European Alternatives to CloudHealth
Looking for a European alternative to CloudHealth? CloudHealth is now sold as "CloudHealth by Broadcom": the old cloudhealthtech.com address forwards through vmware.com to a Broadcom product page, so the billing, tag and inventory data you connect sits with a US-headquartered parent. The Broadcom product page does not publish prices in the version we could read, which leaves budgeting to a sales conversation.
The European tools below sign contracts from France, the Netherlands, Germany, the United Kingdom and Israel, and several publish plain monthly or yearly pricing instead of a percentage of your cloud bill.
How we rank these tools — 4-step process
-
1
European ownership, verified
The company is headquartered and incorporated in the EU, EEA, the UK, Switzerland or Israel, and processes customer data in Europe or Israel. A US parent company disqualifies a tool from this page regardless of where its servers are.
-
2
Category fit and hands-on review
What the tool actually does, who it suits, and where it falls short — checked against the vendor’s own documentation, changelog and pricing page rather than its marketing copy.
-
3
Compliance and pricing check
GDPR posture, hosting location and the prices quoted on this page are verified against the vendor’s public pricing before publication, and re-checked when we revisit the category.
-
4
Position on this page
Placement on this page can be paid, and that can affect which tools appear here and the order they appear in. It never buys a good review: a tool that fails the checks above is not here at any price, and payment does not change the shortcomings we write about. A vendor can ask us to correct a factual error — not to remove a criticism.
Vendors can pay for visibility on this page. It never changes what an entry says about a product, including the criticism, and we earn nothing when you click through to a vendor. Vendors can pay for more visibility, higher up on the review pages; it never affects which tools are listed. Editorial policy
10 European Alternatives to CloudHealth
Costory
FinOps agent that answers cost questions in Slack and Claude
Holori
Multi-cloud FinOps dashboard with a free tier and virtual tags
Exivity
Cost allocation, chargeback and billing across cloud and datacentre
Finout
Virtual-tag cost allocation across cloud, Kubernetes and AI spend
Hyperglance
Self-hosted cloud cost and inventory tool priced by resource count
Umbrella
FinOps platform for enterprises and MSPs, grown out of Anodot
meshcloud
Platform engineering suite with a chargeback-oriented FinOps module
PointFive
Agentic FinOps platform covering cloud, data platforms and AI
Cycloid
Internal developer platform with a built-in cloud cost module
COCKPIT (DextraData)
IT financial management with imported cloud and SaaS costs
Key takeaways
- CloudHealth is sold as "CloudHealth by Broadcom", and the old cloudhealthtech.com address forwards through vmware.com to a Broadcom product page.
- Costory, Holori, Hyperglance, Cycloid and COCKPIT publish prices, starting at €250 a month, $0 up to $3K of spend, $899 a month, €39 per user and €799 a month respectively.
- Hyperglance and Exivity Core run in your own environment, which keeps billing data away from any vendor cloud.
- Finout, Umbrella and PointFive are Israeli companies and sit outside the EU and EEA, each with a separate US entity for US customers.
- meshcloud is the only tool on this page that governs STACKIT, IONOS and 3DS Outscale together with AWS, Azure and Google Cloud.
Why people leave CloudHealth
CloudHealth is a cloud cost management and governance product that is now sold as "CloudHealth by Broadcom". The old cloudhealthtech.com address forwards through vmware.com to a Broadcom product page, which tells you who the supplier is today: a US-headquartered parent. For a tool whose job is to read your invoices, usage lines and resource tags for every cloud account you run, the identity of that parent is part of the purchase.
People who start looking beyond CloudHealth tend to raise two practical points. The first is budgeting: the Broadcom product page, in the version we could read, publishes no price, so the cost of a cost-control tool is settled in a sales conversation. The second is jurisdiction. Billing data from an EU company can include customer names in project tags, internal team structures and commitments with providers, and some legal teams want that data under European contracts.
This page is not an attack on the product. CloudHealth sits in a category where an established vendor can offer reporting history and a reseller network that a young tool cannot. We could only read a small part of its public presence, so the comparisons below lean on what the European vendors themselves publish, and we say so where the CloudHealth side is thin.
