Where studies actually fail
Legacy enterprise eCOA, or modern operating system?
Clario's regulatory pedigree is real — decades of eCOA submissions, a deep validated COA library, and big-pharma relationships across Phase III programs. But that pedigree was built around a different trial model: site-based, paper-on-tablet, supplier-as-vendor. Modern trials are wearable-heavy, hybrid, multilingual, and compliance-fragile. Delve was built natively for that operating reality.
- Legacy enterprise eCOA / respiratory / imaging for Phase III pharma
- Validated COA library with deep instrument coverage
- Regulatory experience across global submissions
- Site-based traditional trial model
- COA-as-a-Service for sponsors needing supplier outsourcing
Traditional Phase III pharma submissions. Real heritage.
- A patient who hasn't worn their device for 3 days
- A wearable producing physiologically implausible data
- An eCOA diary missed in a language the patient speaks at home
- A caregiver overwhelmed in a rare-disease trial
- Endpoint integrity when devices have firmware drift
Patient-facing, cross-cultural, real-world. Clario's core labs validate endpoints — they don't keep patients in the study.
- 70+ validated wearable algorithms
- 7-dimension real-time compliance scoring
- Concierge-as-a-Service in 120+ languages
- 92–98% per-study eCOA/ePRO completion
- Up to 63% retention uplift in long-duration cohorts
- UI-driven multi-tenant rollout (US/NA, EU, LATAM, APAC, MENA) — no IT tickets, no per-region procurement
- Open endpoint APIs — REST + webhooks + CDISC + Parquet delivery into your EDC and analytics stack, with versioned contracts and provenance
Platform-owned outcomes. Documented per study.
Bottom line: Clario's irreducible strengths are centralized medical imaging (their SMART imaging suite), cardiac safety device manufacturing (legacy ERT ECG hardware), and respiratory devices like the FDA-cleared SpiroSphere — hardware and central-lab services Delve doesn't compete on. If your protocol genuinely requires those, you'll need a core-lab vendor regardless. For everything else — eCOA, ePRO, wearables, compliance recovery, retention — Delve provides modern, integrated, validated capabilities Clario doesn't match, and without the 12–18 months of Thermo Fisher integration uncertainty (roadmap, pricing, account teams all in flux through mid-2027).
How Delve actually delivers 92–98% completion
Three engagement layers, not one
Other platforms bet on a single approach: configurable software (YPrime), AI agents (Medable), rater services (Signant), or core-lab pedigree (Clario). Delve combines three engagement layers on top of one validated wearable platform — which is why per-study completion lands at 92–98% vs. the published industry baseline of 80–90%.
Fully featured eCOA you can build any study on. Configurable without engineering tickets.
- Branching logic, edit checks, scheduling, scoring, version control
- Validated PRO / ClinRO / ObsRO / PerfO instrument support
- Pre-built diary templates + form builder for custom protocols
- 120+ language delivery, BYOD or provisioned devices
- UI-driven multi-tenant rollout (US/NA, EU, LATAM, APAC, MENA)
Engagement before patients drift. Built into the platform — not a separate product to license.
- Smart push notifications & configurable reminders
- Adaptive UX that responds to completion patterns
- Multimedia guidance (video, audio, visual prompts)
- Patient app with centralized "For You" task view
- Multilingual prompts in the patient's preferred language
When tech engagement isn't enough — humans recover the patient before data goes missing.
- 120+ languages of trained human concierge
- Documented <24h response windows
- Watch-level alerts triaged before they reach sites
- Caregiver support for rare-disease & pediatric trials
- Device troubleshooting, re-engagement, escalation
Why this combination works: Configurable software alone produces blank forms patients ignore. Engagement alerts alone produce notification fatigue. Human concierge alone is expensive and doesn't scale. The three together, operating on one validated wearable platform, are what produce 92–98% completion in real studies. Every other vendor in this comparison provides one or two of these layers — not three.
Two different bets
Legacy enterprise eCOA, or modern compliance operating system?
Both platforms can run a regulated trial. The difference is how the platforms were built. Clario was assembled from decades-old enterprise eCOA, respiratory, and imaging businesses. Delve was built from day one around compliance, retention, and modern wearable engineering.
