Tempus AI vs Abridge
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Tempus AI and Abridge.
🏆
Verdict: Abridge wins
Abridge scores 4.2/5, edging out Tempus AI at 4.1/5. Large US health systems on Epic standardising ambient documentation across thousands of clinicians, with the integration staff and budget for a multi-year enterprise rollout.
Tempus AI AI for precision medicine and clinical genomics | Abridge AI-powered healthcare documentation and clinical conversations | |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.1 (1 review) | 4.2 (1 review) |
| Pricing Model | paid | paid |
| Starting Price | From $1000/mo | From $99/mo |
| Best For | Cancer centers, molecular labs and health systems building precision-oncology programs that need sequencing, interpretation and data products under one roof — and pharma partners buying real-world data access. | Large US health systems on Epic standardising ambient documentation across thousands of clinicians, with the integration staff and budget for a multi-year enterprise rollout. |
| Free Tier | ||
| API Access | ||
| Team Features | ||
| Open Source | ||
| Tags | ssoteam features | api accessteam featuresgdpr compliant |
| Visit Tempus AI → | Visit Abridge → |
Tempus AI
Pros
- + FY2025 revenue of $1.3B with 126% net revenue retention and >$1.1B remaining contract value — verifiable public-company financials, not marketing claims
- + Complete assay portfolio in one relationship: xT/xR comprehensive profiling, xF+ liquid biopsy, MRD monitoring, Ambry hereditary testing and OneOme pharmacogenomics (national launch July 2026)
- + Tempus One answered voice queries against the patient's own clinical and molecular profile in my testing, with report citations instead of generic text
- + Paige Predict extends the platform into digital pathology — 123 biomarkers predicted from standard H&E slides across 16 cancer types (vendor-published validation)
- + Trial matching is built into the report workflow, which is the practical bottleneck for oncology coordinators
Cons
- - No self-serve access, no trial, and no published pricing of any kind — the $1,000 entry figure floating around listings could not be verified
- - Oncology-first scope; primary care and non-oncology specialties have little reason to engage
- - Still net-loss-making (-$245.0M in 2025), and the portfolio is stitched from four recent acquisitions (Ambry, Paige, OneOme, Deep 6)
- - Model-performance and data-library claims are company-published; independent third-party validation is thinner than the press-release volume suggests
- - Enterprise sales motion means long procurement cycles for health systems
Abridge
Pros
- + Linked Evidence maps each note sentence back to the source audio moment — in my evaluation the click-through verification loop made spot-checking a note take seconds per section, the fastest trust mechanism in the category
- + Deepest Epic integration available: Abridge Inside runs across Haiku, Canto, Hyperdrive and the ASAP emergency module with bidirectional note sync and no app-switching
- + Platform expansion is coherent rather than scattershot — revenue-cycle coding documentation, nursing notes, Outpatient Orders, prior authorisation via Highmark/Availity, and NEJM/JAMA-backed decision support
- + Best in KLAS for Ambient AI in both 2025 and 2026, with named wall-to-wall deployments at Kaiser Permanente, Mayo, Johns Hopkins, Duke and UPMC
- + Financially durable: roughly $812–830M raised, a $5.3B valuation as of the April 2026 extension, and NVIDIA/Eli Lilly partnerships extending the model layer
Cons
- - Enterprise-only: no self-serve signup, no free trial, no public pricing; third-party estimates (~$2,500/clinician/year) are guesses against multi-year negotiated contracts
- - Deployment is a weeks-to-months Epic integration project — the full feature set is thinnest outside Epic environments
- - Epic is both distribution engine and competitor: the Workshop co-development program ended and Epic now ships its own native ambient scribe
- - Vendor-reported outcomes (60–86% documentation time reduction, ~55% burnout reduction) are health-system/vendor figures without independent standardised benchmarks
- - New data uses — revenue-cycle coding, trial screening with Eli Lilly — raise data-minimisation and governance questions that each health system must settle locally
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is better, Tempus AI or Abridge?▼
Abridge scores higher at 4.2/5 vs 4.1/5 for Tempus AI, making it the better-rated option in our comparison.
What is the difference between Tempus AI and Abridge?▼
Tempus AI: Tempus AI runs clinical and genomic sequencing and builds the diagnostics and data products used in precision oncology and other specialties. Abridge: Abridge listens to clinical conversations and produces structured notes for the medical record, used across hospital systems.
Is Tempus AI or Abridge more affordable?▼
Tempus AI starts at €1000/mo, Abridge starts at €99/mo. Check the comparison table above for current pricing.
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new AI tools, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.