Hesper AI

Comparison

Hesper AI vs Tractable

One estimates legitimate damage. The other investigates suspected fraud.

TL;DR

Tractable uses computer vision to estimate auto and property damage from photos, automating the appraisal step for legitimate claims. Hesper AI runs full investigations on suspected fraud, end-to-end in 2-4 hours. They sit on opposite sides of the claims workflow - Tractable speeds up clear cases, Hesper resolves suspicious ones. Most carriers benefit from both.

On this page

The core difference: estimating vs investigatingWhat Tractable does wellWhat Tractable does not doHow they work togetherComparison tableWho should use whatFAQ

The core difference: estimating vs investigating

Tractable's product is damage appraisal. A claimant uploads photos of their damaged vehicle or property, and Tractable's models return a structured estimate the adjuster can review and approve. The goal is throughput on routine claims. Hesper AI's product is fraud investigation. When a claim looks suspicious - staged accident, exaggerated injury, inflated property loss - Hesper deploys an investigation agent that gathers evidence across 15 phases, cross-references statements, runs document forensics, and produces an audit-ready report. Tractable accelerates the path to payment. Hesper makes sure the path is legitimate.

What Tractable does well

Tractable is the recognized leader in AI-powered claims appraisal. It serves GEICO, Tokio Marine, MS&AD, Admiral, and 30+ other insurers. Its computer vision models have been trained on tens of millions of vehicle damage photos. Strengths: photo-based damage assessment, repair cost prediction, total-loss triage, integration with most major claims platforms, established regulatory acceptance in the US, UK, EU, and Japan. For carriers trying to handle higher claim volumes per adjuster on routine auto and property claims, Tractable is a proven solution.

What Tractable does not do

Tractable does not investigate fraud. It is not built to detect staged accidents, identify medical mills, verify claimant identity beyond the photo submission, cross-reference statements, analyze document authenticity beyond visual review, or generate investigation reports. When a claim is suspicious, Tractable's appraisal can become evidence in a downstream investigation - but the investigation itself happens elsewhere. For carriers losing money to claims that pass automated appraisal but should have been flagged, Tractable is not the fix.

How they work together

The two products are complementary, not competitive. The most common stack: Tractable handles 70-80% of routine auto and property claims through automated appraisal. Claims flagged by detection (FRISS, Shift, or Hesper's built-in detection) route to Hesper for full investigation. Tractable owns the legitimate-claim acceleration; Hesper owns the suspicious-claim resolution. Together they cover both ends of the claims volume problem - speed on the easy ones, depth on the hard ones.

Comparison table

DimensionHesper AITractable
Primary functionFraud investigation automationAuto/property damage estimating
InputFlagged or referred claimPhotos of damage
OutputAudit-ready investigation reportRepair cost estimate, total-loss triage
Investigation phases15 autonomous phases per claimNone - estimating only
Time per claim2-4 hours (full investigation)Minutes (estimate)
Document forensicsPre-OCR pixel-level, 200+ fraud signalsDamage detection only
Statement analysisCross-references all statementsNot included
Evidence gatheringNICB, ISO, OSINT, public recordsPhoto analysis only
Lines of businessAuto, property, workers comp, liability, health-adjacentAuto, property
Founded20242014

Who should use what

Hesper AI

Carriers losing money to claims that need investigation

  • SIU cannot investigate all flagged claims
  • Need audit-ready investigation reports
  • Fraud spans staged accidents, medical mills, document fraud
  • Detection alone is not resolving the problem

Tractable

Carriers trying to scale routine claim throughput

  • Auto or property claims volume is the bottleneck
  • Adjusters are stuck on estimating, not investigating
  • Want to settle legitimate claims faster
  • Photo-based intake is already standard

Both together

Carriers handling both volume and fraud exposure

  • Tractable speeds up the 70-80% legitimate claims
  • Hesper resolves the 10-15% suspicious ones
  • Reduces adjuster load on both sides of the workflow

Frequently asked questions

No. Tractable and Hesper solve different problems. Tractable automates damage appraisal for legitimate claims. Hesper investigates suspected fraud. They sit on opposite sides of the claims workflow. Carriers that have Tractable for appraisal still need an investigation solution for flagged claims - that is where Hesper fits.

Tractable is not built as a fraud detection product. Its computer vision can flag inconsistencies in photo submissions (for example, damage that does not match the claimed incident), but it does not run cross-carrier checks, statement analysis, document forensics on supporting paperwork, or full investigation. For fraud detection at scale, carriers typically use FRISS, Shift Technology, or Hesper's built-in detection.

Depends on the bottleneck. If routine auto claims are stacking up and adjusters are bogged down on estimating, Tractable is the higher-leverage purchase. If flagged claims are sitting uninvestigated and the SIU cannot keep up, Hesper is the higher-leverage purchase. The two purchases address different cost centers.

Related comparisons

Hesper AI vs FRISSHesper AI vs Shift TechnologyTractable alternativesWhy flagged claims never get investigatedWhat is an SIU?

See Hesper AI investigate a real claim

30-minute live walkthrough. Custom to your claim types.

Request a Demo