Right AI for the Job
Home › Tools › Humata vs OpenEvidence
Updated 4 September 2026 · Independent comparison

Humata vs OpenEvidence:
which should you use?

Humata and OpenEvidence, side by side. Find the one that fits what you need to do.

Find your best fit

The 30-second answer

Humata ask questions across a set of uploaded documents and get answers with the page they came from, which suits a folder of papers rather than one. OpenEvidence is built for search, research & academics.

Pricing, simplified

Start free. Upgrade when you need more.

2 of 2 have a free plan 0 of 2 prices re-read automatically · how we know No paid placement

The 30-second comparison

If you only read one section, make it this one. Rows where both sides say the same thing are left out — the point is where they differ. Where each row came from is listed underneath.

Humata and OpenEvidence side by side, with the better fit for each row.
CategoryHumataOpenEvidenceBetter fit
What it's built forAsk questions across a set of uploaded documents and get answers with the page they came from, which suits a folder of papers rather than one.Built for clinical literature. Answers cite primary medical research, and it is free for verified clinicians.OpenEvidence
Fit for search, research & academicsStrong fitBuilt for thisOpenEvidence
Free planYes. Free, capped at 60 pages of use in total rather than per month, with the basic features and GPT-5 supportYes. Free for verified clinicians, ad-supportedTie
Cheapest way to pay$9.99 a month.No paid tier — it is free.OpenEvidence
What the paid tiers cost
  • One person, from $9.99/month
  • Per seat, from $49/month
  • Enterprise, priced on request
No paid tier — it is free.Tie
What to watch out forAnswers only from what you upload, so the quality of the shortlist is the quality of the answer. The free tier is 60 pages in total, and the step from Expert to Team switches from a flat rate to per user.Medicine only, and access is gated behind clinician verification. No use for a history or engineering student.Tie
Who it is usually forresearchers, working professionals, studentsresearchers, working professionalsTie
Sources you can checkAnswers arrive without sources attached.Answers carry sources you can open and check.OpenEvidence
Made byHumata — Austin, US.OpenEvidence — Cambridge, US.Tie

OpenEvidence is ahead on 4 of the 9 rows compared, 3 of them about how well it does the job itself. That is a clear lead rather than a tiebreaker.

Overall pick

OpenEvidence

Built for clinical literature.

✓ The job is mainly search, research & academics ✓ Built for clinical literature. ✓ You would rather not take on a subscription at all ✓ You need sources you can open and check
Choose Humata instead if…

Ask questions across a set of uploaded documents and get answers with the page they came from, which suits a folder of papers rather than one.

Humata is the better answer when the job is what it was built for rather than what the pick above does broadly.

✓ Ask questions across a set of uploaded documents and get answers with the page they came from, which suits a folder of papers rather than one. ✓ You are among students ✓ Free, capped at 60 pages of use in total rather than per month, with the basic features and GPT-5 support ✓ It is aimed at researchers, working professionals, students

How we know

Every row that separated these two, and where it came from. Nothing here is a hands-on test — if a line rests on a vendor’s own pricing page, it says so and links it.

The 4 rows that decided this page, with the source for each.
RowFavoursWeightWhere it came from
What it's built forOpenEvidenceHow well it does the jobFrom this site’s own catalogue record for each product — compiled by hand, not imported. How a product gets listed
Fit for search, research & academicsOpenEvidenceHow well it does the jobBoth products are listed under search, research & academics in the catalogue, and this is the fit recorded against each listing. Everything listed under search, research & academics
Cheapest way to payOpenEvidenceEverything elseFrom each vendor’s own pricing page. Dates and pages are listed below.
Sources you can checkOpenEvidenceHow well it does the jobFrom this site’s own catalogue record for each product — compiled by hand, not imported. How a product gets listed

The prices

Humata. Read by hand off humata.ai on 4 September 2026. It is not on the monthly re-check, so confirm there before paying. humata.ai/pricing

OpenEvidence. Read by hand on 4 September 2026, because OpenEvidence cannot be read automatically: Free for verified clinicians, no paid tier — nothing priced to watch openevidence.com/pricing

The ratings

The category these two share. Search, Research & Academics — both are listed there in the catalogue, and the fit recorded against each listing is a judgement made here, by hand.

The nine-category grid below. Derived from what each product is listed for, by one script, once per build — so the same pair always reads the same. It is a derivation, not a review.

What this is not

Neither product was run side by side to produce this page. Nobody was paid to appear on it and nothing here is ranked by commission.

To put the same question to both and read the answers yourself, run them side by side — that is a live test, and this is not.

Choose based on what you’re doing

All ten categories, including the ones where neither of these is the answer. These ratings are derived from what each product is listed for, not from running it — a rating here is a reading of the record, and the record is linked.

01

General-Purpose AI Assistants

Questions, brainstorming, explanations, everyday tasks, decision-making, general advice.

Humata
Not a good fit
OpenEvidence
Not a good fit
Best choice: Neither
02

Search, Research & Academics

Web research, deep research, books, academic papers, citations, news, fact-checking.

