Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Apiiro vs Upwind comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Apiiro
Ranking in API Security
11th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (20th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (11th), Software Supply Chain Security (8th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (12th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (4th)
Upwind
Ranking in API Security
10th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (29th), Container Security (25th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (17th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (21st), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (16th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (5th)
 

Featured Reviews

Ryan-Murphy - PeerSpot reviewer
A great secrets detection feature, good visibility, and integrates well
The biggest benefit of Apiiro for us was the visibility it gave us into our GitHub organization, which we didn't have much of before. The benefit of adding Apiiro early is that it would be integrated into our pipeline from the start. Since we have had some of our software products for many years, we would have to do a lot of cleaning up before integrating Apiiro into our developer workflow. Integrating Apiiro early allows us to stay ahead of the curve on security issues and address them as they arise, rather than having a huge backlog for developers to fix. Apiiro's ability to provide visibility into the risk of our application components is great. This was a selling feature for us. Apiiro was a less mature product a little over a year ago when they were still early on in their development. However, they have made fantastic advancements over the last year, which has given us much more visibility into that sort of thing. Apiiro has helped prevent business-critical risks by making recommendations based on what it thinks is a high or critical issue. I think it does a pretty good job at that, but those recommendations still need a manual review from us. In general, if Apiiro flags a critical issue, it is usually pretty close to identifying whether it is business-critical or not. It is something we should review, even if we end up downgrading it. Apiiro raises valid concerns, and I am happy that it does.
GF
Gaining Confidence in Cloud Security with Improved Vulnerability Management
In general, I think that Upwind as a product makes a disruption in the concept of shift left; they come with a new approach by the runtime sensor that they made, making life for the AppSec team much easier. It's a good question about the best features Upwind offers, but in general, they build a great product. One feature I can think about is their very strong API, allowing us to export most of the data to crunch and work with it. To me, having a wide API to interact with the data is very important. In general, we use the API to export the asset and then compare it with our findings to improve triage, ensuring we are not missing anything. This is one of the main use cases for the API. Having access to this API changes our team's efficiency dramatically; programmability makes everyone's life much easier. The operation reduces because of the time that analysts need to spend on triaging, and it also minimizes friction with developers, which is something Upwind helps us with. Upwind positively impacts our organization overall by helping with the CIS benchmark for Kubernetes, which is definitely one of the strongest parts. Second, by reducing the number of vulnerabilities, we automatically reduce the number of tickets opened with the dev team, which is a big win. It also helps us to tune our vulnerability program better regarding classification and priority.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Security solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Energy/Utilities Company
11%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Apiiro?
Apiiro's secrets detection feature has saved us several times, which we appreciate greatly.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apiiro?
My understanding is the pricing is pretty competitive.
What needs improvement with Apiiro?
Apiiro recently integrated SaaS, and we would love to see them expand on that. They provide many integrations to different products, including SaaS products such as Snyk. Ideally, Apiiro would incl...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Upwind?
The pricing, setup cost, and licensing process were pretty reasonable.
What needs improvement with Upwind?
Currently, we are working with Upwind on API security, which is something we want them to keep pushing. We also want them to be able to record SSH sessions; it's a tough request.
What is your primary use case for Upwind?
I have several use cases for Upwind. I will start with our private cloud that is based on Kubernetes, so we're using it also for Cloud Detection and Response and also for vulnerability scanning. We...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Apiiro Control Plane (ASOC), Apiiro API Security (SAST), Apiiro Open Source (SCA)
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Morgan Stanley, Rakuten, Jack Henry, SoFi, Colgate, Navan
StockX, Yotpo, bill, Digital Turbine, nanit, CallRail, boomi
Find out what your peers are saying about Apiiro vs. Upwind and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.