ClearChoice alternatives: what the other brands actually charge

Start with what each brand will tell you before you walk in

This is the table we wanted when we started, and the useful part is the gaps in it. On the single most expensive treatment any of these companies sells, three of the five publish no price you can act on.

Read that column of empty cells as the finding rather than as a gap in our research. Aspen prices a crown, a bridge and a snap-in denture down to the dollar and then stops at the treatment that costs the most. ClearChoice publishes a $22,000-wide range and sells three named arch tiers without pricing any of them, which the ClearChoice price list goes through in detail. Nuvia publishes nothing. If you have been searching for alternatives because the ClearChoice number felt unverifiable, the problem is wider than ClearChoice.

The cheapest headline prices are for a different treatment

Aspen Dental publishes $7,534 per arch. ClearChoice publishes $14,000 to $36,000 per arch. It looks like a saving of $7,000 to $28,000 for the same thing, and it is not the same thing. Aspen's own footnote describes the figure as an implant denturewith two implants. A ClearChoice arch uses four to eight and does not come out of your mouth.

Both of Aspen's published arch averages, $7,534 and $8,289, sit inside our own $5,000 to $12,000 band for an implant-retained overdenture. Affordable Dentures' two-implant snap-in arch runs about $5,495 to $7,995 depending on the office, which lands in the same band nearer the floor. Neither figure belongs in a column headed fixed full arch, and the moment you put them there the comparison stops meaning anything.

That is not an argument against the cheaper treatment. An overdenture on two implants is a real solution, it is a third of the price of a fixed arch, and for a lot of people it is the right answer. Our snap-in dentures against All-on-4 comparison sets the two side by side on cost, bone requirements and what daily life is actually like with each. The argument is only against reading a $7,534 snap-in price as a cheaper version of a $20,000 fixed arch, because that is the single most common mistake in this whole category, and the brand pages do very little to stop you making it.

G4 is the only brand that puts a price on the material tier

G4 Dental Implants, marketed for years as G4 by Golpa, publishes two prices for a fixed arch and names the material in each one: $12,500 per arch for a PMMA and titanium bridge, $15,500 per arch for nanoceramic and Trilor, or $27,500 and $33,500 for a full mouth. Base pricing includes general anesthesia, which is a line most quotes bill separately.

That single detail makes G4 the most checkable price in this category, because material is the biggest variable in a full-arch quote and almost nobody prices it in public. Provider-side costing puts the acrylic-to-zirconia upgrade at $5,000 to $13,000 per arch, and we used that figure on the ClearChoice against traditional implants comparison. G4's own published upgrade is $3,000 per arch, or $6,000 across a full mouth. So the only national brand that prices the tier publicly prices it below the independent range, which is worth knowing before you accept that a material upgrade has to cost five figures.

There is a timing detail inside that too. Upgrading from PMMA to nanoceramic at purchase costs $6,000 across a full mouth. Doing it after surgery costs $8,000. Deciding later costs $2,000 more than deciding now, which is a reasonable thing to raise in a consultation when somebody suggests starting cheap and upgrading once you have lived with it.

Where G4's own pages disagree by $9,000

We found this while verifying the figures above, and it is the reason this section is longer than the others. Every page on G4's site carries a banner reading "Arches/Implants starting from $12,500* per arch", and its financing page sets out the two tiers at $12,500 and $15,500 per arch with full mouth at $27,500 and $33,500. Its FAQ page, live at the same time, says the cost "starts from $21,500 for a single arch, or $36,500 for full-mouth restoration."

Both figures are exactly $9,000 above the financing page. Part of the single-arch gap has an explanation sitting in a footnote: the $12,500 PMMA price carries an asterisk reading "Ceramic required for single arch", so a single arch has to be the nanoceramic tier at $15,500. That still leaves $6,000 unexplained on the FAQ's single arch and $9,000 on its full mouth. Whichever page is current, the one to quote in a consultation is the financing page, and the question to ask is which number your contract will carry.

One smaller discrepancy is worth reading the other way. Two arches at $12,500 each would be $25,000, but the published full mouth is $27,500. The nanoceramic tier shows the same thing: $31,000 against a published $33,500. The gap is $2,500 in both tiers, and a difference that consistent looks like a fixed full-mouth fee rather than an error, probably the anesthesia and facility time the footnote mentions. We would rather say that than imply arithmetic failure where there is probably a fee.

The honest total matters more than the headline either way. G4 publishes typical complexity fees of $3,000 to $6,000, "but in extremely rare and complex cases could be higher", which no other brand here quantifies. Add that to the base and a realistic G4 full mouth is roughly $30,500 to $33,500 in the PMMA tier, before airfare, which G4 states is not included. That is still inside ClearChoice's published range and below its midpoint. It is also a number you can arrive at from the company's own pages before anyone asks for your phone number, which is rarer in this category than it should be.

The comparison baseline G4 uses for itself is inflated

G4's financing page claims the US average for a full-mouth All-on-4 is $59,000, and that G4 saves patients up to 50%. We cannot source that $59,000 anywhere. Doubling ClearChoice's published per-arch range gives $28,000 to $72,000. Doubling the independent prosthodontist estimates we collected gives $40,000 to $60,000. Doubling our own standard tier gives $30,000 to $50,000. So $59,000 sits at or above the ceiling of every published range we could find, and is being presented as the average. The published G4 prices hold up well on their own. The saving claimed against that baseline does not.

Aspen Dental publishes two different averages for the same arch

Aspen is the cheapest published brand price in this category and the most widely available, with offices in most states. It is also the only brand here that publishes two different national averages for one treatment, on two of its own pages, both footnoted as an approximation based on 2026 internal data.

