At-Bay vs Root
At-Bay vs Root, compared side by side on 22 data points: what each one does, how big it is, what it has raised, the tech running each site, and what users report. We score both out of 100 on traction, team and visibility: At-Bay is on 70/100 and Root on 63/100.
Where each one leads
At-Bay
- our overall score: 70/100 against 63/100
- agent readiness: 48/100 against 33/100
- headcount growth: +18.9% against +4.2%
Root
- domain rating: 73/100 against 61/100
- headcount: 1,197 against 359
- funding raised: $1.4B against $292M
- LinkedIn following: 52,266 against 20,419
At a glance
| Measure | At-Bay | Root |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | At-Bay is a cyber insurance and security company that combines insurance products with active security monitoring to help businesses prevent and recover from cyber threats. | Root Inc. offers personalized car insurance based on driving behavior, managed via a mobile app. |
| Category | InsurTech, Cybersecurity, Risk Management, Parametric Insurance | InsurTech, Parametric Insurance, AI-Driven Parametric Insurance, Usage-Based Insurance |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2C |
| Offering | Software | Software | platform |
| Founded | 2016 | 2015 |
| Headquarters | New York, United States | Columbus, United States |
| Status | Active | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | At-Bay | Root |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 359 | 1,197 |
| Headcount growthLast 12 months | +18.9% | +4.2% |
| Total funding | $292M | $1.4B |
| Latest round | Series D | Debt |
| Valuation | $1.4B | Not published |
| LinkedIn followers | 20,419 | 52,266 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | At-Bay | Root |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 70/100 | 63/100 |
| Traction | 60/100 | 60/100 |
| Team | 70/100 | 70/100 |
| Search visibility | 46/100 | 32/100 |
| Quality | 78/100 | 68/100 |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | D (48/100) | F (33/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 61/100 | 73/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | At-Bay | Root |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Self Managed | AWS |
| CDN | Not detected | CloudFront |
| CMS | WordPress | Not detected |
| Frameworks | Tailwind CSS | Gatsby |
| Analytics | Google Analytics 4, Google Tag Manager, Mixpanel, Hotjar +1 more | Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity |
| Support stack | HubSpot | Not detected |
At-Bay vs Root: common questions
Which is better, At-Bay or Root?
On our 0-100 score At-Bay rates higher (70/100 against 63/100). The score weights traction, team, visibility and profile completeness, so it reflects company strength rather than which product suits you. We compare the two on 22 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do At-Bay and Root compare on the numbers?
At-Bay leads on our overall score (70/100 against 63/100), agent readiness (48/100 against 33/100), headcount growth (+18.9% against +4.2%). Root leads on domain rating (73/100 against 61/100), headcount (1,197 against 359), funding raised ($1.4B against $292M), LinkedIn following (52,266 against 20,419).
Read the full At-Bay review and pricing or the Root review and pricing. You can also browse other At-Bay alternatives we track.