Cerbo alternative

A chart that assumes the long consult

Cerbo’s audience overlaps with ours: practitioners who are tired of generic EMRs built for ten-minute visits. The difference I care about is whether the file still feels like a long interview when you are three portals deep in lab PDFs.

Practiceflow keeps the interview, the medication overview, the lab request and the plan on one chart. Templates and snippets are yours. A colleague can open the record without calling you. That is the EMR close-up.

Isabelle Arts, a functional medicine doctor using the product, wrote: “With the software, a patient-personalized treatment plan is ready in a matter of minutes.” That is her sentence. I will not dress it up as a benchmark against Cerbo.

Labs you already use, on the same timeline

Functional medicine labs do not arrive from one vendor in one layout. A Cerbo alternative has to let you request from the labs you already work with and park results on the patient file — standard and functional ranges in one place if you work that way.

Practiceflow logs the request against the patient, keeps the result in the same file, and lets you reorder a repeat panel from the previous request. Keep the lab you already use: drop in the PDF and the values land on the chart — the parser is live. Rupa and Fullscript are connecting now, into the same file, not a second portal tour.

Follow-up is not a separate app. If the retest date is not next to the markers you ordered, it is a sticky note. Long protocols stall at month three for operational reasons more often than for clinical ones.

Try the file, do not trust a landing page

See pricing for paid plans — by client volume, in dollars. Start is free, no credit card.

If you want the category view, read functional medicine software. If you want every screen, see features. If you want a baseline on whether the practice can grow, take the practice scan.

Look at Cerbo. Look at Practiceflow. Choose the chart that matches the consult you still sit in.

I am still in clinic. That is the only reason this page exists. If your visits are short and labs are rare, a different chart may be kinder. If your visits look like mine, the file has to hold the interview, the labs and the plan without a second unpaid shift.

What I would not do when you compare

I would not ask you to migrate in a weekend. I would not pretend Cerbo cannot chart. The numbers below are published prices next to ours; the rest you should judge by opening both products on the same shape of visit: a long-form intake, labs already in flight, a plan that has to include more than one modality.

One thing that is true right now, and only for now: we move you over at no charge. Charts, calendar, labs — we do the move with you. Not every Cerbo field maps 1:1, so it is a real handover, not a weekend dump. That offer will not stay open forever. Your existing patient records, protocols, and templates come over; you sign in on Monday and the file remembers.

Practiceflow is functional medicine software with that visit as the default. Start is free. No credit card. See pricing.

If you want a baseline on whether the practice can grow, take the practice scan. Start for Free is https://app.practiceflow.io/signup.

Cerbo and OptiMantra, one company — the factual differences

First the housekeeping: Cerbo and OptiMantra merged in December 2025. One company, two products still running. So compare them as one entry on the shortlist, not two — and here is where Practiceflow sits next to them, facts only.

Seats. Cerbo bills almost every login: a full-time prescribing provider is $281/mo, additional staff $63/mo, restricted access a one-time $15. In Practiceflow the only paid seat is the practitioner with their own calendar, who signs the plan — each plan includes one to four, then +$49/mo per extra. Admin and assistants log in and do not show up on the invoice.

Setup. Cerbo charges $1,195 to start ($595 for a new micro practice). Practiceflow charges $0 — you start at https://app.practiceflow.io/signup and plans run Starter $0, Beginner $49, Growth $79, Advanced $139, Unlimited $249 per month by client count, with an extra practitioner at +$49/mo after the included count.

Patient portal. Cerbo prices the portal at +$79/mo. In Practiceflow the portal is included on every plan.

Video. Cerbo adds video at +$27 per provider. In Practiceflow an online consult is a consult type in the agenda; the file stays open during the call.

Labs. Cerbo has 60+ bidirectional lab integrations — a real strength. Practiceflow takes any lab you already use, and the live AI parser files a lab PDF into results on the chart. Rupa and Fullscript are connecting now, into the same file.

AI. Cerbo sells a scribe as an add-on ($29–59 per provider). Practiceflow writes the report from the file — intake, labs, journals — and from the consult transcription. You edit, then you sign. Yesterday’s journals become a summary.

One worked example, not an average. Two full-time prescribing providers and two additional staff on Cerbo’s public list prices: 2×$281 + 2×$63 + $79 for the patient portal = $767/mo, $9,204 a year — $821/mo ($9,852 a year) if both providers also take 1:1 video at $27 each. The same clinic on Practiceflow runs Growth at $79/mo ($948 a year) while the client count fits — both prescribing providers sit inside Growth’s two included practitioners — or Advanced at $139/mo ($1,668 a year) at 600 clients, also with two included. The two staff are admin seats at $0. That is about $8–9k a year on this example clinic (two prescribing providers, two staff, Cerbo list prices including their portal). Not an average of our customers. Cerbo’s setup fee — $1,195, or $595 for a new micro practice — is a year-one extra on top, not inside that number.

Cerbo can chart. This is the invoice math and the shape of the file, said plainly — I am still in clinic, and that is the comparison I can stand behind.

Cerbo vs Practiceflow, at a glance

Published list prices, August 2026. Example is not an average.