Covariant vs Uma
Covariant vs Uma, compared side by side on 20 data points: what each one does, how big it is, what it has raised, the tech running each site, and what users report. We score both out of 100 on traction, team and visibility: Covariant is on 61/100 and Uma on 58/100.
Where each one leads
Covariant
- domain rating: 60/100 against 36/100
- headcount: 43 against 29
- funding raised: $80.0M against $40.0M
- LinkedIn following: 27,403 against 5,831
Uma
- agent readiness: 42/100 against 23/100
At a glance
| Measure | Covariant | Uma |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Covariant builds a universal AI platform, the Covariant Brain, to enable robots to see, reason, and act autonomously in dynamic real-world environments like warehouses. | Developing advanced physical AI and humanoid robots for industrial and domestic environments, focusing on real-world performance and learning through demonstration. |
| Category | Robotics, Industrial Robotics, Warehouse Robotics, Computer Vision | Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Deep Tech, Hardware |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2B |
| Offering | Platform | Hardware |
| Founded | 2017 | 2025 |
| Headquarters | Emeryville, United States | Paris, France |
| Status | Inactive | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | Covariant | Uma |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 43 | 29 |
| Total funding | $80.0M | $40.0M |
| Latest round | Series C | Seed |
| Valuation | Not published | $1.1B |
| LinkedIn followers | 27,403 | 5,831 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | Covariant | Uma |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 61/100 | 58/100 |
| Traction | 56/100 | 53/100 |
| Team | 70/100 | 30/100 |
| Community | 8/100 | Not published |
| Search visibility | 42/100 | 42/100 |
| Quality | 65/100 | 70/100 |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | F (23/100) | D (42/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 60/100 | 36/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | Covariant | Uma |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Netlify | Vercel |
| CDN | Netlify | Vercel |
| Frameworks | Not detected | Next.js |
| Analytics | Not detected | Google Tag Manager |
Covariant vs Uma: common questions
Which is better, Covariant or Uma?
On our 0-100 score Covariant rates higher (61/100 against 58/100). The score weights traction, team, visibility and profile completeness, so it reflects company strength rather than which product suits you. We compare the two on 20 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do Covariant and Uma compare on the numbers?
Covariant leads on domain rating (60/100 against 36/100), headcount (43 against 29), funding raised ($80.0M against $40.0M), LinkedIn following (27,403 against 5,831). Uma leads on agent readiness (42/100 against 23/100).
Read the full Covariant review and pricing or the Uma review and pricing. You can also browse other Covariant alternatives we track.