CloudHealth has been a fixture in cloud cost management since long before "FinOps" was a job title. Originally an independent product, it was acquired by VMware in 2018 and passed to Broadcom with Broadcom's 2023 acquisition of VMware. Broadcom retains ownership and development, relaunching the product as CloudHealth by Broadcom with a refreshed UX in June 2025, while since May 2024 Arrow Electronics has been the sole global provider handling sales, marketing, and technical support through its ArrowSphere platform. It remains one of the most widely deployed FinOps platforms in large AWS-heavy enterprises and among managed service providers.
That longevity is real value: a mature reporting engine, deep AWS billing knowledge, and an installed base that spans thousands of organizations. It also comes with the baggage of a large, twice-acquired enterprise product. This page compares CloudHealth and CLARITY honestly, including where CloudHealth's enterprise heritage is still the better fit.
When CloudHealth Is the Right Choice
CloudHealth is a strong choice for large, AWS-heavy organizations that already run on VMware or Broadcom infrastructure and want a single vendor relationship. Its perspective-based reporting engine (grouping resources into logical business perspectives) is genuinely flexible for complex organizational hierarchies, and its multi-tenant architecture makes it one of the better options for MSPs and resellers who need to bill multiple clients from one console with custom pricing models.
If your organization has existing Broadcom or VMware contracts, procurement relationships, and support agreements, consolidating FinOps under the same vendor can reduce vendor sprawl even if the FinOps-specific tooling isn't the newest on the market.
Feature Comparison
The table below reflects both platforms' publicly documented capabilities as of mid-2026.
| Capability | CloudHealth | CLARITY |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-cloud coverage | AWS-primary tiering, Azure and GCP supported | AWS, Azure, GCP at comparable analytical depth on every provider |
| Cost data source | Billing exports and Cost and Usage Reports | Live provider APIs — no CUR-file dependency, no 24–48h export delay |
| Cost allocation model | Perspective-based grouping and tagging rules | 4-strategy engine (direct, calculated, proportional, K8s) with per-row source tracking |
| AI-validated recommendations | Rule-based rightsizing and anomaly detection | AI-powered analysis validates every recommendation before it surfaces |
| Kubernetes cost allocation | Limited native support; often paired with third-party tools | Namespace-level allocation by CPU/memory share, feeding directly into chargeback |
| Commitment optimization (RI/SP/CUD) | Mature AWS Reserved Instance and Savings Plan analysis | Modeled across AWS, Azure, and GCP with break-even and inventory tracking |
| MSP / multi-tenant billing | Strong — purpose-built for reseller pricing models | Built for direct customer use, not reseller multi-tenancy |
| Contract structure | Annual contracts, tiered by AWS spend under management | Flat monthly tiers, cancel anytime, annual billing optional |
| Roadmap ownership | Broadcom, post-VMware acquisition (2023) | Cloudbitz, independently developed and maintained |
| Onboarding | Sales-led, typically weeks | Self-serve trial, minutes to connect; guided onboarding on paid tiers |
The pattern: CloudHealth's strength is its maturity and MSP flexibility, particularly for AWS spend. CLARITY's strength is equal-depth multi-cloud analysis, AI-validated recommendations, and native Kubernetes chargeback, delivered through flat monthly pricing instead of a locked annual contract.
Pricing Comparison
CloudHealth's pricing is structured around annual contracts tiered by AWS spend under management. Third-party pricing breakdowns put the CH150K tier (covering up to $150,000/mo in AWS spend) at roughly $45,000/year for a 12-month term, with the CH300K tier extending coverage to $300,000/mo in AWS spend at a proportionally higher annual price, as of mid-2026. Add-ons like premium support tiers carry additional annual fees. Multi-year contracts (24 or 36 months) can reduce per-year rates but increase the total commitment.
CLARITY's Business tier is $3,800/mo ($45,600/yr), covering up to $1,000,000/mo in tracked cloud spend across all three providers combined — more than triple CloudHealth's CH300K ceiling at a comparable or lower annual cost, per each vendor's published pricing as of mid-2026, and billed month to month rather than locked into a multi-year contract. For organizations spending under $50,000/mo, CLARITY's Starter tier at $1,200/mo is typically a fraction of what a CloudHealth enterprise contract would run once onboarding and support fees are included. See the full CLARITY pricing breakdown for tier details.
Why Teams Switch to CLARITY
Organizations migrating off CloudHealth tend to cite three recurring drivers.
Roadmap uncertainty after the Broadcom acquisition. Large-scale acquisitions routinely shift product priorities, pricing structures, and support models. Teams that depend on CloudHealth for daily cost decisions want confidence that the roadmap serves their use case, not just the acquiring company's broader portfolio strategy.
Azure and GCP feel like an afterthought. CloudHealth's pricing tiers and much of its deepest tooling were built around AWS spend under management. Organizations running meaningful Azure or GCP workloads often find the reporting and recommendation depth noticeably thinner outside AWS. CLARITY was engineered for parity across all three from day one.
They want AI-validated recommendations and Kubernetes chargeback natively. CloudHealth's rightsizing recommendations are rule-based; CLARITY's AI layer classifies CPU peak patterns before recommending a change, so a workload with a predictable nightly batch spike doesn't get flagged as idle. Combined with namespace-level Kubernetes cost allocation feeding directly into chargeback, teams get one system instead of stitching CloudHealth together with a separate Kubernetes cost tool.
If your organization runs an active MSP or reseller business on CloudHealth's multi-tenant billing, that's a genuine reason to stay. For direct-use FinOps programs looking for multi-cloud parity and predictable flat pricing, CLARITY is worth the trial.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CloudHealth still being actively developed after the Broadcom acquisition?
How is CloudHealth priced compared to CLARITY?
Does CloudHealth cover Azure and GCP as well as AWS?
Is CloudHealth good for MSPs and resellers?
For the full evaluation framework covering all five FinOps platform criteria, read Best FinOps Tools in 2026: A Practical Platform Comparison.
See how CLARITY handles your actual cloud bill.
Connect AWS, Azure, or GCP and get the full diagnostic during a 5-day free trial — no credit card required.
Start Free Trial Or talk to us about a free cloud cost audit