OpenEvidence vs Tempus AI
A side-by-side look at scores, pricing and features — with RECATOOLS' ASEAN-aware verdict for each.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| RECATOOLS Score | 7.8 / 10 | 8.2 / 10 |
| Capability | ||
| Value for money | ||
| Ease of use | ||
| ASEAN readiness | ||
| API quality | ||
| Pricing | Freemium | Enterprise |
| Free tier | Free for all verified US clinicians (NPI required); ad-supported | No free tier; enterprise contracts only |
| Paid from | Enterprise tier in development; pricing undisclosed — contact sales | Custom enterprise contracts; multi-year data-licensing subscriptions (price not publicly disclosed) |
| Has API | ✗ | ✓ |
| Open source | ✗ | ✗ |
| Free to use | ✓ | ✗ |
| Users | ~860,000 verified US clinicians (June 2026) | ~50% of US oncologists; 4,500+ hospital integrations; 40M+ clinical records |
| Founded | 2022 | 2015 |
| Maker | Daniel Nadler (CEO), Zachary Ziegler (CTO) | Tempus AI, Inc. (independent, Nasdaq: TEM) |
| Verdict | OpenEvidence is genuinely useful for US clinicians: free, citation-backed answers pulled from NEJM, JAMA, and AMA guidelines, funded by pharma advertising instead of subscriptions. Growth has been extraordinary — over 69... |
Tempus AI sits on one of the more defensible data moats in health AI — a self-reinforcing loop of clinical sequencing, molecular data, and real-world outcomes that's hard for pure-software competitors to replicate. Q1 20... |
| Full review → | Full review → |
← Back to AI Directory
Comparisons cover up to 4 tools. Scores are RECATOOLS editorial assessments; verify current pricing on each vendor's site.