CVS-owned health insurer

Aetna

A CVS Health-owned health insurer selling employer, individual, Medicare, Medicaid, dental, vision, and other coverage. Aetna is a major consumer-facing insurer, but its parent link to CVS adds pharmacy, retail, PBM, and insurance integration concerns.

Why this matters: Aetna should be listed because consumers choose it directly even though the parent CVS profile also matters.

Letter grade D Extractive High confidence (AI) Rubric gcd-rubric-v1 Parent / owner: CVS Health Last reviewed May 12, 2026

Aetna is owned by CVS Health, whose parent profile is also listed.

Final Score 2* D - Extractive

DEXTRACTIVE2 pts

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

Base Material14

Bonus+0

Cap35Ownership <= 2 and Governance <= 2

After Cap14

Penalties-12

!Not Verified

Represent this organization?

Request verification to have the evidence record checked against primary materials and organization-supplied documents. Verification does not buy a higher score; scores change only when review finds factual errors, omissions, or miscalibration.

Request verification

Owned by CVS Health

The parent profile is currently rated F (Malignant, -18*). This subsidiary is not mechanically capped at the parent score, but parent control is part of the ownership, governance, policy, accountability opacity, reversibility, and harm analysis.

Evaluation Overview

D - Extractive

The score turns mainly on Scale Integrity, with the largest penalty coming from Policy Capture.

Strengths

Scale Integrity3/5
Solidarity with the Unemployed2/7
Loss-Bearing Fidelity2/7

Penalties

Policy Capture-5
Accountability Opacity-2
Surveillance Capture-2
Ideological Disavowal-2

Evidence state

ConfidenceHigh confidence (AI)
ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)
Linked claims14
Direct axis claims14
Coverage14/14

