CloudHealth vs Cloudability: two platforms inside two giants, compared
CloudHealth and Cloudability are the two longest-established multi-cloud cost platforms, and both now sit inside much larger companies: CloudHealth with Broadcom, sold exclusively through Arrow, and Cloudability with IBM through the Apptio acquisition. Buyers comparing them are usually renewing one, migrating from one to the other, or asking whether a third option fits. This page compares ownership, how each is sold and priced, and how each handles allocation, chargeback and forecasting, and says when Runcost is worth a look.
Ownership and how each is sold
CloudHealth was acquired by VMware in 2018 and became a Broadcom product when Broadcom completed its acquisition of VMware in November 2023. In May 2024 Broadcom made Arrow Electronics the exclusive global provider: Arrow sells and supports it, Broadcom owns it and sets the roadmap. It is marketed as CloudHealth by Broadcom.
Cloudability was acquired by Apptio in 2019 and became an IBM product when IBM completed its acquisition of Apptio in 2023. IBM sells it directly in three editions, Essentials, Standard and Premium, and positions it alongside the Apptio Technology Business Management portfolio.
The practical difference for a buyer is the counterparty. A CloudHealth contract runs through Arrow; a Cloudability contract runs through IBM. Both are enterprise procurement processes, and both have been reported by some customers to change terms at renewal after the acquisitions; check your own renewal rather than the anecdotes.
Allocation, chargeback and forecasting
Both platforms allocate cost to business dimensions by rule. CloudHealth’s construct is Perspectives, groupings of resources by account, tag and other attributes into dimensions such as team and application, with reports built on top. Cloudability’s is Business Mapping, which IBM says can reach full allocation of multi-cloud program costs, with cost-sharing tools and container allocation for Kubernetes.
Both offer forecasting and budgets against those dimensions, anomaly and budget alerts, rightsizing and commitment recommendations, and governance features; Cloudability adds policy enforcement with ITSM integration and a financial planning module. In both, the chargeback statement finance posts is typically assembled from reports rather than produced as a reconciled document per consumer, which is the gap a finance team most often reports.
Choosing between them
- Already on one of them with acceptable renewal terms: the switching cost of rebuilding Perspectives or Business Mapping is real, and staying is usually right.
- Running Technology Business Management on Apptio: Cloudability, for the shared vocabulary.
- Buying as, or through, a managed service provider: CloudHealth, whose MSP model and Arrow channel were built for it.
- Wanting a direct vendor relationship rather than a distributor: Cloudability.
- Wanting a published price, a commitment sized to the data rather than the bill, and a chargeback statement finance can post: neither is designed for that, which is where Runcost comes in.
Where Runcost fits
Runcost is a third option for a specific buyer: the organization whose finance team owns the cloud bill and needs a showback or chargeback statement per department, product or customer, reconciled to the invoice and drillable to the resource, from one FOCUS 1.4 ledger across AWS, Azure and Google Cloud, with forecasts and anomaly alerts at the same level. It is priced in four published tiers by rows of cost data, from $300 a month, and sold directly.
It is also a new product, launched in 2026, with no reviews, no analyst placement, no optimization workflow and no partner channel. An organization that needs those should choose between the two incumbents. An organization that needs the statement, and is willing to be an early customer, should talk to Runcost.
Side by side
Neither vendor publishes prices. Both are sold on enterprise contracts sized to cloud spend under management; figures from third-party pricing guides are buyer reports and are labelled as such. Runcost publishes its prices, tiered by data volume rather than by a percentage of the bill, from $300 a month.
| CloudHealth by Broadcom | IBM Cloudability | Runcost | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Owner | Broadcom (VMware acquisition, Nov 2023) | IBM (Apptio acquisition, 2023) | CloudMigrate L.L.C-FZ |
| Channel | Exclusively through Arrow since May 2024 | Direct from IBM | Direct |
| Pricing basis | Enterprise contracts sized to spend; no public prices | Essentials, Standard, Premium; annual contracts sized to spend; no public prices | Published: Starter $300, Growth $1,000, Scale $3,000, Enterprise from $5,000 a month, tiered by rows of cost data a month, never a percentage of the bill |
| Free tier or trial | None published | Free trial | No free tier; a read-only pilot on one billing export |
| Allocation construct | Perspectives | Business Mapping | Ordered direct, proportional and fixed rules; unallocated reported by cause |
| Chargeback statement | Assembled from reports | Cost sharing and showback views; assembled from them | Showback and chargeback statements per department, product or customer, from the same rules |
| Forecasting | Forecasts and budgets on Perspectives | AI-backed forecasting, top-down budgeting, financial planning | Per consumer, committed and on-demand apart, published as a range against budget |
| Optimization and governance | Rightsizing, commitments, governance policies | Rightsizing, commitments, policy enforcement, ITSM | Not a focus |
| FOCUS | Confirm with Arrow | Confirm with IBM | Native FOCUS 1.4 data model; ingests FOCUS exports and native exports |
| Maturity | Established; enterprise and MSP base | Established; Gartner leader by IBM’s account | Launched 2026; no public reviews or customer logos yet |
Choose one of them if
- CloudHealth if you buy through or as a managed service provider, or the Arrow relationship already works for you.
- Cloudability if you run Apptio TBM, want a direct IBM relationship, or want policy enforcement and financial planning in one suite.
- Either if you are already on it and the renewal terms are acceptable; rebuilding allocation rules is the real switching cost.
Choose Runcost if
- Finance needs the chargeback statement itself, reconciled and drillable, rather than reports to build it from.
- You want a published price and a commitment sized to your data, not a percentage of your bill.
- You are standardizing on FOCUS and want a FOCUS-native ledger.
- You would rather be an early customer with direct access to the builders than a small account at a large vendor.
Questions
Is CloudHealth or Cloudability better?
They are close in capability and both are enterprise platforms. The decision usually turns on channel and ecosystem: CloudHealth through Arrow with a strong managed-service-provider model, Cloudability direct from IBM alongside Apptio’s TBM suite. If you are already on one with acceptable terms, staying is usually right.
Who owns CloudHealth and Cloudability now?
Broadcom owns CloudHealth, which came with its acquisition of VMware in November 2023, and Arrow Electronics has been its exclusive global provider since May 2024. IBM owns Cloudability, which came with its acquisition of Apptio in 2023.
How are they priced?
Neither publishes prices. Both sell enterprise contracts sized to the cloud spend under management; Cloudability in Essentials, Standard and Premium editions. Third-party pricing guides report percentages of spend and five-figure annual fees at around a million dollars of spend; treat those as buyer reports and get quotes.
Why consider Runcost instead?
If the thing you need is a chargeback or showback statement per department that reconciles to the invoice, from a FOCUS-native ledger, with published prices from $300 a month. Runcost is new and honest about its scope: no optimization workflow, no partner channel, no reviews yet.
Sources
Go deeper