- The supplier is a US parent company The product page now belongs to Broadcom, and the redirect from the old CloudHealth address passes through vmware.com on the way. Your AWS, Azure and Google Cloud billing data would sit with that US group. The European options sign from Paris, Toulouse, Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Essen and London, and Costory states EU data residency on its about page.
- No price on the page we could read We found no price on the Broadcom product page. Compare that with Costory at €250 to €1,200 a month, Holori with a free plan up to $3K of monthly spend, Cycloid at €39 per user, or COCKPIT at €799 to €999 a month. Five of the ten European tools publish numbers, which lets a team set a budget before it books a call.
- Pricing models that do not follow your cloud bill A cost tool whose fee tracks the spend it analyses grows as you grow. We could not verify how CloudHealth charges, so this is a question for its sales team. The European vendors show alternatives: flat plans with unlimited users at Costory and Holori, a resource-count ladder at Hyperglance, a flat yearly fee on forecast spend at Finout, and per-user pricing at Cycloid.
- Newer tools put the answer where the work happens Several European tools skip the dashboard. Costory posts the change, the likely cause and a next step into Slack, and offers a FinOps MCP server for Claude and Cursor. Finout has a read-only Billy assistant, and Umbrella has CostGPT. If the people who cause cost never open a reporting portal, an alert in their channel reaches them sooner.
What you have to replace, not just match
A move away from CloudHealth is first of all a rebuild of structure, not of data. Every tool on this page reads the billing exports of AWS, Azure or Google Cloud itself, so the figures reappear within days.
What you have to recreate by hand is the layer on top: how costs map to teams and products, which reports finance receives, which budgets alert whom. Finout does this with Virtual Tags, Holori and Hyperglance with virtual tags, and Costory and Exivity with allocation rules. Plan a mapping workshop rather than an export script.
Second, list what else the old tool touched. Some teams used CloudHealth only for reports, others tied it into governance and policy work, and the second group has more to replace. meshcloud covers landing zones and account governance across AWS, Azure, Google Cloud, OpenStack, STACKIT, IONOS and 3DS Outscale. Cycloid covers cost estimates at provisioning time. Neither is a drop-in for a pure reporting setup, and a pure reporting setup is better served by Costory, Holori or Finout.
Third, decide who owns the result. Exivity and COCKPIT target people who charge consumers or plan IT budgets, while Hyperglance and PointFive target people who remove waste. We could not read which of these roles CloudHealth served in your company, so write down who uses it today before you compare tools, and pick against that list.
The alternatives compared
| Position | Tool | Headquarters | Pricing | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | Costory | Paris (Station F), France | Starter €250/month, Team €600/month, Business €1,200/month, Custom from €2,500/month; 30-day free trial | EU (France) |
| #2 | Holori | Toulouse, France | Free ($0, up to $3K monthly spend), Pro $49/month, Business $199/month, Enterprise on request; 14-day trial | EU (France) |
| #3 | Exivity | Amsterdam, Netherlands | Quote on request; flat licence, tiered, multi-year, perpetual or pay-as-you-go models | EU (Netherlands) |
| #4 | Finout | Israel (Tel Aviv courts under the terms), Israel | Flat yearly fee based on forecast cloud and AI spend; quote on request | Israel (outside the EU/EEA) |
| #5 | Hyperglance | London, United Kingdom | From $899/month (up to 500 resources), $1,459 (1,000), $3,144 (3,000), $4,492 (5,000), above that on quote; billed annually; 14-day trial | United Kingdom (adequacy decision, outside the EEA) |
| #6 | Umbrella | Israel (city not stated on the pages checked), Israel | Pricing on request | Israel (outside the EU/EEA) |
| #7 | meshcloud | Frankfurt am Main, Germany | Custom pricing, no published price list; book a demo | EU (Germany) |
| #8 | PointFive | Tel Aviv-Yafo, Israel | Pricing on request | Israel (outside the EU/EEA) |
| #9 | Cycloid | Paris, France | Free (up to 5 users, SaaS), Advanced €39 per user/month, Enterprise €99 per user/month, billed annually | EU (France) |
| #10 | COCKPIT (DextraData) | Essen, Germany | Free trial; €999/month (1-year contract), €899 (3-year), €799 (5-year), each including one user, extra full user €35 per user/month; Enterprise on request | EU (Germany) |
How each alternative compares to CloudHealth
Best for: Engineering teams that want spend explained in chat and a price they can read before calling anyone
Against CloudHealth, Costory changes where cost information arrives. An alert lands in Slack with the change, the likely cause and a suggested next step, and a question in the thread gets an answer. A FinOps MCP server gives Claude or Cursor the same data. The Broadcom page we read described none of this, so treat the chat angle as Costory's own claim.