Scoring Axes

Axis	Score	Why this score
Ownership ? Control rights: shareholder-dominated at 0, worker cooperative control at 10.	1 / 10	Aetna's public materials identify its ownership form, parent relationship, nonprofit status, mutual structure, or shareholder-controlled insurance model. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence Aetna's public materials identify its ownership form, parent relationship, nonprofit status, mutual structure, or shareholder-controlled insurance model. [1] context Aetna's public record shows whether binding control sits with policyholders, members, nonprofit boards, parent companies, public shareholders, or executives. [2] context Aetna's insurance model collects premiums or dues and controls how much value returns as claims, benefits, reserves, dividends, surplus, or shareholder/investor return. [3] context Aetna's public structure does not show ordinary workers holding binding democratic control over insurance operations. [4] context Aetna's coverage model affects people during job loss, disability, illness, accidents, housing instability, or other periods when insurance access and continuity matter. [5] context Aetna's product is built around bearing covered losses, but the public record also shows policy terms, eligibility, exclusions, or managed-care constraints that determine how much loss the insurer actually absorbs. [6] context Aetna competes in insurance markets where pricing, underwriting, networks, formularies, claims handling, cancellation, and renewal practices determine ordinary consumer power. [7] context Aetna's core product can protect against catastrophic financial loss, but coverage integrity depends on claim payment, network adequacy, exclusions, and transparent policy terms. [8] context Aetna's scale and category make its underwriting, care-management, claims, or investment decisions consequential for households, workers, patients, pets, or public programs. [9]
Governance ? Binding decision authority: centralized control at 0, democratic stakeholder control at 10.	1 / 10	Aetna's public record gives limited direct evidence about whether binding control sits with policyholders, members, nonprofit boards, parent companies, public shareholders, or executives. Aetna's public record gives limited direct evidence about whether binding control sits with policyholders, members, nonprofit boards, parent companies, public shareholders, or executives. On Governance, Aetna belongs low because insurance power is controlled mainly by shareholders, executives, parent companies, or ordinary corporate boards rather than policyholders, patients, workers, or affected communities. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence context Aetna's public materials identify its ownership form, parent relationship, nonprofit status, mutual structure, or shareholder-controlled insurance model. [1] Aetna's public record shows whether binding control sits with policyholders, members, nonprofit boards, parent companies, public shareholders, or executives. [2] context Aetna's insurance model collects premiums or dues and controls how much value returns as claims, benefits, reserves, dividends, surplus, or shareholder/investor return. [3] context Aetna's public structure does not show ordinary workers holding binding democratic control over insurance operations. [4] context Aetna's coverage model affects people during job loss, disability, illness, accidents, housing instability, or other periods when insurance access and continuity matter. [5] context Aetna's product is built around bearing covered losses, but the public record also shows policy terms, eligibility, exclusions, or managed-care constraints that determine how much loss the insurer actually absorbs. [6] context Aetna competes in insurance markets where pricing, underwriting, networks, formularies, claims handling, cancellation, and renewal practices determine ordinary consumer power. [7] context Aetna's core product can protect against catastrophic financial loss, but coverage integrity depends on claim payment, network adequacy, exclusions, and transparent policy terms. [8] context Aetna's scale and category make its underwriting, care-management, claims, or investment decisions consequential for households, workers, patients, pets, or public programs. [9]
Extraction ? Surplus allocation, wage share, CEO pay ratio, margins, and structured extraction judgment.	1 / 10	Aetna's insurance model collects premiums or dues and controls how much value returns as claims, benefits, reserves, dividends, surplus, or shareholder/investor return. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence context Aetna's public materials identify its ownership form, parent relationship, nonprofit status, mutual structure, or shareholder-controlled insurance model. [1] context Aetna's public record shows whether binding control sits with policyholders, members, nonprofit boards, parent companies, public shareholders, or executives. [2] Aetna's insurance model collects premiums or dues and controls how much value returns as claims, benefits, reserves, dividends, surplus, or shareholder/investor return. [3] context Aetna's public structure does not show ordinary workers holding binding democratic control over insurance operations. [4] context Aetna's coverage model affects people during job loss, disability, illness, accidents, housing instability, or other periods when insurance access and continuity matter. [5] context Aetna's product is built around bearing covered losses, but the public record also shows policy terms, eligibility, exclusions, or managed-care constraints that determine how much loss the insurer actually absorbs. [6] context Aetna competes in insurance markets where pricing, underwriting, networks, formularies, claims handling, cancellation, and renewal practices determine ordinary consumer power. [7] context Aetna's core product can protect against catastrophic financial loss, but coverage integrity depends on claim payment, network adequacy, exclusions, and transparent policy terms. [8] context Aetna's scale and category make its underwriting, care-management, claims, or investment decisions consequential for households, workers, patients, pets, or public programs. [9]
