Oasys vs TheraNest: Which Is Better for a Group Practice?
By Steven Van ·
Oasys's vendor-written comparison for group practices covers supervision, payroll, $80 per clinician pricing and TheraNest migration, and concedes where TheraNest wins.
Oasys has published a comparison of its platform against TheraNest for group practices, covering supervision, payroll, pricing at scale and migration. Oasys Health says it draws on conversations with practice owners, several of them current or former TheraNest customers, plus what both vendors publish about their own pricing and features. The post is vendor-authored, and it names TheraNest as the better fit for some practices.
Where the two differ
- Supervision: Oasys says TheraNest has one supervision setting, so an independently credentialed provisional clinician gets the same forced co-sign as an intern. Oasys configures supervision per role and per supervisor-supervisee relationship, so one clinician can be exempted without switching it off for others.
- Payroll: The post says neither TheraNest nor SimplePractice models payroll. It cites one group practice that spent roughly 20 hours a week of a billing manager's time rebuilding compensation in a spreadsheet. Oasys models revenue splits and per-therapist overrides, produces the payroll ledger as an output, and can gate payout on notes being signed and approved.
- Billing: TheraNest billing is described as straightforward for practices that do not need heavy customization. Oasys keeps claims, denials and reconciliation in the same system as the clinical record and payroll ledger.
Pricing
TheraNest starts around $29 per therapist per month, tiered by active clients rather than seats. The post concedes this is cheaper at low or fluctuating caseload, such as seasonal swings or part-time clinicians with light rosters. Oasys is a flat $80 per clinician per month on an annual contract, with no add-on tiers. Oasys argues that a busy group practice with a full, steady caseload can end up paying more under active-client pricing, and that the bill is harder to forecast. The prices were verified on 30 July 2026.
Migration
The post quotes one practice that moved to TheraNest and said it did not get the support it needed despite paying for white-glove onboarding, with months of cleanup afterward. Oasys calls this one practice, not a pattern, and suggests asking TheraNest for migration references in writing. It says migration is the question it is asked about most, and that group practices often carry eight to eleven years of records. Rather than promise a smooth switch, it invites practices to ask what moving a specific system would involve.
Who should choose which
Oasys recommends itself for practices with five or more clinicians, especially those with supervisees or provisionally licensed clinicians, payroll rebuilt in a spreadsheet each month, or a need for role-based permissions. It recommends TheraNest for practices with a seasonally fluctuating caseload that value average cost over predictable cost and will do migration diligence upfront. The full comparison is in the original post.