Humata
Good fit
OpenEvidence
Built for this
Best choice: OpenEvidence
03

Writing, Communication & Language

Emails, reports, essays, editing, summarizing, translation, presentations.

Humata
Not a good fit
OpenEvidence
Not a good fit
Best choice: Neither
04

Coding, Data & Technical Work

Programming, debugging, data analysis, spreadsheets, math, engineering, technical research.

Humata
Bad fit
OpenEvidence
Bad fit
Best choice: Neither
05

Business, Finance & Professional Work

Business strategy, investing, market research, legal, sales, HR, accounting, consulting.

Humata
Not a good fit
OpenEvidence
Not a good fit
Best choice: Neither
06

Image & Design

Image generation, photo editing, logos, graphics, product design, advertising creatives.

Humata
Bad fit
OpenEvidence
Bad fit
Best choice: Neither
07

Video

Video generation and editing, clipping, subtitles, avatars, animation and motion capture.

Humata
Bad fit
OpenEvidence
Bad fit
Best choice: Neither
08

Audio, Voice & Music

Voice generation, transcription, music, dubbing, sound cleanup and podcast production.

Humata
Bad fit
OpenEvidence
Bad fit
Best choice: Neither
09

Marketing & Content Creation

Social media, SEO, advertising, copywriting, content ideas, scripts, brand development.

Humata
Bad fit
OpenEvidence
Bad fit
Best choice: Neither
10

Productivity, Automation & Personal Life

AI agents, workflows, scheduling, meetings, organization, shopping, travel, personal finance.

Humata
Not a good fit
OpenEvidence
Not a good fit
Best choice: Neither
Pick Humata if

Ask questions across a set of uploaded documents and get answers with the page they came from, which suits a folder of papers rather than one.

Austin, US
Ask questions across a set of uploaded documents and get answers with the page they came from, which suits a folder of papers rather than one.
You are among students
Free, capped at 60 pages of use in total rather than per month, with the basic features and GPT-5 support
It is aimed at researchers, working professionals, students
Pick OpenEvidence if

Built for clinical literature.

Cambridge, US
The job is mainly search, research & academics
Built for clinical literature.
You would rather not take on a subscription at all
You need sources you can open and check

Pricing, simplified

The plans people actually compare, read from each vendor’s own page.

PricingSimple, up-to-date plan overview.
Humataby Humata
OpenEvidenceby OpenEvidence
Free version
Humata
Yes — Free plan availableFree, capped at 60 pages of use in total rather than per month, with the basic features and
OpenEvidence
Yes — Free plan availableFree for verified clinicians, ad-supported
Individual plans
Humata
Expert $9.99 / month
OpenEvidenceFree plan only
Business plans
Humata
From $49 / user / monthTeam
OpenEvidenceNot sold to teams
Enterprise
Humata
Custom pricing
OpenEvidenceNot published
View full details
HumataView Humata pricing
OpenEvidenceView OpenEvidence pricing
Interactive

Tell us what you use AI for

Pick your main job and the verdict below changes to match. Every answer is on the page already, so this works as a reader, not a lookup.

The verdict for that job
OpenEvidence
OpenEvidence. It is built for search, research & academics; Humata does it well without it being its focus; both have a free plan you can start on.
9 rows compared

Frequently asked questions

Is Humata or OpenEvidence better?

OpenEvidence is ahead on 4 of the 9 rows compared, 3 of them about how well it does the job itself. That is a clear lead rather than a tiebreaker. OpenEvidence is built for search, research & academics; Humata does it well without it being its focus; both have a free plan you can start on. Humata: Ask questions across a set of uploaded documents and get answers with the page they came from, which suits a folder of papers rather than one. OpenEvidence: Built for clinical literature. Answers cite primary medical research, and it is free for verified clinicians.

Is Humata or OpenEvidence cheaper?

Only one of the two publishes a ladder we have verified, so a like-for-like comparison is not possible yet.

Do Humata and OpenEvidence both have free plans?

Yes. Humata: Free, capped at 60 pages of use in total rather than per month, with the basic features and GPT-5 support. OpenEvidence: Free for verified clinicians, ad-supported.

What should I watch out for?

Humata: Answers only from what you upload, so the quality of the shortlist is the quality of the answer. The free tier is 60 pages in total, and the step from Expert to Team switches from a flat rate to per user. OpenEvidence: Medicine only, and access is gated behind clinician verification. No use for a history or engineering student.

Read more

Humata

What it is for, who makes it, what it costs and what to use instead.

OpenEvidence

What it is for, who makes it, what it costs and what to use instead.

Best AI for Research

Web research, deep research, books, academic papers, citations, news, fact-checking.

How we compare AI tools
Every row is generated from the same record the rest of the site is built on, so this page cannot drift from what we say elsewhere. We separate winner, tie and depends rather than forcing each category into a ranking, and we drop rows where both sides say the same thing. A pick is only called an overall pick when it leads on rows about how well the tool does the job; a lead that rests on price or audience alone is labelled as one. Nothing here is a hands-on test — how we know lists the source and date behind every deciding row.