Best ABA Data Collection Software (2026)

Great data collection is table stakes; what separates the best is what happens to the data next. We ranked the 8 leading tools on capture, graphing, all-in-one depth, and pricing — starting with our own, and why.

The short answer

The best ABA data collection software in 2026, ranked: 1. Wilma® (best overall all-in-one), 2. Ensora/Catalyst (best-known standalone data tool), 3. Motivity (best modular), 4. Hi Rasmus (best clinical & curriculum depth), 5. Theralytics (best value), 6. ABA Matrix (best usage-based), 7. Raven Health (best for startups wanting managed billing), 8. Aloha ABA (best affordable).

  • Wilma — overall — all-in-one, done right
  • Ensora (Catalyst) — Best-known data collection (Catalyst)
  • Motivity — modular all-in-one
  • Hi Rasmus — clinical & curriculum depth
  • Theralytics — value all-in-one
  • ABA Matrix — usage-based all-in-one
  • Raven Health — for startups wanting managed billing
  • Aloha ABA — affordable practice management

At a glance

ABA data collection software compared

PlatformBest forAll-in-oneAIEVVPricing
1WilmaPractices wanting capture that feeds notes and billingNativeAgentic (add-on)NativeFlat $30/user, 10 min
2Ensora (Catalyst)Teams that want the proven Catalyst data toolBroadSomeYesQuote-based
3MotivityData-collection-first, configurable practicesModularSomeYesPer module
4Hi RasmusClinically-driven, curriculum-heavy teamsCore + add-onsLimitedYesQuote-based
5TheralyticsSmall-to-mid practices wanting valueYesLimitedYesPublished
6ABA MatrixPractices wanting a broad native platformNativeSomeNativeQuote-based
7Raven HealthStartups wanting managed billing bundledYesLimitedYesQuote-based
8Aloha ABACost-sensitive practices with large caseloadsCore + add-onsLimitedIntegrationPer staff

Comparison compiled by Wilma from publicly available information, 2026. “Quote-based” means pricing is not published. All names are trademarks of their respective owners.

Wilma

Wilma is all-in-one done right — built by people who actually ran ABA practices, so every workflow connects end to end and nothing feels bolted on. That cohesion is why providers say "you've thought through everything." Native EHR, data collection, notes, scheduling/EVV, and full billing/RCM on one record; agentic AI and a built-in phone are bonuses on top. Flat $30/user pricing, 10-licence minimum.

The differentiator is what happens after capture: real-time ABC and trial-by-trial data with mastery graphing drafts the note and feeds the claim without re-keying, so the practice runs on one login and one bill instead of separate integrations that drift apart. Data collection is offline-first, and pricing is published and flat at $30/user/month with no per-client fees.

Pros

  • Offline-first real-time capture (ABC, trial-by-trial) with mastery graphing
  • Data drafts notes and feeds billing on one record
  • Flat, published $30/user pricing, 10-licence minimum — no per-client fees
  • Native EVV; agentic AI available as an add-on

Cons

  • Newer platform than the standalone incumbents
  • AI and Phone are paid add-ons, not core

Ensora (Catalyst)

Ensora Health (formerly Therapy Brands) pairs ABA practice management with Ensora Data Collection — the well-known Catalyst tool. A multi-product suite under quote-only pricing.

Catalyst is one of the most battle-tested data-collection tools in ABA, and Ensora wraps it in a broader practice-management suite. The trade-off is a multi-product suite under quote-only pricing, where the pieces are largely acquired products stitched together rather than one natively built record.

Pros

  • Catalyst is a proven, widely used data tool
  • Broad multi-product suite behind it
  • Established vendor with scale

Cons

  • Quote-only pricing
  • Multi-product suite rather than one native record

Motivity

A modular ABA platform offering both data collection and a practice-management module (priced per module, or all-in-one); historically rooted in data collection.

Its configurable data engine is the heritage strength; the practice-management module is newer. Because it is modular you assemble the pieces you need — flexible, but cohesion and cost depend on how many modules you turn on, so a full set of modules can add up.