Labor Sovereignty ? Worker power: coercive conditions at 0, co-determination or ownership at 7. Employee dissatisfaction matters only when source-backed evidence shows concrete limits on worker agency, such as coercive scheduling, retaliation, wage theft, harassment, unsafe conditions, suppression of worker voice, or extreme turnover.	1 / 7	Aetna's public structure does not show ordinary workers holding binding democratic control over insurance operations. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence context Aetna's public materials identify its ownership form, parent relationship, nonprofit status, mutual structure, or shareholder-controlled insurance model. [1] context Aetna's public record shows whether binding control sits with policyholders, members, nonprofit boards, parent companies, public shareholders, or executives. [2] context Aetna's insurance model collects premiums or dues and controls how much value returns as claims, benefits, reserves, dividends, surplus, or shareholder/investor return. [3] Aetna's public structure does not show ordinary workers holding binding democratic control over insurance operations. [4] context Aetna's coverage model affects people during job loss, disability, illness, accidents, housing instability, or other periods when insurance access and continuity matter. [5] context Aetna's product is built around bearing covered losses, but the public record also shows policy terms, eligibility, exclusions, or managed-care constraints that determine how much loss the insurer actually absorbs. [6] context Aetna competes in insurance markets where pricing, underwriting, networks, formularies, claims handling, cancellation, and renewal practices determine ordinary consumer power. [7] context Aetna's core product can protect against catastrophic financial loss, but coverage integrity depends on claim payment, network adequacy, exclusions, and transparent policy terms. [8] context Aetna's scale and category make its underwriting, care-management, claims, or investment decisions consequential for households, workers, patients, pets, or public programs. [9]
Solidarity with the Unemployed ? Treatment of exits and nonworkers, including severance, redeployment, and non-competes.	2 / 7	Aetna's coverage model affects people during job loss, disability, illness, accidents, housing instability, or other periods when insurance access and continuity matter. Aetna's coverage model affects people during job loss, disability, illness, accidents, housing instability, or other periods when insurance access and continuity matter. On Solidarity with the Unemployed, Aetna belongs low because insurance power is controlled mainly by shareholders, executives, parent companies, or ordinary corporate boards rather than policyholders, patients, workers, or affected communities. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence context Aetna's public materials identify its ownership form, parent relationship, nonprofit status, mutual structure, or shareholder-controlled insurance model. [1] context Aetna's public record shows whether binding control sits with policyholders, members, nonprofit boards, parent companies, public shareholders, or executives. [2] context Aetna's insurance model collects premiums or dues and controls how much value returns as claims, benefits, reserves, dividends, surplus, or shareholder/investor return. [3] context Aetna's public structure does not show ordinary workers holding binding democratic control over insurance operations. [4] Aetna's coverage model affects people during job loss, disability, illness, accidents, housing instability, or other periods when insurance access and continuity matter. [5] context Aetna's product is built around bearing covered losses, but the public record also shows policy terms, eligibility, exclusions, or managed-care constraints that determine how much loss the insurer actually absorbs. [6] context Aetna competes in insurance markets where pricing, underwriting, networks, formularies, claims handling, cancellation, and renewal practices determine ordinary consumer power. [7] context Aetna's core product can protect against catastrophic financial loss, but coverage integrity depends on claim payment, network adequacy, exclusions, and transparent policy terms. [8] context Aetna's scale and category make its underwriting, care-management, claims, or investment decisions consequential for households, workers, patients, pets, or public programs. [9]
Loss-Bearing Fidelity ? Willingness to absorb costs to preserve values, workers, users, and public obligations.	2 / 7	Aetna's product is built around bearing covered losses, but the public record also shows policy terms, eligibility, exclusions, or managed-care constraints that determine how much loss the insurer actually absorbs. Aetna's product is built around bearing covered losses, but the public record also shows policy terms, eligibility, exclusions, or managed-care constraints that determine how much loss the insurer actually absorbs. On Loss-Bearing Fidelity, Aetna belongs low because insurance power is controlled mainly by shareholders, executives, parent companies, or ordinary corporate boards rather than policyholders, patients, workers, or affected communities. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence context Aetna's public materials identify its ownership form, parent relationship, nonprofit status, mutual structure, or shareholder-controlled insurance model. [1] context Aetna's public record shows whether binding control sits with policyholders, members, nonprofit boards, parent companies, public shareholders, or executives. [2] context Aetna's insurance model collects premiums or dues and controls how much value returns as claims, benefits, reserves, dividends, surplus, or shareholder/investor return. [3] context Aetna's public structure does not show ordinary workers holding binding democratic control over insurance operations. [4] context Aetna's coverage model affects people during job loss, disability, illness, accidents, housing instability, or other periods when insurance access and continuity matter. [5] Aetna's product is built around bearing covered losses, but the public record also shows policy terms, eligibility, exclusions, or managed-care constraints that determine how much loss the insurer actually absorbs. [6] context Aetna competes in insurance markets where pricing, underwriting, networks, formularies, claims handling, cancellation, and renewal practices determine ordinary consumer power. [7] context Aetna's core product can protect against catastrophic financial loss, but coverage integrity depends on claim payment, network adequacy, exclusions, and transparent policy terms. [8] context Aetna's scale and category make its underwriting, care-management, claims, or investment decisions consequential for households, workers, patients, pets, or public programs. [9]
