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

Exabeam vs GitGuardian Public Monitoring 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

Exabeam
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
9th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (17th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (2nd), Security Incident Response (4th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (10th), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (9th)
GitGuardian Public Monitoring
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
18th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (22nd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (19th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Threat Intelligence Platforms category, the mindshare of Exabeam is 0.6%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GitGuardian Public Monitoring is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Threat Intelligence Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

Stephen-Armstrong - PeerSpot reviewer
The SIEM provides a user-friendly UI experience
When events come into the system, the dashboard categorizes them by the highest risk score, not when they appear on the system. When you've got multiple ongoing incidents you can only see the highest risk score at the top of the list rather than the most recent detection. Exabeam's reporting dashboard could have included a filtering option to filter by the most recent detection.
Theo Cusnir - PeerSpot reviewer
Detects and alerts us about leaks quickly, and enables us to filter and prioritize occurrences
One thing I really like about it is the fact that we can add search words or specific payloads inside the tool, and GitGuardian will look into GitHub and alert us if any of these words is found in a repository. For example, if I put "Payfit" in the tool, I will be alerted every time someone is committing with that word in the code. It's really useful for internal domain names, to detect if someone is leaking internal code. With this capability in the tool, we have good surveillance over our potential blind spots. It can detect a leak in 10 minutes. We had an experience with one of our engineers who had leaked a secret, and 10 minutes afterward we had a warning from GitGuardian about the leak. It's very effective. We looked at the commit date and the current date with hours and minutes and we could see that the commit had been made 10 minutes ago. As a result, we are sure it is pretty fast. Another feature, one that helps prioritize remediation, is that you can filter the findings by criticality. That definitely helps us to prioritize which secrets we should rotate and delete.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of Exabeam Fusion SIEM is the easy-to-use user interface."
"Exabeam Fusion SIEM has a good performance and more advantages than traditional solutions."
"It's a very user-friendly product and it's a very comprehensive technology."
"The platform is not extremely expensive compared to its direct competitors; I would rate its pricing around six out of ten."
"The user interface and the timelines they use are the most valuable features. The price model is very simple so that one can understand it easily and there are no surprises within it."
"The way it can connect with AWS is very useful, and the integrations are pretty good."
"Timeline based analysis; good platform support"
"The UI was very clean."
"The Explore function is valuable for finding specific things I'm looking for."
"One thing I really like about it is the fact that we can add search words or specific payloads inside the tool, and GitGuardian will look into GitHub and alert us if any of these words is found in a repository... With this capability in the tool, we have good surveillance over our potential blind spots."
 

Cons

"I believe if it were more flexible it would be a better product."
"The customer service and support are not satisfactory."
"We use the on-prem Exabeam product and face limitations using the web UI and administration of custom models and rules."
"The organzation is rigid and not flexible in the way they operate"
"The solution's reporting and dashboarding could be improved."
"The only problem is that the UI is not very impressive."
"Updating the new release of Exabeam Fusion SIEM takes time and slows our performance."
"Adding to the number of certifications that they have, for example, ISO 27001, would be helpful."
"I'm excited about the possibility of Public Postman scanning being integrated with GitGuardian in the future. Additionally, I'm interested in exploring the potential use of honeytokens, which seems like a compelling approach to lure and identify attackers."
"I would like to see improvement in some of the user interface features... When one secret is leaked in multiple files or multiple repositories, it will appear on the dashboard. But when you click on that secret, all the occurrences will appear on the page. It would be better to have one secret per occurrence, directly, so that we don't have to click to get to the list of all the occurrences."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Exabeam is not a cheap solution."
"Exabeam Fusion SIEM's pricing is reasonable."
"The solution is expensive."
"They have a great model for pricing that can be based either on user count or gigabits per day."
"The platform is not extremely expensive compared to its direct competitors; I would rate its pricing around six out of ten."
"There is an annual license required to use Exabeam Fusion SIEM. The price of the solution should be reduced."
"It's a bit expensive, but it works well. You get what you pay for."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
857,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Government
21%
Computer Software Company
14%
Energy/Utilities Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What are the biggest differences between Securonix UEBA, Exabeam, and IBM QRadar?
It mostly depends on your use-cases and environment. Exabeam and Securonix have a stronger UEBA feature set, friendlier GUI and are not licensed based on capacity (amount of logs and information in...
What do you like most about Exabeam Fusion SIEM?
The solution's initial setup process is easy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Exabeam Fusion SIEM?
I do not have much information about the pricing. However, I am aware that Exabeam is cheaper than Palo Alto based on discussions in meetings.
What do you like most about GitGuardian Public Monitoring?
The Explore function is valuable for finding specific things I'm looking for.
What needs improvement with GitGuardian Public Monitoring?
I'm excited about the possibility of Public Postman scanning being integrated with GitGuardian in the future. Additionally, I'm interested in exploring the potential use of honeytokens, which seems...
What is your primary use case for GitGuardian Public Monitoring?
We use GitGuardian Public Monitoring for code that is exposed in public.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hulu, ADP, Safeway, BBCN Bank
Align Technology, Automox, Fred Hutch, Instacart, Maven Wave, Mirantis, SafetyCulture, Snowflake, Talend
Find out what your peers are saying about Exabeam vs. GitGuardian Public Monitoring and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.