Claroty
CPS/IoT & IoMT security visibility
7.5
Overall Score
7.5
Overall Score
CLAROTY
Healthcare cybersecurity · CPS & IoMT exposure
Claroty
Strong fit
- Health systems with large connected device and industrial control footprints across clinical and facilities networks
- CISO teams that need visibility and risk prioritization beyond managed laptops
- Organizations ready to involve biomed and facilities engineering in the security program
Weak fit
- Ambulatory groups with minimal IoMT or building-system exposure
- Buyers who only need endpoint EDR on managed workstations
- IT shops unwilling to fund network segmentation follow-through after discovery
Bottom line
Claroty earns a Recommend for hospitals that need cyber-physical and IoMT visibility at a broader scale than a clinical-device-only point tool. Outcomes hinge on asset discovery quality and whether risk rankings drive real segmentation and patching work. Product depth in CPS/IoT security is the differentiator versus identity-first tools like Imprivata and versus more clinically focused IoMT peers like Cynerio. Implementation needs network access and biomed partnership. Pricing is specialized enterprise security territory.
Score breakdown
7.8
Seeing what is on the network
7.6
Ranking which risks to fix first
7.1
Fitting hospital clinical workflows
7.0
Knowing what you will pay
35% Customer outcomes
30% Product
20% Implementation
15% Pricing clarity
Score Analysis
- Seeing what is on the network. Finding what is actually on clinical and facilities networks is the first job, and Claroty's CPS heritage shows here. Coverage still depends on sensor placement and network design.
- Ranking which risks to fix first. Ranking exposures so the SOC and biomed can act is more valuable than raw CVE dumps. Clinical context still needs local tuning.
- Fitting hospital clinical workflows. Healthcare packaging and IoMT content matter for hospital buyers. Industrial security depth helps, and messaging that stays too OT-centric can slow clinical buy-in.
- Knowing what you will pay. Device counts, sites, and sensor hardware drive quotes. Compare total cost against the cost of a clinical device or building-system outage, not against consumer antivirus.
Claroty vs Competitors
Cynerio
IoMT discovery & clinical cyber risk
7.3
Overall Score
Imprivata
Identity-first clinical security
7.8
Overall Score
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | Typically scaled to sites, beds, or discovered assets, with sensor and services lines. |
| What usually drives cost | Network sensors and professional services for deployment and tuning. |
| What to ask in diligence | Year-two cost at your projected device growth, plus who owns segmentation follow-through. |
Methodology
| Weight | Factor | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| 35% | Customer outcomes | Whether buyers get measurable operational or clinical-workflow results after go-live |
| 30% | Product | Capability depth, reliability, and fit for the job the category actually buys |
| 20% | Implementation | How hard it is to stand up, integrate, train, and stabilize |
| 15% | Pricing clarity | Whether a buyer can model total cost without a mystery quote |
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Highly recommend | Strong outcomes and product with manageable caveats |
| Recommend | Solid fit for the right buyer; know the tradeoffs |
| Conditional | Only with a specific use case or heavy caveats |
| Not recommended | Avoid for most buyers in this category |
Read our full methodology for how we weight scores and assign recommend labels.