Market Conduct ? Pricing fairness, switching costs, lock-in, and rent extraction.	1 / 5	Aetna competes in insurance markets where pricing, underwriting, networks, formularies, claims handling, cancellation, and renewal practices determine ordinary consumer power. Aetna competes in insurance markets where pricing, underwriting, networks, formularies, claims handling, cancellation, and renewal practices determine ordinary consumer power. On Market Conduct, Aetna belongs low because insurance power is controlled mainly by shareholders, executives, parent companies, or ordinary corporate boards rather than policyholders, patients, workers, or affected communities. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence context Aetna's public materials identify its ownership form, parent relationship, nonprofit status, mutual structure, or shareholder-controlled insurance model. [1] context Aetna's public record shows whether binding control sits with policyholders, members, nonprofit boards, parent companies, public shareholders, or executives. [2] context Aetna's insurance model collects premiums or dues and controls how much value returns as claims, benefits, reserves, dividends, surplus, or shareholder/investor return. [3] context Aetna's public structure does not show ordinary workers holding binding democratic control over insurance operations. [4] context Aetna's coverage model affects people during job loss, disability, illness, accidents, housing instability, or other periods when insurance access and continuity matter. [5] context Aetna's product is built around bearing covered losses, but the public record also shows policy terms, eligibility, exclusions, or managed-care constraints that determine how much loss the insurer actually absorbs. [6] Aetna competes in insurance markets where pricing, underwriting, networks, formularies, claims handling, cancellation, and renewal practices determine ordinary consumer power. [7] context Aetna's core product can protect against catastrophic financial loss, but coverage integrity depends on claim payment, network adequacy, exclusions, and transparent policy terms. [8] context Aetna's scale and category make its underwriting, care-management, claims, or investment decisions consequential for households, workers, patients, pets, or public programs. [9]
Product Integrity ? Preservation of quality rather than degradation for monetization.	2 / 5	Aetna's core product can protect against catastrophic financial loss, but coverage integrity depends on claim payment, network adequacy, exclusions, and transparent policy terms. Aetna's core product can protect against catastrophic financial loss, but coverage integrity depends on claim payment, network adequacy, exclusions, and transparent policy terms. On Product Integrity, Aetna belongs low because insurance power is controlled mainly by shareholders, executives, parent companies, or ordinary corporate boards rather than policyholders, patients, workers, or affected communities. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence context Aetna's public materials identify its ownership form, parent relationship, nonprofit status, mutual structure, or shareholder-controlled insurance model. [1] context Aetna's public record shows whether binding control sits with policyholders, members, nonprofit boards, parent companies, public shareholders, or executives. [2] context Aetna's insurance model collects premiums or dues and controls how much value returns as claims, benefits, reserves, dividends, surplus, or shareholder/investor return. [3] context Aetna's public structure does not show ordinary workers holding binding democratic control over insurance operations. [4] context Aetna's coverage model affects people during job loss, disability, illness, accidents, housing instability, or other periods when insurance access and continuity matter. [5] context Aetna's product is built around bearing covered losses, but the public record also shows policy terms, eligibility, exclusions, or managed-care constraints that determine how much loss the insurer actually absorbs. [6] context Aetna competes in insurance markets where pricing, underwriting, networks, formularies, claims handling, cancellation, and renewal practices determine ordinary consumer power. [7] Aetna's core product can protect against catastrophic financial loss, but coverage integrity depends on claim payment, network adequacy, exclusions, and transparent policy terms. [8] context Aetna's scale and category make its underwriting, care-management, claims, or investment decisions consequential for households, workers, patients, pets, or public programs. [9]
Scale Integrity ? Whether growth improves or degrades fairness and accountability.	3 / 5	Aetna's scale and category make its underwriting, care-management, claims, or investment decisions consequential for households, workers, patients, pets, or public programs. Aetna's scale and category make its underwriting, care-management, claims, or investment decisions consequential for households, workers, patients, pets, or public programs. On Scale Integrity, Aetna belongs low because insurance power is controlled mainly by shareholders, executives, parent companies, or ordinary corporate boards rather than policyholders, patients, workers, or affected communities. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence context Aetna's public materials identify its ownership form, parent relationship, nonprofit status, mutual structure, or shareholder-controlled insurance model. [1] context Aetna's public record shows whether binding control sits with policyholders, members, nonprofit boards, parent companies, public shareholders, or executives. [2] context Aetna's insurance model collects premiums or dues and controls how much value returns as claims, benefits, reserves, dividends, surplus, or shareholder/investor return. [3] context Aetna's public structure does not show ordinary workers holding binding democratic control over insurance operations. [4] context Aetna's coverage model affects people during job loss, disability, illness, accidents, housing instability, or other periods when insurance access and continuity matter. [5] context Aetna's product is built around bearing covered losses, but the public record also shows policy terms, eligibility, exclusions, or managed-care constraints that determine how much loss the insurer actually absorbs. [6] context Aetna competes in insurance markets where pricing, underwriting, networks, formularies, claims handling, cancellation, and renewal practices determine ordinary consumer power. [7] context Aetna's core product can protect against catastrophic financial loss, but coverage integrity depends on claim payment, network adequacy, exclusions, and transparent policy terms. [8] Aetna's scale and category make its underwriting, care-management, claims, or investment decisions consequential for households, workers, patients, pets, or public programs. [9]