Costory SAS, based at Station F in Paris, lists Starter at €250 a month, Team at €600 and Business at €1,200, with unlimited users on each and a 30-day trial. The cheaper plans update daily with a two-day delay, and SSO starts at the Team plan. For a firm with one cloud contract that wants cost owners named, this is a short path.
What Costory does better than CloudHealth
- Prices are published, from €250 a month
- Alerts and answers inside Slack
- Unlimited users on every plan
- EU data residency stated on the about page
Where Costory is a step down from CloudHealth
- A younger product with a shorter reporting history
- Two-day data latency on Starter
- No Azure marketplace listing mentioned
Standout against CloudHealth. Costory is the tool on this page that lets an AI assistant query your cloud spend through its own MCP server.
Best for: Small teams with more than one cloud provider who need a cheap start and virtual allocation
Holori undercuts a sales-led purchase with a free plan for spend up to $3K a month, then Pro at $49 and Business at $199. Beyond AWS and Azure, it connects Scaleway and OVHcloud and accepts FOCUS data from other providers. A company that keeps part of its estate at a European host sees both worlds in one view, which we could not confirm for CloudHealth.
Holori SAS is registered in Toulouse. Allocation relies on virtual tags dragged onto teams, projects or departments, and the company also tracks AI and LLM costs. The cautions are dollar pricing for a French vendor, monthly sync on the free plan, and tiers that follow the previous month's spend. Enterprise features such as SSO were not described.
What Holori does better than CloudHealth
- A free plan for spend up to $3K a month
- Scaleway and OVHcloud as sources
- Unlimited users on all plans
- Billing data stays in your environment, per the homepage
Where Holori is a step down from CloudHealth
- Enterprise features are not documented publicly
- A small vendor against a large parent group
- Tier follows last month's spend
Standout against CloudHealth. Holori combines a free tier with European hosting providers as supported sources.
Best for: Providers and enterprises that bill customers or business units for metered hybrid infrastructure
Exivity leaves the dashboard question aside and asks how to charge for usage. Hypermeter allocates cloud, private infrastructure and AI spend, and Exivity Core collects usage and applies customer-specific rates in your own environment. Showback, chargeback and billing preparation are standard. If CloudHealth served your reporting only, this is more than you need, and if you resell cloud capacity it may be exactly the missing part.
Exivity B.V. is registered in Amsterdam (KvK 69674191), and its partner list includes HPE, Dell, Nutanix and Morpheus. Connectors reach AWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, VMware and ServiceNow. There is no public price, only licence, tiered, multi-year, perpetual or pay-as-you-go models by quote. The pages we read describe no rightsizing or commitment purchasing, so savings automation sits elsewhere.
What Exivity does better than CloudHealth
- Chargeback and billing preparation are part of the product
- Core runs in your own environment
- VMware and Kubernetes metering for private estates
- Perpetual and pay-as-you-go licence options
Where Exivity is a step down from CloudHealth
- No published prices
- Overbuilt for one team with one AWS account
- No rightsizing described on the pages we read
Standout against CloudHealth. Exivity rates usage against contract terms, so its output can feed an invoice and not only a report.
Best for: FinOps teams with many accounts who need shared costs split by unit without retagging
Finout answers the question of messy tags with Virtual Tags, a rule layer that assigns spend to teams, products or customers while leaving resource tags alone. Its integrations also take in AI providers, Snowflake, Databricks, Datadog and GitHub, so one allocation model can include SaaS and data costs. Anomaly detection, CostGuard, Kubernetes costs and financial plans sit alongside.
