Agentic Index
Hyro vs Luma Health (2026)
Both run agent platforms for health system patient access at similar scale, 45 plus and 50 plus systems, documenting 8.5 and 8 of 14.
Hyro leads with the knowledge layer, a self updating knowledge graph resolving more than 85 percent of repetitive calls, chats and SMS, with responsible AI framing. Luma leads with orchestration, its Spark core coordinating named agents across access, intake, engagement and payments including a Navigator voice concierge, Document Flow and Order Management, with HITRUST r2 and SOC 2 Type II. Hyro answers questions better; Luma covers more of the journey and carries the stronger published certification posture.
Choose Hyro if
- Content going stale is your actual failure mode and a self updating graph is the fix.
- Documented coverage is slightly broader and call resolution rate is the metric you own.
- You want the strongest answer engine and already have the rest of the journey handled.
Choose Luma Health if
- Document flow and order management alongside access are in scope.
- HITRUST r2 and SOC 2 Type II are certifications your security review requires.
- Payments as part of the same platform closes a loop you currently hand off.
Vendor data for this comparison is unavailable.
Browse the full vendor directory