Penalties

Penalty	Applied	Why this penalty
Policy Capture ? Private-interest attempts to bend law, regulation, subsidies, taxes, enforcement, trade, labor, safety, competition, environmental, healthcare, housing, surveillance, civil-liberties, or consumer policy against workers, customers, citizens, affected communities, or ecological life. Public-interest advocacy is not penalized merely because it is lobbying. Range: -15 to 0.	-5	Aetna's public record makes Policy Capture relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. Aetna's public record makes Policy Capture relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. This warrants a Policy Capture penalty because the insurance model exposes customers or members to recurring-payment inertia, opaque policy terms, care or claims gatekeeping, policy influence, data use, or identity-based trust transfer. The penalty is calibrated to the evidence for this entity rather than assumed for the whole sector. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence Aetna's public record makes Policy Capture relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. [10]
Subscription Capture ? Manipulative recurring-payment, automatic-renewal, cancellation-friction, bundling, trial-conversion, or refund designs that profit from inertia or confusion. Range: -5 to 0.	-1	Aetna's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. Aetna's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. This warrants a Subscription Capture penalty because the insurance model exposes customers or members to recurring-payment inertia, opaque policy terms, care or claims gatekeeping, policy influence, data use, or identity-based trust transfer. The penalty is calibrated to the evidence for this entity rather than assumed for the whole sector. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence Aetna's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. [11]
Accountability Opacity ? Material opacity, reputation laundering, or hidden accountability structures that prevent public accountability. Range: -2 to 0.	-2	Aetna's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. Aetna's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. This warrants a Accountability Opacity penalty because the insurance model exposes customers or members to recurring-payment inertia, opaque policy terms, care or claims gatekeeping, policy influence, data use, or identity-based trust transfer. The penalty is calibrated to the evidence for this entity rather than assumed for the whole sector. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence Aetna's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. [12]
Surveillance Capture ? Invasive surveillance, unreasonably non-optional tracking, facial recognition, biometric identification, or AI behavior scanning of customers, workers, bystanders, or the public. Range: -5 to 0.	-2	Aetna's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. Aetna's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. This warrants a Surveillance Capture penalty because the insurance model exposes customers or members to recurring-payment inertia, opaque policy terms, care or claims gatekeeping, policy influence, data use, or identity-based trust transfer. The penalty is calibrated to the evidence for this entity rather than assumed for the whole sector. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence Aetna's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. [13]
Ideological Disavowal ? Concealed ideology presented as neutrality, expertise, professional necessity, public-service administration, market inevitability, or non-ideological common sense while exercising power. Range: -3 to 0.	-2	Aetna's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. Aetna's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. This warrants a Ideological Disavowal penalty because the insurance model exposes customers or members to recurring-payment inertia, opaque policy terms, care or claims gatekeeping, policy influence, data use, or identity-based trust transfer. The penalty is calibrated to the evidence for this entity rather than assumed for the whole sector. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Insurance expansion batch calibrated across health, life, mutual, public, pet, renters, and member-governed alternatives. Linked evidence Aetna's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping. [14]

Bonus Credits

No bonus credits applied in this version.

Confidence Basis

Confidence is computed from the evidence trail and review state, not typed into the profile by hand.

High 80/100

14 verified linked claims 14 direct axis claims 0 disputed claims 14/14 components covered

This confidence label measures the source-backed evidence trail. AI-scaffolded scores remain tentative until human review.

