Comparison Overview

Kindred

VS

Ardent Health

Kindred

680 South Fourth Street, Louisville, KY, US, 40202
Last Update: 2025-12-09

Kindred’s mission is to help our patients reach their highest potential for health and healing with intensive medical and rehabilitative care through a compassionate patient experience. Kindred’s 61 long-term acute care hospitals (LTACHs), along with 18 community-based, short-term acute care hospital campuses from across the nation, became part of ScionHealth with its launch in December 2021. Cornerstone Healthcare Group joined the ScionHealth family of hospitals and hospital services in January 2023. In December 2021, Kindred Healthcare became a part of LifePoint Health, a leading healthcare company. As part of this transaction, LifePoint and Kindred also launched a new company, ScionHealth. Today, Kindred’s facilities are now part of either LifePoint or ScionHealth. Specifically, Kindred’s 61 long-term acute care hospitals – along with 18 community-based, short-term acute care hospital campuses from LifePoint – are now a part of ScionHealth.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 13,609
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Ardent Health

340 Seven Springs Way, Nashville, Tennessee, 37027, US
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 700 and 749

Ardent Health is a leading provider of healthcare in communities across the country. With a focus on consumer-friendly processes and investments in innovative services and technologies, Ardent is passionate about making healthcare better and easier to access. Through its subsidiaries, Ardent owns and operates 30 hospitals and 200+ sites of care with more than 1,700 aligned providers in six states. Ardent includes: • 30 hospitals • 200+ sites of care • 23,000+ team members • 8,000+ nurses • 1,700+ aligned providers • $5 billion+ annual revenue

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 13,124
Subsidiaries: 9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/kindred-healthcare.jpeg
Kindred
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ardent-health-services.jpeg
Ardent Health
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Kindred
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Ardent Health
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Kindred in 2025.

Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ardent Health in 2025.

Incident History — Kindred (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Kindred cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Ardent Health (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ardent Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/kindred-healthcare.jpeg
Kindred
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ardent-health-services.jpeg
Ardent Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2023
Type:Ransomware
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2023
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2023
Type:Ransomware
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Kindred company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Ardent Health company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Ardent Health company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Kindred company has not reported any.

In the current year, Ardent Health company and Kindred company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Ardent Health company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Kindred company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Ardent Health company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Kindred company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Ardent Health company nor Kindred company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Kindred company nor Ardent Health company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Kindred nor Ardent Health holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Ardent Health company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Kindred company.

Kindred company employs more people globally than Ardent Health company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Kindred nor Ardent Health holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Kindred nor Ardent Health holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Kindred nor Ardent Health holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Kindred nor Ardent Health holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Kindred nor Ardent Health holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Kindred nor Ardent Health holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N