S10.AI vs Sully.ai (2026)
Two agent suites built around a scribe, competing to be the only AI vendor a practice needs. S10 publishes a flat per provider rate and builds its positioning on it, reaches record systems by a route that does not require each vendor's cooperation, names an external audit standard, and covers documentation, front office calls and note auditing. Sully sells role based agents across reception, scribing, coding, intake, triage and interpretation, publishes genuine technical work including material that does not flatter its own category, and prices a bundle modestly. They are close enough that the pilot decides. What neither publishes is any confidence threshold, escalation path or accuracy figure for agents that draft codes, answer phones and talk to patients, so measure how often staff have to correct them rather than how many agents there are.
- It publishes a flat per provider rate prominently and builds its positioning on it, so the cost is knowable and comparable before any conversation.
- Reach into record systems is achieved by a route that does not depend on each vendor granting access, and it names an external audit standard alongside compliance claims across three regimes.
- The suite covers the scribe, a front office agent and a note auditing module, so documentation, phones and quality checks come from one vendor.
- The role based framing covers the whole encounter, reception through scribing, coding, intake, triage and interpretation, integrated with the major record systems.
- It publishes real technical work rather than adjectives, including a benchmark result that is unflattering to its own category.
- A public trust centre lists its security, privacy and AI governance documentation in one place, so procurement knows exactly what to request.
This comparison is published by AI Health Index, an independent research platform that compares healthcare AI vendors objectively. S10.AI and Sully.ai 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
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 S10.AI its top capability grade on AI Centrality and Commercial Transparency. Set against Sully.ai, S10.AI grades higher on Commercial Transparency. 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 Sully.ai its top capability grade on AI Centrality. Set against S10.AI, Sully.ai grades higher on Model and Technology Transparency and Security Certifications and Trust Center. 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 S10.AI or Sully.ai?
On the axes where the AI Health Index separates them, S10.AI grades higher on Commercial Transparency, and Sully.ai grades higher on Model and Technology Transparency and Security Certifications and Trust Center. Sully.ai 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 S10.AI and Sully.ai differ most?
The widest separation the AI Health Index records between S10.AI and Sully.ai is on Commercial Transparency, where S10.AI grades A and Sully.ai grades C. That axis sits in the Commercial group, so it should carry the most weight for a buyer whose binding constraint is contracting, scope and what the price actually covers.
Where do S10.AI and Sully.ai grade the same?
The AI Health Index grades S10.AI and Sully.ai the same on several axes, including AI Centrality, Autonomy and Oversight Model and Model Supply Chain Disclosure. Neither holds an advantage the index can evidence on those axes, so they should not carry weight in a selection between these two.
Related comparisons
Other published head to head assessments involving these vendors or their closest peers. The full set for this category is on the Ambient Scribes page.
An earlier version of this comparison said Sully offers tiered pricing at a modest per provider rate. Sully's pricing is customised and published by no tier, so the line rested on third party material and is removed. Corrected 15 September 2026.
Both platforms take autonomous action well beyond producing a note, including codes delivered into the record, phone handling and patient facing responses, and neither publishes a confidence threshold, an escalation behaviour or an accuracy figure for any of it. That is the defining gap in this part of the category: the surface expanded much faster than the disclosure. Neither publishes a subgroup or accent performance analysis, and a front office agent that understands some callers less well fails them silently. Pilot both on how often a clinician or a staff member corrects what the agents produced.