LunaBill Review (2026): Pricing, Features & Honest Verdict

TLDR

LunaBill uses coordinated AI agents to automate accounts receivable follow-up for hospitals and RCM firms. The agents check payer portals, call insurers, appeal denials, and resubmit claims, and you pay 1.5% of what they recover, nothing if they recover nothing. Best for: hospitals and RCM firms with aged AR. Price: 1.5% of net collections. Rating: 6.2/10.

What is LunaBill?

LunaBill is an AI revenue cycle automation platform built to chase down aged accounts receivable for hospitals and RCM firms. Accounts receivable, or AR, is money a provider has billed but not yet collected, and the older a claim gets, the less likely it is to ever be paid. Working that backlog means checking payer portals, calling insurers to ask why a claim is stuck, reading denials, drafting appeals, and resubmitting corrected claims. It is repetitive, phone-heavy grunt work, and it is exactly what LunaBill automates with a team of coordinated AI agents.

The company behind it is LunaHealth Technologies, Inc., which is Y Combinator backed. We looked at how it frames itself, and the pitch is narrow and specific on purpose: this is not a full billing suite, it is an automation layer that sits on top of your existing systems and grinds through follow-up work. The agents post payments, reference numbers, and notes directly back into your EHR, so the recovered money and the paper trail land where your staff already work. That focus is both the appeal and the limitation. LunaBill does one slice of the revenue cycle, the follow-up on stuck and denied claims, and it is betting that slice is painful enough to be a business on its own.

What Are LunaBill’s Key Features?

AI Payer Phone Calls

The headline feature is agents that place actual phone calls to insurance companies. They navigate the IVR menus, wait through the queues, and get live answers from representatives about claim status. Anyone in billing knows that calling payers is the single most time-draining task in the job, often 20-plus minutes per claim of hold music and transfers. LunaBill reports cutting follow-up time from roughly 22 minutes to about 4 minutes per claim in its case study. Offloading these calls is the clearest, most tangible win the platform offers.

Portal Monitoring and Status Checks

LunaBill’s agents continuously check payer portals for claim status and denial codes, so nothing sits unwatched. Instead of a staffer periodically logging into a dozen payer portals, the agents monitor them and surface which claims need action. This is the unglamorous backbone of AR work, and automating it means aged claims get caught while they are still recoverable rather than after the appeal window has closed.

Denial Management and Appeals

When a claim is denied, LunaBill reads the denial, drafts an appeal, and files it with supporting documentation. Denials are where the real money hides, because appealing them is tedious and understaffed teams let them slide. By reading the denial reason and generating the appeal automatically, LunaBill attacks the exact work that most often goes undone. The quality of those appeals is what determines whether this feature actually recovers money or just generates paperwork, and that is where an early vendor’s track record matters most.

Claim Resubmission and EHR Posting

The agents also correct common claim errors, like wrong payer IDs or coordination-of-benefits problems, and resubmit the fixed claims. When payment lands, LunaBill posts the payment, reference numbers, and notes back into your EHR. Closing that loop matters, because automation that recovers money but dumps the reconciliation back on your staff only moves the bottleneck. LunaBill says it processes over 90,000 payer interactions a month, which suggests the pipeline is built to run at real volume rather than as a pilot.

How Much Does LunaBill Cost?

LunaBill’s pricing is refreshingly clear for this category: it charges 1.5% of the net collections it recovers. There are no upfront license fees, no implementation fees, and no charge on claims where it recovers nothing. Billing happens only after payment is received. In other words, it is pure performance-based pricing, and you pay a small cut only of money that would otherwise likely have stayed uncollected.

That model is the strongest thing about LunaBill from a buyer’s perspective, because it flips the usual software risk. Competitors keep pricing custom and opaque. Adonis, which has raised over $95M, quotes based on scope and volume and publishes nothing. Thoughtful AI sells per-agent, outcome-based contracts, also demo-led with no list prices. Waystar, the established enterprise RCM platform, is likewise custom. Against that wall of hidden pricing, LunaBill naming a flat 1.5% of recovered collections is unusually honest and easy to reason about.

The catch is that percentage-of-collections pricing can get expensive at scale. For a hospital recovering large dollar amounts, 1.5% of net collections is still a real number, and you should model it against the fully loaded cost of the staff time it replaces. LunaBill’s own case study claims cost per claim dropped from $22.28 to $2.00, which is a dramatic figure, but it comes from a single customer and should be treated as a best case rather than a guarantee. The right way to buy this is to run a bounded pilot on a defined backlog and measure recovery against the 1.5% fee before committing broadly.

Who is LunaBill Best For?

Use LunaBill if you are a hospital or RCM firm sitting on a large backlog of aged accounts receivable and denials that your team cannot work fast enough. The value is highest exactly where claims are old, numerous, and stuck in payer phone queues. Because there is no upfront cost and no fee when nothing is recovered, the downside of running a pilot is genuinely low, which makes it easy to test on a slice of your worst AR.

Skip LunaBill if you are a small practice looking for a complete billing system, because this is not that; it is a follow-up automation layer, not a full RCM suite like Quill Bills or Tebra. Skip it if you need the front end of the cycle, eligibility, coding, and clean claim submission, since LunaBill focuses on the back end after claims are already out. And be cautious if you cannot tolerate early-vendor risk, because the public evidence is thin and denials are a domain where sloppy automation can do harm as well as good.

Best LunaBill Alternatives

Adonis

Adonis is the well-funded heavyweight, pairing a revenue-intelligence platform with agentic AI that autonomously works denials and underpayments across the revenue cycle. It has raised over $95M, counts large systems like Mount Sinai as customers, and is built with enterprise-grade governance. Pricing is custom and unpublished. Choose Adonis if you are a large system that wants a broader, better-resourced platform and can run a full enterprise sales process, and you do not need LunaBill’s simple pay-per-recovery model.

Thoughtful AI

Thoughtful AI is the closest peer on approach, selling productized AI agents for RCM under outcome-based contracts. Like LunaBill, it automates the financial workflows of the revenue cycle, and it also ties pricing to results, though the exact rates stay custom and demo-led. It skews toward practices and groups automating eligibility, claims, and posting. Pick Thoughtful AI if you want AI-agent automation across more of the cycle than just AR follow-up and prefer a slightly more established vendor.

Waystar

Waystar is the established enterprise RCM platform, a mature, broad system covering claims, denials, payments, and analytics for large healthcare organizations. It is proven and comprehensive where LunaBill is young and narrow, but it is a heavier, custom-priced platform that expects a real implementation. Go with Waystar if you want a full, battle-tested revenue cycle system rather than a lightweight automation layer bolted onto your existing tools.

Final Verdict: Is LunaBill Worth It?

LunaBill has one of the cleaner pitches in a murky category. The AI phone agents attack the most hated task in billing, the pay-per-recovery pricing is honest and low-risk, and posting results straight back into the EHR shows the team understands the actual workflow rather than just the demo. For a hospital or RCM firm with a wall of aged AR, running a pilot costs almost nothing and could recover money that was otherwise gone. On pricing transparency alone it embarrasses better-funded rivals.

It lands at 6.2 because promise is not the same as proof. The scope is deliberately narrow, covering only AR follow-up rather than the full cycle, the public evidence rests largely on a single case study with eye-catching numbers, and the company is early in a domain where trust and track record are everything. If you have aged AR to recover and the appetite to run a measured pilot, LunaBill is worth a look precisely because the pricing removes the downside. If you need a complete billing platform or the reassurance of a long track record, a broader or more established option like Adonis or Waystar is the safer call.