This is not an EU company. The terms name Finout Ltd. for customers outside the US and Canada, with Tel Aviv courts, and Finout Inc. for US and Canadian customers under New York law. The fee is a flat yearly amount on forecast cloud and AI spend, by quote, and no data region is stated on the pages we checked. For European data sovereignty it needs a closer look than Costory or Exivity.
What Finout does better than CloudHealth
- Allocation without cleaning up resource tags
- Shared-cost splitting across business units
- Integrations beyond cloud, covering SaaS and AI
- A flat yearly fee instead of per-user pricing
Where Finout is a step down from CloudHealth
- Israeli company, outside the EU and EEA
- Price on request only
- Data storage region not stated
Standout against CloudHealth. Finout allocates costs through Virtual Tags that live in the tool and never alter your cloud resources.
Best for: Regulated or security-minded organisations that will not send cloud inventory to a vendor SaaS
Hyperglance reverses the SaaS model: you install it, and it collects data from your accounts without agents. Cost visualisation, budgets, anomaly detection, rightsizing and commitment planning share the install with infrastructure diagrams and compliance rules, and auto-remediation is available. Against a hosted CloudHealth, your data never reaches a vendor, but you carry the maintenance.
Hyperglance Ltd (company number 06278143) is a UK company, outside the EEA though covered by an adequacy decision, and a US sister company serves US customers. Pricing is annual and in dollars, from $899 a month for up to 500 resources to $4,492 for 5,000, with a 14-day trial. The integration list shows AWS, Azure, GCP and Kubernetes, so European clouds are absent.
What Hyperglance does better than CloudHealth
- Data stays in your own infrastructure
- Rightsizing, compliance and diagrams in one install
- Prices listed by resource count
- Agentless collection from accounts
Where Hyperglance is a step down from CloudHealth
- You run and update the installation
- Entry price of $899 a month
- No European cloud hosts on the integration list
Standout against CloudHealth. Hyperglance is the only tool here that is fully self-hosted from the first tier.
Best for: MSPs and distributors that bill many end customers and need tenants separated
Umbrella speaks to enterprises, MSPs and distributors on separate pages, and its multi-tenant, multi-billing design is the difference from tools built for one company. It offers anomaly detection, forecasting, a savings tracker, CostGPT and GreenOps, with cost for Kubernetes pods and SaaS tools. Forecast accuracy and savings numbers on the site are the vendor's own claims.
The site says Umbrella launched in 2025 as an independent business unit, built on the cloud cost work Anodot began after buying Pileus in 2021. Umbrella Ltd serves customers outside the US under Israeli law, and Umbrella Inc. serves US residents. We could not read its city, data region or price, so a buyer should request all three in writing before shortlisting.
What Umbrella does better than CloudHealth
- Tenant separation for reselling cost reporting
- A GreenOps view beside cost data
- Kubernetes pod and SaaS cost coverage
- A savings tracker for realised savings
Where Umbrella is a step down from CloudHealth
- City, data location and prices are not stated
- Israeli jurisdiction, outside the EU and EEA
- New brand, with history under another name
Standout against CloudHealth. Umbrella offers MSPs and distributors tenant-level billing, a model most tools here do not cover.
Best for: Organisations with several clouds and a sovereignty rule that names STACKIT, IONOS or 3DS Outscale
meshcloud answers a wider question than cost. Its meshStack platform creates landing zones and puts a self-service marketplace in front of developers; the company says it cuts a request from about 45 minutes to under a minute. A FinOps module shows cost across all connected clouds. If you used CloudHealth for governance, that overlap matters.
meshcloud GmbH is a Frankfurt am Main company (HRB 116189) with ISO 27001 and TISAX certification and CNCF Silver and Linux Foundation membership. It governs AWS, Azure, Google Cloud and OpenStack, plus STACKIT, IONOS and 3DS Outscale. There is no price list or self-serve trial, and it is not a Terraform orchestration engine, so it suits companies already running several clouds.