An implant denture is $7,534 per arch on the implants cost page and $8,289 on the implant dentures page, a difference of $755, with ranges that do not even share a floor: $6,102 to $10,638 against $7,628 to $13,297. The single tooth gets the same treatment, $3,571 in a pricing tile and $4,259 in the FAQ further down the same page, with two different ranges attached. Our own single-tooth model is $3,000 to $6,000, which contains all of it, and our single tooth implant cost breakdown splits that into post, abutment and crown.

The bigger thing to notice is a footnote rather than a figure. Those averages are the national out-of-pocket costfor members of the Aspen Dental Savings Plan, which costs $49 a year, is available in select offices, and which Aspen states in capitals is not insurance. The advertised price has a membership inside it. That is a smaller version of the same thing ClearChoice does when it footnotes its range as an average paid after all available discounts, and it is why two brands' headline numbers can never be compared without reading what is underneath them.

Three more Aspen specifics worth having before a consultation. Its 20% off implants offer expires 12/31/26, cannot be combined with other discounts, and insured patients get whichever is greater, the discount or their plan pricing. Its warranty runs 25 years limited on the titanium implant and 5 to 10 years on the prosthetic, which is the most generous published warranty structure of the five. And Aspen states plainly that it does not accept Medicaid, which matters because Medicaid adult dental coverage is the first thing anyone on a tight budget should check. Our affordable implants page covers what else is available at that end of the market.

Affordable Dentures prices per office, and the spread is the point

Affordable Dentures & Implants is the only chain here that publishes a price list per office rather than a national range. Every location has its own pricing page, and the figures move between them. A two-implant SNAPSecure arch runs about $5,495 at the Lexington, Kentucky office and about $7,995 at West Palm Beach, Florida. That is a 45% difference for one product inside one chain, which is a cleaner demonstration of regional pricing than any national average can give you.

Individual implants are about $1,340 each and a single-tooth implant is estimated nationally at about $1,350, which are the lowest published implant prices of the five brands by a wide margin. Conventional dentures start at roughly $924 for an economy arch and around $2,225 for the top tier. Financing examples include $0 down over 24 equal payments at 0% APR, and a longer option at 144 months and 11.99% APR, which is worth modelling before signing: a long term at that rate is where a cheap headline price quietly stops being cheap.

Two caveats, stated rather than buried. These are starting prices set office by office, so your own office's page is the only one that describes your quote. And this chain blocks automated access to its site, so unlike Aspen and G4 we could not read its pages directly; the figures above are attributed to the named office pricing pages as published and indexed, not to a national list, because there is no national list. Before you act on any of them, open your own office's pricing page.

Nuvia publishes nothing, and blocks the attempt

Nuvia Dental Implant Centers market the strongest promise in the category: permanent zirconia teeth within 24 hours of surgery, no temporary denture, skipping what the company describes as a 10 month or longer wait for final teeth. There is no published price attached to it anywhere on the site. Every automated request we made to nuviasmiles.com returned a bot challenge, including the request for its own sitemap, so there is no price to read whether you arrive as a person or as a crawler.

What exists instead is patient-reported. RealDentalCosts, reviewed 31 May 2026, collects roughly $22,000 to $32,000 per arch and $40,000 to $60,000 for both arches, states plainly that Nuvia does not publish prices, and reports Nuvia financing at about $250 to $450 a month per arch and $450 to $900 for a full mouth. On those figures Nuvia is the most expensive of the five brands, and we would rather label that as the weakest evidence on this page than present it with the same confidence as a figure we read off a company's own price list.

The 24-hour claim itself comes with caveats the company publishes alongside it: not everyone who attends a consultation is medically cleared for permanent teeth in 24 hours, and follow-up appointments are required to confirm the implants have integrated. That last point is the one to hold onto. Getting the final bridge on day one does not shorten osseointegration, which runs for months on every route, including this one. Our same-day implants page covers what the research says about loading implants immediately and what it costs.

The fees that arrive after the headline price

This is where the ranking changes. Four of these brands advertise a starting price and one publishes a maintenance price list, and the second thing is worth more than a few thousand dollars off the first. Every line below is quoted from the brand that publishes it.

Read that table as a list of questions rather than a list of prices. Nearly every line is something you will eventually pay on any route, from any provider. G4 is not more expensive because it publishes $500 for an annual re-care visit; every provider charges for that visit and one of them tells you the number. The same goes for its warranty conditions, which are the most specific we found anywhere: the warranty runs 2 years on a PMMA bridge and 5 on nanoceramic from the delivery date, it does not restart when a bridge is replaced under it, and it is voided by nicotine use, with a positive test after a failure voiding both the surgical and prosthetic cover. An HbA1c above 7 needs a physician's review, and missing the first re-care visit at 4 to 6 months voids standing.

Those terms are strict. They are also roughly what the clinical evidence would predict, since smoking is one of the few variables with a statistically significant effect on implant failure in the 10-year data we went through on the traditional implants comparison. A provider writing that down is telling you what it already knows about why these fail.

The alternatives that are not a brand at all

Four of the five routes below are cheaper than every national brand, and the first one is the comparison most people never make. Figures here are our own sourced model unless the row says otherwise.

One route we are deliberately not putting a number on is treatment abroad. G4's own financing page puts the overseas All-on-4 procedure at $30,000 to $38,000 and warns about added expenses and risk, which is a company with a US price list describing its cheapest competitor as expensive, so take the figure for what it is. We have no sourced data on overseas pricing, remedial costs when something fails at home, or outcomes, and until we do we are not going to publish a range for it. Our methodology page explains where our figures come from and where they stop.

ClearChoice alternatives: FAQ