Armis vs Claroty (2026)
The two platform giants in healthcare device security share a structure, healthcare capability inside a broader industrial platform, and differ on validation and future ownership. Claroty's healthcare product is Medigate, acquired in 2022 and purpose built for hospital networks: passive deep packet inspection across a reported 500 plus device protocols with clinical context in its threat detection, protecting a reported 20 million plus devices across 2,000 plus hospital facilities, and named Best in KLAS for Healthcare IoT Security multiple years, a healthcare specific buyer signal. Armis validates cross industry: a Leader in the 2026 Gartner Magic Quadrant for CPS Protection Platforms for the second consecutive year, with a unified risk model correlating device context, anomalies, vulnerabilities, and exposure pathways, and deployment flexibility across on premise, cloud, and hybrid. One forward looking fact belongs in the verdict: Armis has announced a planned acquisition by ServiceNow expected to complete in the second half of 2026, so buyers signing multi year agreements are contracting with a company changing owners. If your failure mode is clinical device depth judged by hospital buyers, start with Claroty. If your failure mode is one exposure model across hospital, campus, and industrial estate, start with Armis, and put contractual continuity in the negotiation.
- One risk model across the whole estate: device context, behavioural anomalies, vulnerability intelligence, and exposure pathways correlated into unified prioritisation, spanning hospital, OT, IoT, and enterprise assets.
- Cross industry analyst validation: a Leader in the 2026 Gartner Magic Quadrant for CPS Protection Platforms for the second consecutive year, with 119 Peer Insights reviews rating 4.7 of 5 as of March 2026.
- Deployment flexibility is your constraint: on premise, cloud, and hybrid options, graded A on this index's deployment axis.
- Clinical device depth judged by hospital buyers: Best in KLAS for Healthcare IoT Security multiple years, a healthcare specific survey signal, on a platform protecting a reported 20 million plus devices across 2,000 plus hospital facilities.
- Protocol coverage where fragile devices live: passive deep packet inspection with light active techniques across a reported 500 plus device protocols, and an anomaly module that adds clinical context to prioritise threats.
- Ownership stability by comparison: Claroty completed its healthcare acquisition in 2022 and has operated Medigate since, while Armis's pending ServiceNow acquisition leaves integration questions open through at least late 2026.
This comparison is published by AI Health Index, an independent research platform that compares healthcare AI vendors objectively. Armis and Claroty 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 | Armis | Claroty |
|---|---|---|
| Primary category | Healthcare Cybersecurity | Healthcare Cybersecurity |
| Founded | Not recorded | 2015 |
| Headquarters | San Francisco, California, United States | New York, New York |
| Website | armis.com | claroty.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.
The AI Health Index grades Armis A on Security Certifications and Trust Center, A on EHR and Interoperability Depth, A on Deployment Model and Data Residency and A on Setting and Specialty Coverage, which is the strongest deployment and integration profile of the pair and reflects on premise, cloud and hybrid options rather than a single hosting model. It grades B on AI Centrality, Autonomy and Oversight Model, Clinical and Operational Evidence, AI Safety and PHI Stewardship, FDA and Regulatory Status, AI Governance and Bias Disclosure and Model Supply Chain Disclosure, and C on Model and Technology Transparency, HIPAA and BAA Posture and Commercial Transparency. The grade to read closely is D on AI Liability and Recourse, the only bottom grade either company carries, and it sits alongside a pending change of ownership, so continuity and recourse both belong in the contract rather than in the demo.
Source: AI Health Index, July 2026
The AI Health Index grades Claroty A on Security Certifications and Trust Center, A on HIPAA and BAA Posture, A on EHR and Interoperability Depth and A on Setting and Specialty Coverage, and B on AI Safety and PHI Stewardship, Autonomy and Oversight Model, Model and Technology Transparency, Deployment Model and Data Residency, AI Centrality, Clinical and Operational Evidence and Model Supply Chain Disclosure. It grades C on AI Governance and Bias Disclosure, FDA and Regulatory Status, Commercial Transparency and AI Liability and Recourse. Two of those separate it from Armis directly: an A rather than a C on HIPAA and BAA posture, which is the healthcare specific contracting grade, and a C rather than a D on liability and recourse. The AI Health Index reading is that Claroty carries the stronger healthcare disclosure profile of the pair while Armis carries the stronger deployment profile.
Source: AI Health Index, July 2026
Questions buyers ask
Armis vs Claroty: which is better for hospital device security?
The AI Health Index grades both companies A on setting and specialty coverage, A on security certifications and A on EHR and interoperability depth, so on the axes a hospital security team weighs first the two are level. The separation is on two grades and one structural fact.
Claroty grades A on HIPAA and BAA Posture where Armis grades C, which is the healthcare specific contracting grade rather than a general security one, and Claroty grades C on AI Liability and Recourse where Armis grades D. Armis grades A on Deployment Model and Data Residency where Claroty grades B, reflecting on premise, cloud and hybrid options.
The structural fact is ownership. Armis has announced a planned acquisition expected to complete in the second half of 2026, so a buyer signing a multi year agreement is contracting with a company changing owners, and the AI Health Index recommends putting contractual continuity into the negotiation rather than treating it as settled.
Does either Armis or Claroty publish pricing for healthcare?
Neither does. The AI Health Index grades both C on Commercial Transparency, meaning a hospital cannot establish a pricing basis before a sales engagement with either company. That places both inside the norm for the healthcare cybersecurity vendors the AI Health Index grades, where the index has not located a published pricing basis anywhere in the lane.
Which healthcare device security vendor has better clinical context?
Claroty, on the evidence the AI Health Index records, and the mechanism is worth naming. Its healthcare product is a purpose built acquisition operated since 2022, using passive deep packet inspection across a large number of device protocols with clinical context carried into its threat detection, and it has been named best in class for healthcare device security by a hospital buyer survey across multiple years.
Armis validates across industries rather than within healthcare specifically, correlating device context, anomalies, vulnerabilities and exposure pathways into a single risk model that spans hospital, campus and industrial estate. The AI Health Index grades both B on Clinical and Operational Evidence, so the difference is the shape of the validation rather than its presence: one is deep in the setting, the other is broad across settings.
Who is liable if a device security platform misses a compromised medical device?
Neither company publishes a commitment a buyer can retrieve before contact, and the AI Health Index grades that directly: Claroty C and Armis D on AI Liability and Recourse. Across the whole index this is the weakest axis the AI Health Index grades, with exactly one vendor of the several hundred graded earning the top grade, so the gap here is the market norm rather than a defect specific to either company.
The practical consequence is that recourse in this category is negotiated rather than published. Ask for the cap, the carve outs and the trigger in the same conversation, and for the Armis agreement specifically, ask what survives a change of ownership.
Related comparisons
Other published head to head assessments involving these vendors or their closest peers. The full set for this category is on the Healthcare Cybersecurity page.
Device and facility counts for both vendors are vendor published. Both companies are horizontal platforms whose healthcare capability sits inside a broader industrial security business, and independent Gartner Peer Insights commentary on Armis notes that while asset visibility is strong, some users find OT and CPS protocol depth less than top tier.
Armis's planned acquisition by ServiceNow, expected to complete in the second half of 2026, is a forward looking announcement rather than a settled outcome. Neither vendor publishes pricing, consistent with this index's lane wide finding that none of its indexed healthcare cybersecurity vendors publishes a security attestation.