Pros

  • Highly configurable data collection
  • Modular — pay for what you use
  • Strong clinical data heritage

Cons

  • Per-module pricing adds up
  • PM side younger than the data engine

Hi Rasmus

Clinically deep with a strong curriculum library and supervision tools; relies on partners for medical billing. Per-client, quote-based pricing.

The draw is clinical and curriculum depth plus supervision tooling, which appeals to teams that prize programming over operations. Medical billing leans on partners rather than a native engine, and pricing is per-client and quote-based, so costs scale with caseload rather than staffing.

Pros

  • Deep clinical and curriculum library
  • Supervision tooling built in
  • Strong programming focus

Cons

  • Medical billing relies on partners
  • Per-client, quote-based pricing

Theralytics

A well-reviewed, user-friendly all-in-one (data, scheduling, billing, documentation) popular with small-to-mid practices.

Consistently praised for value and ease of use, it covers the core surface — data, scheduling, billing, documentation — well. Where an agentic all-in-one differs is the AI layer and the broader operations layer that reaches beyond the clinic floor.

Pros

  • Strong value for small-to-mid practices
  • Well-regarded support
  • Genuine all-in-one core

Cons

  • Lighter AI than agentic platforms
  • Smaller ecosystem than incumbents

ABA Matrix

A genuinely broad all-in-one with native billing, EVV, and payroll-style operations, billed on a quote-only, usage-based model.

One of the broader native platforms here, with native billing and EVV plus fast onboarding. The usage-based, quote-only pricing makes cost harder to predict as you scale — the opposite of a flat per-user model.

Pros

  • Broad native platform (billing, EVV, ops)
  • Native EVV
  • Fast onboarding

Cons

  • Quote-only, usage-based pricing
  • Cost less predictable at scale

Raven Health

Aimed at new and growing providers; software offered free bundled with managed billing at about 5% of collections, plus full-service credentialing.

The model is unusual: the software is free when bundled with Raven's managed billing at roughly 5% of collections, plus full-service credentialing. Attractive for startups that want billing handled — but the software cost is really priced into the billing percentage rather than a flat fee.

Pros

  • Software free when bundled with managed billing
  • Full-service credentialing included
  • Good fit for new and growing providers

Cons

  • Requires using their billing at ~5% of collections
  • Cost tied to collections, not a flat fee

Aloha ABA

Transparent per-staff pricing with unlimited clients and well-regarded support. Data collection is a per-client add-on and EVV runs through a Sandata integration.

Attractive for cost-sensitive practices thanks to unlimited clients per staff seat. The trade-off is that data collection is a per-client add-on and EVV runs through a Sandata integration rather than natively — a stitched model versus a single native platform.

Pros

  • Transparent per-staff pricing
  • Unlimited clients per seat
  • Good support reputation

Cons

  • Data collection is a per-client add-on
  • EVV via Sandata integration, not native

Editorial ranking by Wilma based on publicly available information as of 2026. Wilma is our own product; we rank it #1 and explain why, alongside an honest look at the alternatives. All other names are trademarks of their respective owners.

How we evaluated

How we ranked ABA data collection software

Editorial methodology

How this ABA data collection software guide was reviewed

Rankings are written by Wilma's editorial team from public product information, pricing pages, documentation, demos, and operator-facing workflow analysis.

We rank Wilma first where we believe the native all-in-one model is strongest, and we say that plainly. No vendor pays for placement.

We do not list a named BCBA reviewer until a real credentialed reviewer has approved the page for publication. Clinical judgment remains with the treating clinician.

FAQ

Questions buyers ask

What is the best ABA data collection software in 2026?

Is there a free ABA data collection app?

Should data collection be standalone or all-in-one?

Does the data work offline?

Is Wilma HIPAA compliant?

See why Wilma® tops the list.

Thirty minutes. Bring your hardest workflow and a competitor you're comparing — we'll show you the difference.

Keep reading

Related guides on running an ABA practice — the same operation, from a different angle.