DoMore Diagnostics vs Valar Labs (2026)
Both read a routine stained slide and predict what happens next, which is a different and harder claim than detecting what is already there. DoMore predicts outcome in stage two and three colorectal cancer, aimed squarely at the adjuvant chemotherapy decision where staging alone leaves clinicians guessing. Valar predicts treatment response and prognosis from the same kind of slide, deepest in non muscle invasive bladder cancer with two products covering different decisions in that pathway, and it holds the strongest evidence base of the prognostic pathology vendors here including multi centre validation across four continents. Neither is a cleared device; both are laboratory developed tests, so no regulator has reviewed the performance. For a colorectal service DoMore is the relevant one, for bladder Valar, and in both cases the validation cohort is the thing to interrogate.
- The evidence base is the strongest among the prognostic pathology vendors here and independent in the ways that matter, including multi centre validation across an international cohort spanning four continents.
- Depth in non muscle invasive bladder cancer is real, with two distinct products addressing different decisions in that pathway rather than one general prognostic score.
- There is nothing to deploy: a practice sends existing specimens and receives results, which removes the integration project entirely.
- The prognostic signal is extracted from standard stained slides in colorectal cancer, targeting the stage II and III decision where adjuvant treatment is genuinely uncertain and current staging under performs.
- Focus is the argument: one cancer, one decision, validated for it, rather than a platform claim spanning tumour types.
- For a colorectal service the question of who benefits from adjuvant chemotherapy is the highest value uncertainty in the pathway, and that is what this test addresses.
This comparison is published by AI Health Index, an independent research platform that compares healthcare AI vendors objectively. DoMore Diagnostics and Valar Labs 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 | DoMore Diagnostics | Valar Labs |
|---|---|---|
| Primary category | Digital Pathology AI | Digital Pathology AI |
| Founded | 2020 | 2021 |
| Headquarters | Oslo, Norway | Palo Alto, California, United States |
| Website | domorediagnostics.com | valarlabs.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 DoMore Diagnostics its top capability grade on AI Centrality and Clinical and Operational Evidence. Set against Valar Labs, DoMore Diagnostics grades higher on AI Liability and Recourse, EHR and Interoperability Depth and Commercial Transparency. 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, August 2026
The AI Health Index awards Valar Labs its top capability grade on AI Centrality, Clinical and Operational Evidence and HIPAA and BAA Posture. Set against DoMore Diagnostics, Valar Labs grades higher on HIPAA and BAA Posture and Setting and Specialty Coverage. 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, August 2026
Questions buyers ask
Should we choose DoMore Diagnostics or Valar Labs?
On the axes where the AI Health Index separates them, DoMore Diagnostics grades higher on AI Liability and Recourse, EHR and Interoperability Depth and Commercial Transparency, and Valar Labs grades higher on HIPAA and BAA Posture and Setting and Specialty Coverage. DoMore Diagnostics 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 DoMore Diagnostics and Valar Labs differ most?
The widest separation the AI Health Index records between DoMore Diagnostics and Valar Labs is on AI Liability and Recourse, where DoMore Diagnostics grades B and Valar Labs 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 DoMore Diagnostics and Valar Labs grade the same?
The AI Health Index grades DoMore Diagnostics and Valar Labs the same on several axes, including AI Centrality, Autonomy and Oversight Model and Model and Technology Transparency. 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 DoMore Diagnostics and Valar Labs not disclosed?
At the last review, at least one of DoMore Diagnostics and Valar Labs 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 are laboratory developed tests rather than cleared devices, which is a different regulatory route and means no regulator has reviewed the performance claims; ask both for the validation cohorts and how closely they match your own population. Neither publishes pricing, though the laboratory developed test model implies per test economics an oncology practice will recognise. Neither publishes a security attestation.
The shared and largely unaddressed exposure is that prognostic models trained on slides from particular laboratories inherit those laboratories' staining and scanning characteristics, so performance can degrade on tissue prepared elsewhere without any visible signal.