Behold.ai vs Oxipit (2026)
These two define the autonomous end of imaging AI, the only pair in the index that removes normal studies from human review entirely, both CE or UK and neither cleared for autonomous use in the US. So the buyer's real question is who stands behind an auto reported study that no clinician read. If you want the cleanest published autonomy evidence and CT head coverage, start with Behold.ai, but read its continuity history first. If corporate stability and the first ever autonomous reporting clearance matter more, start with Oxipit, now owned by the imaging IT vendor Sectra. Behold's original entity entered administration in early 2025 and a successor acquired the assets. Oxipit was acquired intact. Both publish strong operating detail; the difference is who will still be there.
- The cleanest published autonomy evidence at this frontier: peer reviewed work reporting 15 percent of chest X-rays auto reported normal at a 0.33 percent error rate, publishing the auto report rate and its error rate together, which is what a defensible autonomy claim requires.
- CT head as well as chest X-ray: it removes more than 60 percent of CT head scans from the reporting workload at a 93 percent negative predictive value, coverage Oxipit's autonomous product does not match.
- A concrete commercial benchmark: it positions explicitly against outsourced radiology reporting, so a buyer can price it against the per study outsourcing rate it displaces.
- The first regulatory approval anywhere for autonomous diagnostic reporting: ChestLink holds CE Class IIb across 32 European countries, and the company publishes the fullest operating detail in the category, over a year of supervised operation on more than 500,000 images at a 99 percent sensitivity threshold, with an audit trail.
- Stable corporate footing: acquired by the imaging IT vendor Sectra in April 2026, so procurement, roadmap, and support run through an established organization rather than a relaunched entity.
- A broader safety netted suite: 75 findings plus a quality module that continuously re checks AI negative studies, a standing false negative control.
This comparison is published by AI Health Index, an independent research platform that compares healthcare AI vendors objectively. Behold.ai and Oxipit 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
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 Behold.ai its top capability grade on AI Centrality and Autonomy and Oversight Model. Set against Oxipit, Behold.ai grades higher on Autonomy and Oversight Model. Its thinnest published disclosure sits on Model Supply Chain Disclosure. 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 Oxipit its top capability grade on AI Centrality and Model and Technology Transparency. Set against Behold.ai, Oxipit grades higher on several axes, including Model and Technology Transparency, Model Supply Chain Disclosure and HIPAA and BAA Posture. 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 Behold.ai or Oxipit?
On the axes where the AI Health Index separates them, Behold.ai grades higher on Autonomy and Oversight Model, and Oxipit grades higher on several axes, including Model and Technology Transparency, Model Supply Chain Disclosure and HIPAA and BAA Posture. Oxipit 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 Behold.ai and Oxipit differ most?
The widest separation the AI Health Index records between Behold.ai and Oxipit is on Autonomy and Oversight Model, where Behold.ai grades A and Oxipit grades B. That axis sits in the AI Capability group, so it should carry the most weight for a buyer whose binding constraint is how much of the work the model itself is trusted to do.
Where do Behold.ai and Oxipit grade the same?
The AI Health Index grades Behold.ai and Oxipit the same on several axes, including AI Centrality, Clinical and Operational Evidence 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.
What have Behold.ai and Oxipit not disclosed?
At the last review, at least one of Behold.ai and Oxipit published thin or absent detail on Model Supply Chain Disclosure. The AI Health Index treats an absent disclosure as a gap in the public record rather than a failure of the product, so these are the axes to get in writing during diligence instead of inferring from the grade.
Related comparisons
Other published head to head assessments involving these vendors or their closest peers. The full set for this category is on the Clinical Decision Support page.
Both sit at the autonomous frontier and remove normal studies from human review, so the governing questions are accountability and subgroup performance, and neither publishes demographic subgroup analysis, the pointed gap when a tool removes studies from review entirely, since any group the model underperforms on disproportionately receives an unread scan.
Neither is available for autonomous use in the United States; Oxipit is CE only and Behold's autonomous operation is a UK and European deployment, with its FDA clearance covering triage only. Behold's regulatory standing is unsettled: NICE withdrew red dot in February 2025 after the original company entered administration, and a buyer must verify which authorizations, support terms, and indemnity transferred to the successor entity. Behold's materials do not address who holds clinical responsibility for an auto reported study no clinician read. Neither publishes pricing or a security attestation.