than one in ten practices reach a published top decile. That is arithmetic, not a compliment.
A published benchmark records where the top of a range sits and stops there. It cannot say what the practices standing at that line actually do, because nobody asked them. So this is the plain question: what are the three things you would say account for it? Answer in your own words — the specific decision, not the category it belongs to.
THE ABSENT NUMBER
Patient acquisition cost — where it exists, and where it does not
We went looking for a credible cost-per-new-patient benchmark in all nine specialties. In three we found one. In three it does not exist at any tier we would cite — and the reason is structural: the ADA's own Survey of Dental Practice aggregates every practice expense into a single figure and never breaks out advertising, so there is nothing to derive from. Every percentage in circulation traces back to a vendor with no disclosed sample.
| SPECIALTY | STATUS | WHAT IS ACTUALLY PUBLISHED |
|---|---|---|
| Specialty dental — pediatric | Published | $26.46 average; $44.47 under $1.65M vs $25.42 above Cain Watters, from client books |
| Optometry | Published | Marketing spend per complete exam — median $4.11 MBA Key Metrics |
| Dermatology — cosmetic | Partial | Paid media ≈ 5% of revenue CorralData |
| Behavioral health | Native term only | “Cost per admission” is the vocabulary; no benchmark located |
| Multi-specialty MSO | Gated | Obtainable behind MGMA membership MGMA DataDive |
| DSO / general dentistry | Does not exist | ADA HPI aggregates all practice expenses and never breaks out advertising |
| Veterinary | Does not exist | Unpublished by every institutional and capital-tier source located |
| Emergency & urgent care | Does not exist | No credible source located |
This is worth stating plainly: if a marketing agency quotes you an industry patient acquisition cost for dentistry, veterinary medicine or urgent care, it is quoting a figure no institution measured. We build yours from your own spend and your own instrumented new-patient count instead.
WHERE DOES YOUR NUMBER SIT
Locate one of your own figures on these ranges
Pick a row from the acquisition-cost table, enter your figure, and a red mark lands on the scale the source actually published. Not one of these 8 rows publishes enough of a distribution to place a number — and this says so rather than guessing. An average is not a percentile, and no figure here has been interpolated, smoothed or invented to fill a gap the source left open.
Every measure in the table above is set out below with the points its source actually published, and whether those points can place a number at all.
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Specialty dental — pediatric — cost per new patient
This row publishes an average ($26.46) and no distribution behind it. An average is not a percentile — it cannot tell you where you sit among practices, and treating it as a midpoint is how half a market ends up believing it is behind.
WHAT IS PUBLISHED $26.46 average; $44.47 under $1.65M vs $25.42 above STATUS Published SOURCE Cain Watters, from client books
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for specialty dental groups where cost per new patient is climbing — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Optometry — cost per new patient
Only a median is published here ($4.11). You can see which side of it you fall on — which is to say which half of the field you are in — and that is the whole of what this source supports. No quartile, no decile, no exact percentile.
WHAT IS PUBLISHED Marketing spend per complete exam — median $4.11 STATUS Published SOURCE MBA Key Metrics
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for eye care groups where cost per new patient is climbing — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
ONE PUBLISHED FIGURE — NO DISTRIBUTION Dermatology — cosmetic — cost per new patient
This row publishes a single figure (≈ 5%) with no distribution behind it. There is nothing here to place a number against.
WHAT IS PUBLISHED Paid media ≈ 5% of revenue STATUS Partial SOURCE CorralData
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dermatology groups where cost per new patient is climbing — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
NO DISTRIBUTION PUBLISHED Behavioral health — cost per new patient
Nothing in this row can be read as a distribution. It is reproduced here exactly as published, and that text is the answer.
WHAT IS PUBLISHED “Cost per admission” is the vocabulary; no benchmark located STATUS Native term only
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Four causes are ranked for behavioral health operators where cost per new patient is climbing — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
NO DISTRIBUTION PUBLISHED Multi-specialty MSO — cost per new patient
Nothing in this row can be read as a distribution. It is reproduced here exactly as published, and that text is the answer.
WHAT IS PUBLISHED Obtainable behind MGMA membership STATUS Gated SOURCE MGMA DataDive
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for multi-specialty MSOs where cost per new patient is climbing — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
NO DISTRIBUTION PUBLISHED DSO / general dentistry — cost per new patient
Nothing in this row can be read as a distribution. It is reproduced here exactly as published, and that text is the answer.
WHAT IS PUBLISHED ADA HPI aggregates all practice expenses and never breaks out advertising STATUS Does not exist
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for dental groups and DSOs where cost per new patient is climbing — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
NO DISTRIBUTION PUBLISHED Veterinary — cost per new patient
Nothing in this row can be read as a distribution. It is reproduced here exactly as published, and that text is the answer.