Two trial-model eras
- Clario's strength: Validated COA library, respiratory device heritage (legacy ERT), imaging core lab — assembled from the 2021 merger of ERT, Bracket, iCardiac, and others.
- Clario's 2025-2026 moves: Closed acquisition of WCG's eCOA business (May 2025), launched a multi-year AWS GenAI partnership (April 2025), and on October 2025 agreed to be acquired by Thermo Fisher for ~$8.9B, the largest healthcare PE exit of 2025. Close expected mid-2026 — meaning sponsors face 12–18 months of integration uncertainty (roadmap, pricing, account team).
- Delve's strength: 70+ validated wearable algorithms on a harmonized clinical data layer, plus Concierge-as-a-Service in 120+ languages — both owned as platform-delivered compliance and retention outcomes. Independent of M&A integration risk.
- Delve's commitment: 92–98% per-study completion ranges and up to 63% retention uplift, documented per study.
- If your trial is wearable-heavy, hybrid, multilingual, or compliance-fragile — and you don't want to navigate a Big-4 lab-supplier integration during your study — the modern operating model matters more than the legacy COA library.
Delve-documented eCOA/ePRO completion range, per study.
Up to 63% retention uplift in long-duration cohorts (Delve).
Validated digital-endpoint algorithms across 25+ wearables.
Languages of human concierge, built into the platform.
Where the two platforms genuinely overlap
At the feature checklist level, Clario and Delve Health each support eCOA, ePRO, eConsent, and modern analytics. Both can run regulated trials. Both platforms ship:
- Digital informed consent (eConsent) with multimedia and audit trail
- Electronic Clinical Outcome Assessment (eCOA) and patient-reported outcomes (ePRO)
- Wearable and digital health technology integration
- Real-time analytics dashboards for study oversight
- Decentralized and hybrid trial design support
- Full compliance posture: HIPAA, GDPR, 21 CFR Part 11, ICH GCP, ISO 27001
The differences show up only once you ask what happens when compliance starts to drift, when a wearable produces unusable data, or when sites need relief.
Side-by-side comparison
Clario vs Delve Health: capability comparison
The table below reflects publicly documented capabilities and standard delivery models for each platform. Specific configurations may vary by contract.
| Capability | Clario | Delve Health |
|---|---|---|
| Outcomes — where studies live or die | ||
| Per-study completion rate accountability | Customer-driven | 92–98% documented per study |
| Retention uplift target | Customer-driven | Up to 63% in long-duration cohorts |
| Validated digital-endpoint algorithms | Strong COA library; thin wearable algos | 70+ wearable algorithms across ECG, glucose, activity, sleep, frequency & QC |
| Real-time compliance scoring | Weekly monitoring reports | 7-dimension hourly readiness + closed-loop recovery |
| Human concierge patient support | Professional services arm | Built into platform — 120+ languages, <24h response windows |
| Wearable device support | Partner-driven, limited devices | 25+ devices on harmonized clinical data layer |
| Site burden reduction | Site portal + clinical services | Concierge triages alerts before sites see them |
| Architecture & speed to launch globally | ||
| Multi-region tenant rollout | Enterprise per-region procurement & provisioning | UI-driven multi-tenant — spin up region-aware tenants (US/NA, EU, LATAM, APAC, MENA) without IT tickets or per-region procurement |
| Diary & eCOA template library | Validated COA instrument library (instruments, not diary templates) | Pre-built diary templates for rapid eCOA build, plus configurable form builder for custom protocols |
| Self-serve admin platform | Vendor-administered, ticket-based for changes | Admin UI for tenant management, user roles, audit log, diary template library |
| API & EDC / analytics integration | Enterprise integrations via professional services; API access typically vendor-mediated | Endpoint APIs with lineage — REST pull + webhook push + batch + CDISC packages + Parquet, with versioned contracts, provenance, audit trail and direct EDC delivery |
| Built-in audit log accessible to sponsors | Available on request from vendor | Live admin UI — sponsors and CROs can self-audit |
| Legacy eCOA core — where Clario focuses | ||
| Validated COA library (PRO/ClinRO/ObsRO/PerfO) | Yes — deep instrument library | Yes — validated instrument library |