What meshcloud does better than CloudHealth
- Sovereign European clouds governed in the same console
- Landing zones and self-service provisioning
- ISO 27001 and TISAX certifications
- German registered company with a sovereignty focus
Where meshcloud is a step down from CloudHealth
- No published price and no trial
- Cost is a module, not the whole product
- Little value for a single-cloud team
Standout against CloudHealth. meshcloud governs STACKIT, IONOS and 3DS Outscale beside the US hyperscalers from one console.
Best for: Enterprises that want findings traced to a cause and fixes prepared across cloud and AI usage
PointFive starts at the opposite end from allocation tools. DeepWaste detections trace waste to the resource or decision behind it, and Chat, Coworkers and Apps can carry out a fix after you approve. Its reach covers Kubernetes, data platforms and AI providers, and TokenShift applies budgets to AI agents running on employee workstations.
PointFive Ltd. appears in the terms and privacy policy with an address in Tel Aviv-Yafo, and a New York office exists too. Israel is outside the EU and EEA. The company lists SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001, AWS and Azure marketplaces, and sub-processors including AWS and Snowflake. Prices and data region are not stated, and automated remediation needs write permissions, which is a security decision for you.
What PointFive does better than CloudHealth
- Waste is traced to its cause
- Fixes are prepared and applied after approval
- AI spend and data platforms in scope
- SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001 listed
Where PointFive is a step down from CloudHealth
- Price not published
- US sub-processors named in the terms
- Remediation needs write access to accounts
Standout against CloudHealth. PointFive pairs waste findings with agents that make the change once a person approves it.
Best for: DevOps teams that want a cost figure at provisioning time inside the developer portal
Cycloid is mainly an internal developer platform, and its cost module follows from that. Cost estimates appear before infrastructure is deployed, with automatic tagging and filters by account, project and provider. The aim is to put the figure in the pipeline rather than in a report a month later, which a reporting-only tool like CloudHealth is not designed to do.
Cycloid SAS has its head office in Paris. The free SaaS plan covers up to five users, Advanced costs €39 per user a month and Enterprise €99, billed annually, and self-hosted or air-gapped installs exist. The module lists AWS, Azure and GCP only, so Scaleway and OVHcloud are not described as supported. Per-user pricing rises with headcount instead of spend.
What Cycloid does better than CloudHealth
- Estimates before deployment
- A free SaaS plan for up to five users
- Self-hosted and air-gapped options
- Cost sits in the same portal as provisioning
Where Cycloid is a step down from CloudHealth
- Heavy if you only need billing analysis
- Only AWS, Azure and GCP described
- Per-user pricing grows with headcount
Standout against CloudHealth. Cycloid puts a cost estimate in the deployment step, before any money is spent.
Best for: IT controllers and finance teams who plan budgets and want cloud costs in the same model
COCKPIT approaches the topic from finance. It is built for IT budgeting, service catalogues and allocation by cause, and cloud and SaaS costs are imported into that model, with forecasts, scenarios and open APIs. A controller who used CloudHealth reports as an input to the budget may find COCKPIT closer to the actual job than an engineering tool.
DextraData GRC Technologies GmbH is registered in Essen (HRB 37332). Monthly prices run from €999 on a one-year contract to €799 on five years, each with one user, plus €35 for each extra full user, and a free trial covers one module. Enterprise customers can install on-premise. The pages we read name no supported clouds and describe no rightsizing, so it will not replace an optimisation tool.
What COCKPIT (DextraData) does better than CloudHealth
- Cloud costs sit inside a full IT budget model
- Monthly prices are published
- On-premise installation for enterprise contracts
- Forecasts and scenarios for finance teams
Where COCKPIT (DextraData) is a step down from CloudHealth
- No engineer-facing optimisation described
- A one-year minimum contract
- Supported cloud providers are not listed
Standout against CloudHealth. COCKPIT is the only tool here that turns cloud spend into a line of a complete IT budget.
What actually breaks when you switch
The first break is reporting continuity. Finance may hold monthly reports built in CloudHealth, and a new tool will not reproduce past periods the same way.