WHAT IS PUBLISHED Unpublished by every institutional and capital-tier source located STATUS Does not exist
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Four causes are ranked for veterinary groups where cost per new patient is climbing — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
NO DISTRIBUTION PUBLISHED Emergency & urgent care — cost per new patient
Nothing in this row can be read as a distribution. It is reproduced here exactly as published, and that text is the answer.
WHAT IS PUBLISHED No credible source located STATUS Does not exist
WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT Five causes are ranked for urgent care networks where cost per new patient is climbing — each with the measurement that confirms it and the one that rules it out. Work the differential →
READING
THE QUESTION THE BENCHMARKS CANNOT ANSWER
Where a figure reaches the top of what a source publishes, the published record stops. We
would like to know what you attribute it to.
This appears when a figure entered above lands at or above the highest rank its source published — the top decile, or the top quartile where the source goes no further. Fewer than one in ten practices reach a published top decile. That is arithmetic, not a compliment.
A published benchmark records where the top of a range sits and stops there. It cannot say what the practices standing at that line actually do, because nobody asked them. So this is the plain question: what are the three things you would say account for it? Answer in your own words — the specific decision, not the category it belongs to.
PROVENANCE
Where these figures come from
Every figure on this page was read in the primary document rather than in somebody's summary of it, and each names its source in its own row so it can be checked without taking our word for anything.
Sources are tiered, and the tier is stated wherever it matters: institutional bodies that publish their methodology and disclose their sample; installed-base publishers who measure their own customers and therefore have a real denominator but not the whole market; capital sources — lenders, valuation firms, healthcare M&A advisers — who see audited financials and are strong on revenue and margin while being silent on marketing; and first-hand operator observation, which is labelled as testimony rather than data and is used to sanity-check published figures, never to replace them.
A figure is never presented as more certain than its tier allows. The full register, including the sources we refuse to use and why, is at /sources. If you think a figure here is wrong, tell us which one and what you read instead.
A reference range tells you where you stand. It does not tell you what is holding you there — that is what the examination is for.
APPLY — 6 / QUARTER →CONSENT · WHAT THIS BROWSER KEEPS
What this site already records, and what it will keep only if you ask
ALREADY HAPPENING — YOU DID NOT AGREE TO THIS, SO YOU SHOULD READ IT FIRST
We record which pages you visit. It is first-party and it goes to our own server at n8n.codybaird.net — no cookies, nothing sold, no advertising audience built. What gets sent is the path you are on, the page you came from, a random visitor id, a random session id, your browser's user-agent string, your window width, and any campaign or ad-click parameters that were on the link you arrived through.
We also run Google Analytics, which is a third party, and you should assume every site you visit does. Ours is configured to set no cookies at all — it receives the page address and nothing you type — and its advertising features are switched off, so nothing here feeds an ad audience. You can confirm both in this page's source.
Do Not Track and Global Privacy Control are honoured. With either set, nothing leaves the browser at all — not a reduced payload, not an anonymised one. Nothing.
THE KEYS THAT ARE ALREADY IN THIS BROWSER
admen-vida random visitor id, in localStorage, with no expiry — this is the durable oneadmen-sida random session id, in sessionStorage, gone when the tab closesadmen-attributionyour first touch — how you first arrived, written onceadmen-last-touchyour most recent touch, overwritten each timeadmen-journeyan ordered list of touches, capped at the 50 most recentadmen-clickidsad-click parameters from the link you arrived through, if there were anyadmen-profilethe picker's three answers, in sessionStorage, gone when the tab closes
The full account — every key, what is sent, where, and what stops it — is on the privacy policy. The instrumentation itself is one readable file; if you view-source you are looking at all of it.
SEPARATELY — AND THIS IS THE PART YOU CHOOSE The three switches below store things in your browser only. Nothing under them is transmitted to us, ever. There is no request in the code that could send them and no address for them to be sent to. Turning any of them on puts you on no list, starts no sequence, and triggers no call, no email and no text — not because we promise to be good about it, but because the data never reaches us. Turning one off deletes what it was holding in the same click.
YOUR RECORD — IN THIS BROWSER, NOWHERE ELSE
Nothing on it yet. Enter a figure into any tool on the site and it lands here.
WHERE THE RECORD IS THIN
The switches themselves need JavaScript, because the only thing they do is write to storage in this browser. With JavaScript off there is nothing to switch and nothing is being kept beyond what is listed above — which you can clear at any time from your browser's own site-data controls, and which stops entirely if you set Do Not Track or Global Privacy Control.