Jane App vs Owl Practice

Jane App scores 8.0/10 vs 7.0/10. Best for: Multidisciplinary clinics where physio, chiro, massage, and counselors share one system instead of juggling separate tools per discipline.

Jane App logo

Jane App

8.0
Better overall
vs
Owl Practice logo

Owl Practice

7.0

Jane App scores higher overall at 8.0/10 vs 7.0/10. Buy Jane if you run a multidisciplinary clinic or want the highest-rated UX in the category. Skip if you are a solo US therapist who wants straightforward USD pricing and a free trial before committing.

Jane App
Owl Practice

Rank

#4 of 41

Rank

#28 of 41

Features

16/18

Features

15/18

Starting at

$54/mo

Starting at

$25/mo

User reviews

4/5 (507)

User reviews

4/5 (72)

What they cost

Jane App Owl Practice
Starting at CA$54 /mo $25 /mo
Free trial No 14 days
Number of plans 3 4
Jane App pricing verified: 2026-04-01 Owl Practice pricing verified: 2026-04-01

What the pricing really means

At first glance, Owl Practice looks cheaper at $25/month vs $54/month. But sticker price is only part of the story. Look at what is included on the base plan, how many users you get, and whether you need add-ons to get the features you actually need. The $99/month plan that requires $200 in add-ons is actually more expensive than the $250/month plan that includes everything.

Where Jane App wins

  • 4.8 Capterra rating is the highest in the practice management category, and 491 reviews back it up
  • Built for multidisciplinary clinics so physio, chiro, massage, and counselors all work in one system with discipline-specific templates
  • CAD pricing means US-based practices effectively pay 25-30% less than the sticker price
  • Free unlimited SMS reminders on Practice plan and up, while competitors charge per message

Where Owl Practice wins

  • Built specifically for Canadian mental health professionals. PIPEDA/PHIPA compliance, Canadian billing codes, and provincial insurance requirements are all native, not bolted on
  • Measurement-based care tools on the Pro plan let you track client outcomes with standardized assessments, which most competitors charge extra for or skip entirely
  • Admin staff accounts are free. You only pay per clinician who sees clients, which saves real money in a group practice
  • APA-endorsed, which gives it credibility if you are a psychologist looking for something vetted by your professional association

Where Jane App falls short

  • No free trial at all, only guided demos, so you commit before testing with your actual workflow
  • Insurance billing is an add-on at CAD $20/mo plus CAD $5 per full-time practitioner, not included in base price
  • Only 16 G2 reviews suggests smaller US market presence and less community support stateside
  • CAD pricing can confuse US-based practices when credit card statements show different amounts than expected

Where Owl Practice falls short

  • Small review count (72 on Capterra). The user community is much smaller than SimplePractice or TherapyNotes, so you will find fewer tutorials and forum answers
  • No mobile app. Managing your schedule between sessions means logging into a browser
  • Insurance claims cost $0.25 each and eligibility checks $0.15 each on top of your monthly fee. Those per-transaction costs add up if you file 100+ claims a month
  • The introductory pricing ($25/month for Starter) jumps significantly after the promo period, so check the regular rates before committing

Who is each product built for?

Jane App

Target: 1-15 practitioners

Buy Jane if you run a multidisciplinary clinic or want the highest-rated UX in the category. Skip if you are a solo US therapist who wants straightforward USD pricing and a free trial before committing.

PhysiotherapistsChiropractorsMassage TherapistsCounselors

Owl Practice

Target: 1-10 clinicians

Buy Owl Practice if you are a Canadian therapist or psychologist who needs PIPEDA compliance and Canadian billing built in from day one. Skip it if you are US-based or want a large user community with plenty of third-party resources.

PsychologistsTherapistsCounselorsSocial Workers

Feature comparison

Feature Jane App Owl Practice
Compliance & Security
HIPAA compliant
Telehealth / video sessions
Secure messaging
Scheduling & Clients
Online scheduling
Client portal
Intake forms / assessments
Automated reminders
Clinical
Progress notes / documentation
Treatment plans
E-prescribing
Outcome measures / assessments
Billing & Payments
Insurance billing / claims
Payment processing
Superbill generation
Automated billing
Platform
Group practice support
Mobile app
Integrations / API

Common questions

Jane App scores 8.0/10 vs Owl Practice's 7.0/10 in our ranking. Jane App is the better pick for 1-15 practitioners. Owl Practice is better if you need canadian psychologists and therapists who want an ehr built for their regulatory and billing requirements without paying us-centric software prices.

Jane App starts at $54/month. Owl Practice starts at $25/month. Watch for add-on costs — the base price often does not include all features. Pricing last verified 2026-04-01.

Jane App: No free trial. Owl Practice: Yes, 14-day free trial. Always test with your actual workflow before committing to an annual plan.

Jane App covers 16 of 18 features we track. Owl Practice covers 15 of 18. Jane App has broader feature coverage, but more features does not always mean better — pick the tool that covers what your business actually needs.

Yes, Jane App has a mobile app. Owl Practice does not.

Yes. The main effort is migrating your data (customer lists, job history, invoices). Plan for 1-2 weeks of overlap where you run both. Most healthcare practice management tools can import CSV data. Ask both vendors about migration support before you sign.

The bottom line

Pick Jane App if...

Multidisciplinary clinics where physio, chiro, massage, and counselors share one system instead of juggling separate tools per discipline.

Pick Owl Practice if...

Canadian psychologists and therapists who want an EHR built for their regulatory and billing requirements without paying US-centric software prices

Related comparisons