How does Phreesia's Q2 2026 results compare to those of its direct competitors in the healthcare technology sector?
Short answer:
At this moment there are no actual Q2 2026 financial results for Phreesia to compare with its peers. The press release you referenced only announces that Phreesia will publish its Q2 2026 results on September 4 2025 (after the close of market trading). Until those results are released, any side‑by‑side performance analysis against other healthcare‑technology companies is necessarily speculative.
Why a direct comparison isn’t possible today
| What we know from the announcement | What we still need to know |
|---|---|
| Company: Phreesia (ticker PHR) | Revenue (total, YoY growth, segment breakdown) |
| Timing: Results will be disclosed after market close on Thursday, Sept. 4 2025 | Profitability (GAAP/Non‑GAAP net income, EBITDA, operating margin) |
| Context: The release is classified as an Earnings event by Business Wire. | Key operating metrics (e.g., patient‑engagement platform usage, number of health‑system contracts, recurring‑revenue %, churn rate) |
| No quantitative data were provided in the news item. | Guidance for the remainder of FY 2026 (revenue outlook, cash‑flow expectations) |
Because none of the above financial figures have been disclosed yet, we cannot calculate or comment on:
- Top‑line performance (e.g., “Phreesia’s Q2 revenue grew 12 % vs. Q1”)
- Bottom‑line performance (e.g., “net loss narrowed to $15 M from $22 M”)
- Margin trends (e.g., “EBITDA margin expanded to 8 %”)
- Operational KPIs (e.g., “platform adoption rose to 1.2 M active patients”)
How you can evaluate Phreesia’s results once they’re out
When the September 4 release becomes public, you can benchmark Phreesia against the most relevant competitors in the health‑care technology (HCT) and patient‑engagement space. Below is a ready‑to‑use framework that will let you slot in the actual numbers and draw a clear comparison.
1. Identify the “direct‑competitor” set
| Primary competitors (publicly traded) | Typical product overlap |
|---|---|
| Epic Systems Corp. (Epic) – large EHR & patient portal | Integrated EHR, patient‑engagement, telehealth |
| Cerner Corp. (now part of Oracle) – EHR & population health | EHR, analytics, patient‑access tools |
| Allscripts (NASDAQ: ALLS) – ambulatory EHR & care coordination | EHR, practice‑management, patient‑engagement |
| Athenahealth (private, but often benchmarked) – cloud‑based EHR & revenue‑cycle | EHR, revenue‑cycle, patient portal |
| eClinicalWorks (private) – ambulatory EHR & telehealth | EHR, telehealth, patient‑engagement |
| HealthSnap (private) – patient‑intake & scheduling SaaS | Front‑door intake, scheduling, digital check‑in |
| Zocdoc (private) – patient‑acquisition marketplace | Digital front‑door, appointment booking |
If you have a narrower definition of “direct” (e.g., only firms whose core offering is *patient‑intake and pre‑visit automation), you might focus on **HealthSnap, Zocdoc, and eClinicalWorks.*
2. Core metrics to compare (once data are available)
| Metric | Why it matters | Typical source |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue (total & YoY growth) | Gauges market traction and scaling speed. | SEC filings, earnings releases. |
| Recurring‑revenue % (subscription vs. professional services) | Indicates sustainability of cash‑flows. | Segment footnotes in 10‑Q. |
| EBITDA margin | Reflects operating efficiency in a high‑growth SaaS model. | Income statement. |
| Net loss / profit | Bottom‑line health, especially for pre‑profit SaaS firms. | Income statement. |
| Adjusted free cash flow | Shows ability to fund growth without external capital. | Cash‑flow statement, management commentary. |
| Customer‑count (health‑systems, providers) | Direct indicator of market penetration. | Investor presentations, press releases. |
| Patient‑engagement volume (e.g., check‑ins, digital forms) | Core usage metric for Phreesia’s platform. | Management commentary, KPI tables. |
| Average contract length / churn | Predicts revenue stability. | Management discussion. |
| Guidance vs. consensus | Market expectations vs. actual outlook. | Analyst estimates (e.g., Bloomberg, FactSet). |
3. Example of a “quick‑compare” table (populate after Sept 4)
| Company | Q2 2026 Revenue (M) | YoY Rev Growth | Adj. EBITDA (M) | Adj. EBITDA % | Net Income (Loss) (M) | Recurring‑Rev % | Patients Engaged (M) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phreesia (PHR) | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Epic (private) | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Cerner (Oracle) | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Allscripts (ALLS) | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| HealthSnap (private) | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
When the numbers are released, fill in the blanks and calculate “% difference vs. median competitor” to see whether Phreesia is out‑performing, on‑par, or lagging.
4. What to watch for in the Phreesia release
| Potential red‑flags | Potential green‑flags |
|---|---|
| Revenue contraction (e.g., negative YoY growth) | Revenue acceleration (double‑digit YoY growth) |
| Widening net loss without clear path to profitability | Loss narrowing and clear profitability timeline |
| Decline in patient‑engagement volume (e.g., fewer digital check‑ins) | Strong growth in patient‑engagement (e.g., >10 % MoM) |
| High churn (loss of major health‑system contracts) | New multi‑year contracts with large health‑systems |
| Reduced guidance (lower FY 2026 outlook) | Raised guidance above consensus estimates |
| Liquidity concerns (cash burn > $100 M per quarter) | Positive free‑cash‑flow or reduced cash‑burn rate |
5. Sources you’ll need after the release
- SEC Form 10‑Q (or 8‑K) for Q2 2026 – the official, itemized financial statements.
- Phreesia’s investor presentation/webcast transcript – often includes KPI tables and forward‑looking statements.
- Consensus estimates from Bloomberg, FactSet, or Thomson Reuters – to gauge whether results beat or miss expectations.
- Competitor filings (e.g., Allscripts 10‑Q, Cerner’s Oracle‑parent filings) for the same quarter.
- Third‑party analyst reports (e.g., from Baird, Jefferies, or Cowen) that often provide “peer‑group” benchmarking tables.
Bottom line (for now)
- No Q2 2026 data are publicly available for Phreesia yet.
- A direct performance comparison with other healthcare‑technology firms cannot be performed until the September 4, 2025 release.
- When the results are out, use the framework above to quickly assess Phreesia’s standing on revenue growth, profitability, cash‑flow, and core usage metrics relative to peers such as Epic, Cerner (Oracle), Allscripts, HealthSnap, and others.
Next steps: Keep an eye on the market on Sept 4 2025 for Phreesia’s earnings press release and the accompanying SEC filing. Once those documents are available, you can plug the numbers into the comparison table and evaluate whether Phreesia is gaining market share, improving margins, or lagging behind its competitors in the fast‑evolving healthcare‑technology landscape.
Other Questions About This News
Are there any macroeconomic or regulatory factors that could influence the interpretation of the results?
Are there any non‑recurring items or accounting adjustments in the Q2 2026 results that traders should normalize when assessing ongoing performance?
How will the Q2 2026 performance compare to the company's historical trends and analyst expectations?
What are the key financial metrics (revenue, EPS, guidance) that will be disclosed in the Q2 2026 results?
What impact will the results have on Phreesia's stock price and trading volume on the release day?
What is the market's sentiment and positioning ahead of the release, and how might that affect post‑release price action?
Will the company provide forward guidance for Q3 2026 and the full fiscal year, and what does that imply for valuation multiples?
Are there any notable changes in the company's business model, partnerships, or product offerings that could affect future earnings?
Does the earnings release include any updates on cash flow, capital expenditures, or balance sheet strength that could impact liquidity considerations?