Asimily vs Cylera (2026)
The lane's top rated platform against its most novel architecture. Asimily is the proven choice: ranked first in the 2026 KLAS Healthcare IoT Security report at 96.6, with contextual vulnerability prioritisation, pre purchase device evaluation, and CMMS integration that grades A on interoperability. Cylera is the technical bet: its patented Digital Twin emulates each device from network traffic and probes the replica out of band, so vulnerability testing never touches equipment attached to a patient, earning A grades on AI centrality and model transparency where Asimily sits at B, and the safest deployment posture in the lane. The gap is evidence, Cylera grades C with no independent benchmark located, where Asimily holds the current KLAS number one. If your failure mode is a proven, independently top rated platform with upstream procurement assessment, start with Asimily. If your failure mode is rigorous vulnerability testing that never touches live equipment, start with Cylera, and ask it to show twin fidelity against real device behaviour.
- The top independent healthcare rating: ranked first in the KLAS 2026 Healthcare IoT Security report at 96.6, buyer sourced research from actual users, where no comparable independent score was located for Cylera, graded B on clinical evidence against Cylera's C.
- Contextual prioritisation plus upstream assessment: each vulnerability weighed against the specific device configuration and network environment, and pre purchase device evaluation that assesses risk before a device is bought.
- The integration that connects security to maintenance: bidirectional CMMS linkage including MediMizer, graded A on interoperability, where Cylera's only named integration is Cisco, holding it at B.
- The most rigorous non invasive testing in the category: the patented Digital Twin emulates each device from network traffic and probes the replica out of band, so testing never touches equipment attached to a patient, graded A on model transparency where Asimily grades B.
- The models do the primary work: the platform classifies zero day devices and protocols it has never seen rather than matching a fixed profile library, graded A on AI centrality where Asimily grades B because its moat is a curated knowledge base.
- The safest deployment posture in the lane, graded A, since rigorous vulnerability probing happens against the emulation out of band and no scanning traffic ever reaches live equipment.
This comparison is published by AI Health Index, an independent research platform that compares healthcare AI vendors objectively. Asimily and Cylera 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 | Asimily | Cylera |
|---|---|---|
| Primary category | Healthcare Cybersecurity | Healthcare Cybersecurity |
| Founded | 2017 | Not recorded |
| Headquarters | Sunnyvale, California, United States | New York, New York, United States |
| Website | asimily.com | cylera.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. Generated from this pair’s live capability grades, so it moves when a grade moves.
The AI Health Index awards Asimily its top capability grade on several axes, including HIPAA and BAA Posture, FDA and Regulatory Status and EHR and Interoperability Depth. Set against Cylera, Asimily grades higher on several axes, including Clinical and Operational Evidence, HIPAA and BAA Posture 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, July 2026
The AI Health Index awards Cylera its top capability grade on AI Centrality, Model and Technology Transparency and Deployment Model and Data Residency. Set against Asimily, Cylera grades higher on AI Centrality, Model and Technology Transparency and Deployment Model and Data Residency. 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, July 2026
Questions buyers ask
Should we choose Asimily or Cylera?
On the axes where the AI Health Index separates them, Asimily grades higher on several axes, including Clinical and Operational Evidence, HIPAA and BAA Posture and Security Certifications and Trust Center, and Cylera grades higher on AI Centrality, Model and Technology Transparency and Deployment Model and Data Residency. Asimily 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 Asimily and Cylera differ most?
The widest separation the AI Health Index records between Asimily and Cylera is on HIPAA and BAA Posture, where Asimily grades A and Cylera grades C. That axis sits in the Regulatory and Compliance group, so it should carry the most weight for a buyer whose binding constraint is where regulatory exposure sits and who carries it.
Where do Asimily and Cylera grade the same?
The AI Health Index grades Asimily and Cylera the same on several axes, including Autonomy and Oversight Model, Model Supply Chain Disclosure and AI Safety and PHI Stewardship. 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 Healthcare Administrative Automation page.
The AI centrality split is deliberate and this index states the reasoning: Asimily grades B because its substantive moat is a curated knowledge base of device profiles alongside the model, while Cylera grades A because constructing and probing a behavioural replica is a substantive modelling problem and the platform generalises to unseen devices.
Against that, Cylera grades C on clinical evidence, with no KLAS score or independent benchmark located and Gartner reviewers describing its vulnerability assessment as still maturing, where Asimily is the current KLAS number one. The technical question to press Cylera on is twin fidelity, since findings only transfer if the replica matches the device. Both are cloud based and neither publishes a security attestation, shared across the category. Neither publishes pricing.