| Respiratory / spirometry devices | Yes — legacy ERT heritage | Partner integration |
| Imaging core lab | Yes — central core lab | Partner integration |
| Phase III pharma submission pedigree | Yes — decades of submissions | Yes — regulator-ready submissions |
| Shared baseline | ||
| eCOA / ePRO platform | Yes | Fully configurable eCOA — adaptive UX, branching logic, multimedia, 120+ languages, validated PRO/ClinRO/ObsRO/PerfO instruments, version control without engineering tickets |
| Patient engagement model | Traditional eCOA reminders; engagement via professional services | Multi-layered — smart reminders + adaptive UX + multimedia guidance + multilingual prompts + human concierge in 120+ languages when tech isn't enough |
| eConsent | Yes | Yes — multimedia with audit trail |
| Telehealth & video visits | Partner integration | Yes — built into platform |
| Compliance posture (HIPAA, GDPR, 21 CFR Part 11, ICH GCP, ISO 27001) | Yes | Yes |
| Engagement model | ||
| Pricing model | Enterprise license + heavy professional services | Outcomes-scoped integrated engagement |
| Accountability for outcomes | Customer's clin ops team + Clario services | Delve owns drift recovery between visits |
| Strongest fit | Traditional Phase III pharma submissions, COA library-heavy protocols | Wearable-heavy, long-duration, hybrid-trial, or compliance-critical studies |
Why modern trials pick Delve over Clario
Four reasons sponsors pick Delve when their trial is wearable-heavy, hybrid, or compliance-fragile — where the legacy enterprise eCOA model wasn't built to operate.
Completion guaranteed, not hoped for
Delve publishes documented 92–98% per-study eCOA/ePRO completion ranges as a platform deliverable. Clario provides tools; the customer's clinical operations team owns the completion number. Different accountability models.
Your algorithm, not the device's
70+ validated digital-endpoint algorithms across ECG, glucose, activity, sleep, frequency, and QC — running on Delve's harmonized data layer, not consumer-grade vendor SDKs. Endpoint integrity is engineered, not assumed.
Humans recover patients. Period.
Patient drift gets recovered by trained humans in 120+ languages, not chatbots. AI agents handle internal paperwork well; they don't solve a caregiver in a rare-disease trial who's burned out, or a non-native speaker confused by an ePRO prompt.
Hourly readiness, not weekly reports
7-dimension compliance scoring updated every hour. Clario's monitoring reports surface after the fact; Delve's readiness scoring is designed to recover drifting patients before that data goes missing.
1. Human concierge vs. customer-driven recovery
Clario delivers patient-facing support through its software platform plus (where needed) professional services or partners. Multilingual outreach, proactive compliance follow-up, and real-time recovery operations are typically handled by the sponsor's clinical operations team or contracted vendors.
Delve includes Concierge-as-a-Service as a built-in platform layer, with humans operating in 120+ languages, with documented response windows and escalation rules. The model targets the compliance loss that happens between visits — missed diaries, device confusion, wear-time decay — through trained humans, not chatbots.
Why it matters: in real-world studies, the majority of compliance loss does not show up in monitoring reports — it shows up in patient confusion, missed reminders, and device issues that need human follow-through. Whoever owns that follow-through determines completion rates.
2. Wearable platform depth
Clario integrates with selected wearables and relies more heavily on vendor-supplied metrics. Delve runs 70+ validated digital-endpoint algorithms across 25+ supported devices on a harmonized clinical data layer that normalizes units, sampling rates, time bases, QC flags, and algorithm versions.
The data-layer engineering is the part most evaluators miss. Two vendors can both “support wearables” and have very different validation evidence behind the data each platform produces.
Why it matters: for wearable-heavy studies, endpoint integrity depends on more than just data ingestion. Validation evidence is part of the submission package.
Which platform fits your study
Choose the platform that fits your operating model
Both platforms run modern clinical trials successfully. The right answer depends on your study profile and your internal operating model.