Export what you need to keep as files before the contract ends, and agree a cut-over date at a month boundary so that no month is split across two tools. Allocation rules are the second break: whatever perspectives or tag mappings you built must be rewritten in the new tool's own model, which takes longer than connecting the accounts.
The third break is access and approvals. Costory describes read-only cloud access, which is quick for a security team to approve, but PointFive's remediation and some Hyperglance features need write permissions and a longer review. Contracts are the fourth: we could not read CloudHealth's terms, so check notice periods and renewal rules before you sign anything new. Self-hosting Hyperglance or Exivity Core also adds an internal task that a SaaS tool does not.
Does CloudHealth publish its prices?
On the Broadcom product page, in the version we could read, no price appears. The page is rendered in the browser, so we may have missed content, and a quote could still be public elsewhere. Ask the sales team for a written price that states what the fee is based on, and for the term of the contract.
If a published price matters to you, five of the ten tools here show theirs: Costory, Holori, Hyperglance, Cycloid and COCKPIT. Exivity, Finout, Umbrella, PointFive and meshcloud work by quote, like the incumbent appears to.
Which European tool reads my cloud accounts without sending data to a vendor cloud?
Hyperglance is deployed in your own infrastructure and collects data agentlessly, so inventory and billing figures stay inside your perimeter. Exivity Core runs in your own environment too, though Hypermeter is a SaaS product whose data region is not stated on the pages we read.
Holori says billing and usage data stay in your environment, and Costory describes read-only access with EU residency. The cost of self-hosting is time: with Hyperglance you run and update the installation yourself, and the entry tier is $899 a month for up to 500 resources.
Which one to pick
For a team of engineers on one or two clouds that wants a readable price and alerts where it already works, Costory is the shortest route, and Holori is the cheaper start when monthly spend is below $3K or part of the estate lives at Scaleway or OVHcloud. For a firm that needs data to stay in its own perimeter, Hyperglance is the self-hosted choice, with Exivity Core as the equivalent on the chargeback side.
If CloudHealth was mostly a governance tool, meshcloud is the closest scope match, especially with STACKIT, IONOS or 3DS Outscale in play. Exivity fits providers who invoice for usage, COCKPIT fits controllers, Cycloid fits platform teams, and Finout, Umbrella and PointFive fit buyers who accept an Israeli supplier. Where you hold a long CloudHealth contract that works, it may be sensible to wait for renewal.
Frequently Asked Questions
No single tool fits every buyer, and the best choice depends on the job. Costory suits teams that want alerts in Slack on flat plans from €250 a month. Holori suits small multi-cloud teams, with a free plan and Scaleway and OVHcloud support. Exivity suits those who charge consumers for usage, and meshcloud suits multi-cloud governance including STACKIT and IONOS. Hyperglance is the self-hosted option.
It is sold as "CloudHealth by Broadcom". Visiting the old cloudhealthtech.com address sends you through vmware.com to a Broadcom product page. We could not read the terms or the customer information on that page, so check the contracting entity on your own order form before you rely on any assumption about who your supplier is.
Yes, and running both for a full billing month is the safest route. Holori has a free plan and a 14-day trial, Hyperglance has a 14-day trial, and Costory has a 30-day trial. COCKPIT offers a free trial of one module for one user. Exivity, PointFive, Finout, Umbrella and meshcloud begin with a demo instead.
We cannot say, because we found no CloudHealth price to compare against. What we can say is what the European vendors publish: Holori's Pro is $49 a month, Costory's Starter is €250, Cycloid's Advanced is €39 per user, and Hyperglance starts at $899 for up to 500 resources. Compare quotes for your own spend level rather than list prices.
Not for the allocation-first tools. Costory and Holori are built for engineers and small teams without a dedicated FinOps role, with alerts and ready dashboards. Finout, Exivity and meshcloud assume a person owns cost allocation, chargeback or governance, and PointFive's agentic fixes need someone to approve write access.
Related comparisons
About the author
Explore More European Alternatives
Discover privacy-focused European alternatives to other popular US tech services.