Genomi vs Katra

Pricing, capabilities and platforms side by side. Prices are as of the "Pricing checked" date in the table.

Genomi

The core workflow is four steps: install the agent harness, point it at your raw genome file on disk, build a local SQLite index, then ask questions through whichever AI agent you already run — Claude Code, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Goose, and others are listed as compatible. Pharmacogenomics, carrier status, polygenic risk scores, nutrigenomics, and ancestry PCA projection are all covered through distinct skill modules backed by ClinVar, PharmCAT, PGS Catalog, HPO, GenCC, and 1000 Genomes reference data. The privacy architecture is explicit: raw genome data stays on disk, and only the specific evidence snippets relevant to a query cross the boundary to whatever LLM handles the response. The vendor marks this as experimental and not for clinical use — which means researchers and privacy-conscious individuals exploring personal data are the intended audience, not clinical teams expecting diagnostic-grade output.

Katra

Katra is self-hosted memory infrastructure: drop it on any Docker-capable machine, point your MCP-compatible agent at it, and you get episodic recall, semantic search, knowledge graphs, and temporal analysis without rebuilding your agent. The architecture is a single deployable unit — the vendor describes it as a 'memory appliance' — which means setup friction is low for teams that already run Docker or Helm on AWS. Where it breaks: Katra is memory infrastructure, not an agent runner, so teams expecting built-in task planning or tool execution will need to wire those themselves. The project is early-stage with five stars on GitHub and no reported production deployments in public community channels, which means you are taking on the role of early adopter rather than stepping into a proven stack.

Specs come from each tool's own site and docs (how we test). AIDiveForge is editorially independent.