Choose Clario if…
- Your protocol requires centralized medical imaging core lab services (Clario's SMART suite)
- Your protocol requires cardiac safety devices — ECG, ABPM, COR-12 wireless ECG — from legacy ERT hardware
- Your protocol requires respiratory devices like the FDA-cleared SpiroSphere with wireless ECG
- You can absorb 12–18 months of Thermo Fisher integration uncertainty during your study timeline
- Your priority is enterprise procurement pedigree, not modern compliance-recovery operations
Choose Delve Health if…
- You're launching a multi-region study and need self-serve UI-driven tenant rollout (US/NA, EU, LATAM, APAC, MENA) without per-region procurement, IT tickets, or pre-built validated diary templates available on day one
- Your trial doesn't require centralized imaging or proprietary cardiac/respiratory hardware — eCOA, ePRO, wearables, and analytics are the deliverable
- You want the same regulator-aligned eCOA Clario offers, plus 70+ validated wearable algorithms Clario doesn't have
- You need multilingual human concierge in 120+ languages built into the platform
- You want documented per-study completion (92–98%) and retention uplift (up to 63%) in your scope
- You don't want to navigate a Thermo Fisher acquisition integration during your study
- Your compliance loss happens through patient drift between visits — not endpoint validation
Frequently asked questions
Questions sponsors ask when comparing Clario and Delve Health
These answers clarify the operational differences and how to evaluate them for your protocol.
How is Delve Health different from Clario?
Clario was formed from the 2021 merger of ERT, Bracket, iCardiac, and others — assembling decades of legacy enterprise eCOA, respiratory device, and imaging core-lab businesses for Phase III pharma submissions. Delve Health is a modern operating system built around compliance and retention: 70+ validated wearable endpoint algorithms, real-time 7-dimension compliance scoring, and Concierge-as-a-Service in 120+ languages. The decision usually comes down to: traditional eCOA pedigree, or modern wearable + compliance operating model.
Is Clario better for Phase III submissions?
Clario has decades of Phase III pharma submission pedigree and a deep COA instrument library — that heritage is real. Where it matters less: wearable-heavy hybrid trials, multilingual decentralized cohorts, and protocols where compliance fails between visits. Delve's submissions are also regulator-aligned (FDA DHT guidance, V3, ICH E6 R3, 21 CFR Part 11), with documented per-study completion outcomes Clario doesn't commit to.
Does Clario have wearable platform depth?
Clario's legacy strength is centralized medical imaging, cardiac safety, and respiratory devices — not multi-modal wearable algorithm validation. Wearable integration is partner-driven. Delve runs 70+ validated digital-endpoint algorithms across 25+ wearable devices on a harmonized clinical data layer. For sponsors with endpoint-grade wearable requirements, the validation library matters more than the device integration count.
Does Clario include human concierge like Delve?
Clario delivers patient support through its professional services arm, typically billed separately. Delve includes Concierge-as-a-Service in 120+ languages as a built-in platform layer with documented response windows and escalation rules, with completion and retention as platform-owned outcomes.
Is Clario or Delve cheaper?
Clario typically prices as enterprise license + heavy professional services billing common to legacy eCOA vendors. Delve prices as an integrated outcomes-scoped engagement where eCOA, wearables, analytics, and concierge support are scoped against the trial's compliance and retention outcomes rather than a la carte. The right model depends on whether the sponsor wants vendor-led execution accountability or to assemble services internally.
When should I choose Clario over Delve Health?
Choose Clario when the priority is a traditional Phase III pharma submission with deep COA instrument library, respiratory device heritage, or imaging core lab requirements — and you have internal clin ops capacity to drive compliance recovery. Choose Delve when the priority is wearable endpoint integrity, multilingual concierge support, real-time compliance scoring, and documented platform-owned completion and retention outcomes.
Related learning
Build a complete picture before you commit
Knowledge pages that help sponsors evaluating eCOA, DCT, and wearable platforms understand what separates execution-grade vendors from platforms that look good in demos.
How to choose an eCOA vendor
Evaluation criteria beyond software — execution, support, compliance, site impact.
Read the guide →eCOA Vendor Comparison framework
Dimensions that predict study performance — used to compare any pair of platforms.
Open the framework →Why eCOA data fails in real-world trials
Missed diaries, patient drift, fragmented systems — hidden failure modes and what fixes them.
Read more →How to measure compliance in clinical trials
A practical, vendor-neutral framework for measuring compliance across modalities.
Read more →Evaluating Delve against your current stack?
If you are comparing Clario, Delve, or other DCT/eCOA platforms, ask each vendor one question: what happens when a participant stops responding? The answer tells you more than any demo.
Book a Platform Walkthrough