Runbeam vs Infor Cloverleaf
Comparing a traditional HL7-centric integration engine with Runbeam's distributed proxy architecture for secure data exchange
Quick Comparison
| Feature | Runbeam | Infor Cloverleaf |
|---|---|---|
| Best For | FHIR and DICOM mediation + cross-site connectivity | HL7 v2 interface engine deployments |
| Architecture | Distributed proxies + centralised orchestration | Centralised integration engine pattern |
| Deployment model | Container-first, deploy near systems | Varies by deployment and operating model |
| HL7 v2 | Coming soon | Mature HL7 v2 tooling (common use case) |
| FHIR | ✓ Supported | ✓ Supported |
| DICOM | ✓ Supported | ✓ Supported |
| Protocol transforms | ✓ Native (e.g. FHIR ↔ DICOM) | Supported (engine-based) |
| Cross-site connectivity | ✓ JWT-based Data Mesh authentication | Typically handled via networking patterns and operational setup |
| Federated data meshes | ✓ Supported | Not supported |
| HTTP/3 (QUIC) | ✓ Supported (HTTP/3 + TLS 1.3) | Not supported |
| Transformation model | Configuration-first pipelines | Engine-specific configuration and tooling |
Choose Runbeam For
FHIR and DICOM as first-class workflows
Runbeam is designed around modern interoperability and imaging workflows; HL7 v2 is coming soon.
- FHIR mediation and routing
- DICOM routing and filtering workflows
- Protocol transformations as configuration
Federated Data Mesh connectivity
Connect sites and partner organisations using authenticated ingress/egress policies.
- JWT-based mutual authentication
- Federated topologies for partner access
- Connectivity expressed as configuration
Modern transport options
Use HTTP/3 (QUIC) where it improves performance on unreliable or high-latency networks.
- Multiplexed streams
- TLS 1.3 enforced for HTTP/3
- Dual-stack alongside HTTP/1.x and HTTP/2
Choose Infor Cloverleaf For
Existing HL7 v2 interface engine estate
If your organisation already runs a mature HL7 v2 interface engine with established operational processes.
- HL7 v2 message handling as a core use case
- Established operational patterns
- Interface engine workflows familiar to integration teams
Traditional integration engine operating model
If you want to centralise integration into a smaller number of managed engine instances.
- Centralised engine administration
- Common interface engine deployment pattern
- May align with existing healthcare integration teams
Use Case Comparison
Multi-site interoperability with partner access
A healthcare network needs to connect multiple environments and selectively expose specific endpoints to partner organisations.
Deploy distributed proxies near systems, define explicit ingress/egress, and enable Federated Data Mesh for partner connectivity.
Operate interface engine instances and use separate networking and identity controls for cross-site and partner connectivity.
Pricing Comparison
Runbeam
- Gateway runs in your infrastructure
- Commercial options for orchestration and management
Infor Cloverleaf
- Pricing varies by deployment and support model
- Cost drivers may include environments, interfaces, and support
Interface engines often optimise HL7 v2 workflows; Runbeam optimises distributed deployment and federated connectivity for secure data exchange.
Need federated connectivity across organisations?
If partner and cross-team topologies are part of your integration design, Federated Data Mesh is a core Runbeam capability.