Claim confidence 16/20

14 verified linked claims

Source quality 10/18

Best source per verified claim, weighted by institutional reliability

Direct axis-specific claims 14/18

14 direct claims across 14 active components

Dispute load 12/12

0 disputed claims on this entity

Recency 10/10

Newest accepted timestamp: May 13, 2026

Reviewer status 7/12

Human-reviewed components score higher than AI scaffolding

Component coverage 10/10

14/14 evidence-bearing components have direct support

Evidence State

Profile stateAI draft / human-pending

VerificationUnverified

ConfidenceHigh confidence (AI)

ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)

Correction routeUse “Challenge this rating” for factual errors, missing counterevidence, source problems, or calculation mistakes.

Company responseCompany representatives can submit source-backed corrections; payment never changes scores or reviewer authority.

Claims and Sources

Claims are the evidence record. Each claim needs a source link, axis category, status, confidence level, and timestamp before it can support a score.

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

1Aetna's public materials identify its ownership form, parent relationship, nonprofit status, mutual structure, or shareholder-controlled insurance model.

Ownership Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

2Aetna's public record shows whether binding control sits with policyholders, members, nonprofit boards, parent companies, public shareholders, or executives.

Governance Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

3Aetna's insurance model collects premiums or dues and controls how much value returns as claims, benefits, reserves, dividends, surplus, or shareholder/investor return.

Extraction Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

4Aetna's public structure does not show ordinary workers holding binding democratic control over insurance operations.

Labor Sovereignty Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

5Aetna's coverage model affects people during job loss, disability, illness, accidents, housing instability, or other periods when insurance access and continuity matter.

Solidarity Unemployed Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

CVS Health AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

6Aetna's product is built around bearing covered losses, but the public record also shows policy terms, eligibility, exclusions, or managed-care constraints that determine how much loss the insurer actually absorbs.

Loss Bearing Fidelity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

7Aetna competes in insurance markets where pricing, underwriting, networks, formularies, claims handling, cancellation, and renewal practices determine ordinary consumer power.

Market Conduct Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

CVS Health AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

8Aetna's core product can protect against catastrophic financial loss, but coverage integrity depends on claim payment, network adequacy, exclusions, and transparent policy terms.

Product Integrity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

9Aetna's scale and category make its underwriting, care-management, claims, or investment decisions consequential for households, workers, patients, pets, or public programs.

Scale Integrity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

CVS Health AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

10Aetna's public record makes Policy Capture relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping.

Policy Capture Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

CVS Health AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

11Aetna's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping.

Subscription Capture Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

CVS Health AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

12Aetna's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping.

Accountability Opacity Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

CVS Health AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

13Aetna's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping.

Surveillance Capture Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

CVS Health AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

14Aetna's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant to the evaluation through mutual/member governance, nonprofit mission, public-program policy, recurring premiums, policy complexity, healthcare data, marketing identity, or claims/care gatekeeping.

Ideological Disavowal Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

CVS Health AetnaGeneral web source · 58%

Alternatives

Competitors

AGOOD51 Co-operative Insurance Companies member-owned regional mutual insurer · same market BQUALIFIED47 Common Ground Healthcare Cooperative nonprofit member-governed health-insurance cooperative · same market BQUALIFIED47 Community Health Options nonprofit member-led health-insurance plan · same market BQUALIFIED47 Mountain Health CO-OP nonprofit member-governed health-insurance cooperative · same market BQUALIFIED45 NJM Insurance Group regional mutual auto, home, renters, and umbrella insurer · same market BQUALIFIED45 PEMCO Insurance regional mutual auto, home, and renters insurer · same market BQUALIFIED42 Amica Mutual mutual insurance company · same market CPERFORMATIVE41 Shelter Insurance regional mutual property, casualty, and life insurer · same market

Help Improve This Profile

Submit source-backed evidence or challenge a specific claim, source, axis value, or calculation below.

How This Page Is Maintained

Evidence comes in through contributors, is checked by verifiers, and is synthesized by reviewers. Founder authority remains narrow and visible; scores recalculate when verified claims or the rubric change.

Civic Note

Incorporation, limited liability, market access, and other institutional privileges are public grants. Good Companies Directory treats those privileges as conditional on accountability to workers, users, communities, and the public.

Submit evidence for Aetna Add one source-backed fact for review.

Challenge this rating Point to a specific score, claim, source, or calculation problem.

Audit Log

Recent public changes for this company or group. The full audit log is part of the Transparency record.

No company-specific audit entries have been published yet.

View Full Audit Log