Which Search AI tool is better in 2026?
Open-source search infrastructure for AI with vector, full-text, regex, and metadata search.
AI medical assistant for clinicians
| Chroma | OpenEvidence | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | Open-source search infrastructure for AI with vector, full-text, regex, and metadata search. | AI medical assistant for clinicians |
| Founded | 2022 | 2022 |
| HQ | San Francisco, US | San Francisco, US |
| Employees | 11-50 | 50-200 |
| Total funding | $20.3M | $735M |
| Latest round | seed | Series D · Jan 2026 |
| Valuation | $75M | $12B |
| Cheapest paid plan | — | — |
| Free plan | ✓ Open Source | ✓ Free for Verified US Physicians |
| Free trial | ✓ | ✗ |
| Top tier price | Enterprise (BYOC) · Contact sales | — |
| Pricing summary | 3 published plans | 1 published plans |
| Categories |
Developer-facing capabilities and access signals for Chroma and OpenEvidence.
| Capability | Chroma | OpenEvidence |
|---|---|---|
| MCP support | ✗ | ✗ |
| Public API | ✗ | ✓ |
| Webhooks | ✗ | ✗ |
| OAuth 2.0 | ✗ | ✗ |
| SDK languages | 3 (Python, TypeScript, Rust) | 2 (TypeScript, Python) |
| Free plan | ✓ | ✓ |
| Free trial | ✓ | ✗ |
| Verified | ✗ | ✓ |
| Active deal | ✗ | ✗ |
Choose Chroma if price matters most — it starts at Open source, which is friendlier for teams watching burn. Both AI Search tools ship core features, so the cost delta often decides it for small teams and solo operators.
Choose OpenEvidence if you want the most established option — it has raised $735M, suggesting more runway for enterprise features, support, and long-term roadmap. For mission-critical workflows or larger teams, that stability often outweighs a lower monthly price.
It depends on your priority. Chroma is the leaner option; OpenEvidence has broader feature depth. See the side-by-side table above.
Yes — Chroma's cheapest paid plan is Free, while OpenEvidence's is Free.
Chroma: Yes, has a free plan. OpenEvidence: Yes, has a free plan.
Contextual paths to related AI startups, deals and rankings.