Helix vs Tempus (2026)
Two genomics companies selling to health systems with different units of value. Helix is population infrastructure: sequence a population once, hold the data as an institutional asset, and return to it for clinical and research questions over years. Tempus sells the software layer around oncology care, decision support that flags patients drifting off guideline treatment, built on data its own laboratory produces. Its health privacy disclosure is the fuller of the two, and it still grades C on AI Safety and PHI Stewardship against Helix at B, because the axis scores what the disclosure permits rather than how much of it there is. The decision follows the ambition. A system enrolling a population and planning to reuse those genomes for a decade is buying what Helix sells, and inherits a consent problem it must solve before the first sample, because a genome cannot be un shared once it is out.
- It is population scale infrastructure, with institutions running programmes on it and returning to the same sequence for later clinical and research questions.
- Sequence once and reuse changes the economics of genomics from a per test cost into an asset the institution holds.
- The interoperability position is oriented to enterprise deployment rather than to a laboratory workflow.
- The provider software is the product, with oncology decision support and physician tooling built on data its own laboratory generates.
- The health privacy disclosure is the fuller of the two, covering both the laboratory and the software roles, though it grades C on AI Safety and PHI Stewardship against Helix at B on what that disclosure actually permits.
- For an oncology programme the question is what happens between tests, and that is what the software addresses.
This comparison is published by AI Health Index, an independent research platform that compares healthcare AI vendors objectively. Helix and Tempus are each graded against the same capability taxonomy, from each vendor's own public materials and the regulatory record, under the AI Health Index verification standard. No vendor pays for placement, and no vendor has reviewed this page. How this evidence is graded
Plain facts
| Fact | Helix | Tempus |
|---|---|---|
| Primary category | Diagnostics & Genomics | Clinical Decision Support |
| Founded | 2015 | Not recorded |
| Headquarters | San Mateo, California | Chicago, Illinois |
| Website | helix.com | tempus.com |
Side by Side
Each record in one paragraph
Written to be quoted whole. Each paragraph states what the AI Health Index verified about the vendor, with the caveats attached. Generated from this pair’s live capability grades, so it moves when a grade moves.
The AI Health Index awards Helix its top capability grade on Setting and Specialty Coverage. Set against Tempus, Helix grades higher on several axes, including Model Supply Chain Disclosure, AI Safety and PHI Stewardship and AI Governance and Bias Disclosure. Grades reflect evidence the AI Health Index could verify at the last review, so a low grade records disclosure the vendor has not published rather than a capability it has been shown to lack.
Source: AI Health Index, August 2026
The AI Health Index awards Tempus its top capability grade on AI Centrality and HIPAA and BAA Posture. Set against Helix, Tempus grades higher on several axes, including AI Centrality, Autonomy and Oversight Model and HIPAA and BAA Posture. Its thinnest published disclosure sits on AI Liability and Recourse. Grades reflect evidence the AI Health Index could verify at the last review, so a low grade records disclosure the vendor has not published rather than a capability it has been shown to lack.
Source: AI Health Index, August 2026
Questions buyers ask
Should we choose Helix or Tempus?
On the axes where the AI Health Index separates them, Helix grades higher on several axes, including Model Supply Chain Disclosure, AI Safety and PHI Stewardship and AI Governance and Bias Disclosure, and Tempus grades higher on several axes, including AI Centrality, Autonomy and Oversight Model and HIPAA and BAA Posture. Helix leads on the greater share of scored axes, but the split means the decision turns on which constraint is binding rather than on an overall winner.
Where do Helix and Tempus differ most?
The widest separation the AI Health Index records between Helix and Tempus is on AI Centrality, where Helix grades C and Tempus grades A. That axis sits in the AI Capability group, so it should carry the most weight for a buyer whose binding constraint is how much of the work the model itself is trusted to do.
Where do Helix and Tempus grade the same?
The AI Health Index grades Helix and Tempus the same on several axes, including Model and Technology Transparency, Clinical and Operational Evidence and Security Certifications and Trust Center. Neither holds an advantage the index can evidence on those axes, so they should not carry weight in a selection between these two.
What have Helix and Tempus not disclosed?
At the last review, at least one of Helix and Tempus published thin or absent detail on AI Liability and Recourse. The AI Health Index treats an absent disclosure as a gap in the public record rather than a failure of the product, so these are the axes to get in writing during diligence instead of inferring from the grade.
Related comparisons
Other published head to head assessments involving these vendors or their closest peers. The full set for this category is on the Diagnostics & Genomics page.
Population genomics raises a consent problem this comparison should not skip: a sequence generated once and reused for future purposes requires a consent model that anticipates uses not yet defined, and a participant cannot revoke a genome once shared. Ancestral representation applies to both, since interpretation quality depends on reference data drawn disproportionately from European ancestry populations. Neither publishes pricing in a comparable form, and the commercial shapes differ enough, per programme against per test and per seat, that a like for like figure will not exist.