Claroty vs Cylera (2026)
Incumbent scale against novel architecture. Claroty is the deployed standard: its Medigate derived platform reports 20 million plus devices across 2,000 plus hospital facilities with a reported 500 plus protocols, named Best in KLAS across multiple years, the largest proven footprint in the lane. 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 and the safest deployment posture in the category. The gap is evidence and maturity, Cylera grades C on clinical evidence with no independent benchmark located, where Claroty has years of Best in KLAS recognition, and Cylera's own record here is stronger on mechanism than on measured outcomes. If your failure mode is the largest proven install base and protocol breadth, start with Claroty. If your failure mode is rigorous vulnerability testing that never touches live equipment, start with Cylera, and ask it to demonstrate twin fidelity.
- The largest proven footprint in the lane: a reported 20 million plus devices across 2,000 plus hospital facilities, with discovery across a reported 500 plus protocols through the Medigate derived platform.
- A long independent track record: named Best in KLAS for Healthcare IoT Security across multiple years, where no comparable independent score was located for Cylera, graded B on clinical evidence against Cylera's C.
- Purpose built healthcare device security graded A on setting coverage, spanning IoMT, IoT, and building management systems with clinical context added to threat prioritisation.
- 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.
- The models do the primary work: the platform classifies zero day devices and protocols it has never seen rather than matching a fixed library, graded A on AI centrality against Claroty at B.
- The safest deployment posture in the lane, graded A, since vulnerability probing happens against the emulation out of band and no scanning traffic reaches live equipment.
This comparison is published by AI Health Index, an independent research platform that compares healthcare AI vendors objectively. Claroty 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 | Claroty | Cylera |
|---|---|---|
| Primary category | Healthcare Cybersecurity | Healthcare Cybersecurity |
| Founded | 2015 | Not recorded |
| Headquarters | New York, New York | New York, New York, United States |
| Website | claroty.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 Claroty its top capability grade on several axes, including HIPAA and BAA Posture, Security Certifications and Trust Center and EHR and Interoperability Depth. Set against Cylera, Claroty grades higher on several axes, including Model Supply Chain Disclosure, Clinical and Operational Evidence 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
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 Claroty, Cylera grades higher on several axes, including AI Centrality, Model and Technology Transparency and FDA and Regulatory Status. 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 Claroty or Cylera?
On the axes where the AI Health Index separates them, Claroty grades higher on several axes, including Model Supply Chain Disclosure, Clinical and Operational Evidence and HIPAA and BAA Posture, and Cylera grades higher on several axes, including AI Centrality, Model and Technology Transparency and FDA and Regulatory Status. Claroty 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 Claroty and Cylera differ most?
The widest separation the AI Health Index records between Claroty and Cylera is on HIPAA and BAA Posture, where Claroty 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 Claroty and Cylera grade the same?
The AI Health Index grades Claroty and Cylera the same on several axes, including Autonomy and Oversight Model, AI Safety and PHI Stewardship and AI Governance and Bias Disclosure. 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 Cybersecurity page.
Both grade A on setting coverage as healthcare device security specialists, and Cylera grades A on AI centrality against Claroty's B for the Digital Twin mechanism. 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 Claroty has been named Best in KLAS across multiple years.
A structural caveat for reading this pairing: Claroty's record on this index is less fully assessed, carrying graded axes on AI centrality, setting, evidence, and deployment but not on model transparency or autonomy, so some Claroty axes show as not rated rather than as an absence of capability. The technical question to press Cylera on is twin fidelity. Device and facility counts are vendor reported. Neither publishes a security attestation or pricing.