← adambecker.org

THE STAR BOOK

How Medicare Advantage star ratings work

A star rating is not a vibe. It is a half-star score that trips three different payment gates, on a built-in payment lag, and it can tell two different stories depending on whether you average by contract or by member. This page is that machine, played straight: statute for the gates, an illustrative book for the weighting lesson, and anonymized public CMS aggregates for the reality check.

2026 STAR RATINGS · GATE 2027 QBP · STATUTE AS OF JULY 2026 · NO COMPANIES, JUST THE RATING

STAR RATING
REBATE SHARE
·
QUALITY BONUS

CHAPTER 01

What the number is

CMS rates most Medicare Advantage contracts on a half-star scale from 1.0 to 5.0. The published figure is a Part C summary rating: a weighted roll-up of dozens of individual measures. CMS sorts those measures into five domains, covering staying healthy, managing chronic conditions, member experience, member complaints and changes in performance, and customer service. It then weights each measure by what kind of measure it is, so an outcome counts for more than a process step. A single number is carrying all of that.

Some contracts carry no numeric rating at all, and there are exactly two reasons for it. A contract can be marked "Not enough data available", or "Plan too new to be measured", which means a plan that has not existed long enough to score. Either way it is unrated, not zero, and it drops out of any honest average. A plan too new to be measured is not left unpaid in the meantime, and Chapter 2 has what statute gives it.

Set a rating. The spine above is what payment cares about. The chapters below explain why.

CHAPTER 02

The ladder is not evenly spaced

Two levers, three gates, and they do not line up. The rebate share moves at 3.5 and again at 4.5 (42 CFR 422.266). The quality bonus switches on at 4.0, and nowhere else (42 CFR 422.258). Below 3.5, neither lever has moved at all, so a 2.0 contract and a 3.0 contract are paid the same way.

Half a star is therefore worth wildly different amounts depending on where you are standing. Climbing from 3.0 to 3.5 moves the rebate share fifteen points. The next half-star buys nothing on the rebate, but switches the bonus on. The one after that adds five more rebate points. Then the payment ladder stops: a 5.0-star contract is paid exactly like a 4.5-star one.

Two cases sit outside that ladder. Five stars does carry a real advantage, but it is an enrollment rule rather than a payment one: a beneficiary may switch into a 5-star plan once during the year, outside the usual windows. And a brand new plan with no rating yet is not treated as a zero, which is the answer Chapter 1 left open. It gets 3.5 bonus points, and counts as 3.5-star when the rebate is worked out.

What the dial cannot show is that the bonus's 5 points are the middle of a range, not a flat rate. They double to 10 in the 279 counties that qualify for a doubled bonus. They also shrink, because every benchmark, bonus included, is capped at what the county would have been paid under the pre-2010 formula: in the 2026 ratebook that cap erases the bonus completely in 338 counties and clips it in 752 more. Across roughly a third of the country a fourth star is worth less than that flat 5 suggests, and in some places nothing at all. Which county you are in decides which of those you get, and that is The Rate Book. This page stops at the gates.

CHAPTER 03

Per contract or per member

CMS publishes ratings on contracts. Members live inside those contracts in very different numbers. Average every contract once, and a book of a few thousand people counts the same as a book of a few hundred thousand. Weight by members, and you are asking a different question: where do the people actually sit? Those two answers always land somewhere different, and they can land on opposite sides of the 4.0 quality-bonus line.

ILLUSTRATIVE BOOK (FABRICATED)

ContractStarsMembers

Highlighted rows are the ones carrying the average in the view you are looking at.

WHAT THE FILE SHOWS

Loading anonymized extract…

CHAPTER 04

Paid on a delay

CMS names each Star Ratings file by a year, then pays the quality bonus one year later. The 2026 Star Ratings on this page (released October 2025) gate 2027 quality bonus payments. They are not the ratings that set the 2026 bonus. That earlier cycle used the same lag: the 2025 Star Ratings, published October 2024, gated 2026 pay.

Measurement years sit earlier still, which is why the same rule gets described with two different lengths. From the file's year label to the pay year is one year: 2026 ratings, 2027 payments. From the measurement behind a rating to the money that rewards it is closer to two, which is how The Rate Book describes the same lag. Either count works as long as you say which one you mean. Both land in the same place: the rating is locked long before the bid that spends it.

MEASUREEarlier calendar years feed the measures inside the rating.
PUBLISHOctober release of the Year Y Star Ratings (this page: 2026, October 2025).
BIDPlans bid with that locked rating already in view for the coming pay year.
PAYYear Y ratings gate quality bonus payments in year Y+1 (here: 2027).

SOURCES

Where every claim sits