Fudo PAM vs One Identity Safeguard comparison

Fudo Security and One Identity are both solutions in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category. Fudo Security is ranked #25, while One Identity is ranked #2 with an average rating of 7.8. Fudo Security holds a 2.5% mindshare in PAM, compared to One Identity’s 4.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Fudo Security users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of One Identity users who would recommend it.

Fudo PAM

Read 5 Fudo PAM reviews

1,175 Views
1,152 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

One Identity Safeguard

Read 56 One Identity Safeguard reviews

5,477 Views
3,724 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

Fudo PAM

One Identity Safeguard

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2024

```html

One Identity Safeguard and Fudo PAM are key competitors in the Privileged Access Management market. Fudo PAM is favored for its comprehensive features, which seem to provide greater value in complex environments.

Features: One Identity Safeguard provides robust session monitoring, an efficient workflow system, and competitive pricing. Fudo PAM offers advanced session recording, real-time analytics, and innovative security management features.

Room for Improvement: One Identity Safeguard requires better integration with IT systems, more detailed documentation, and enhancements in user interface. Fudo PAM needs improvements in documentation, training resources, and software stability.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: One Identity Safeguard facilitates straightforward deployment with strong technical support. Fudo PAM involves a more complex deployment process but has responsive customer service.

Pricing and ROI: One Identity Safeguard is cost-effective with favorable ROI from lower setup costs. Fudo PAM, although more expensive initially, offers a higher long-term ROI due to its enhanced security features.

```

To learn more, read our detailed Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 885,667 peers since 2012

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

Fudo PAM

Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)

25th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

One Identity Safeguard

Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)

2nd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (5th), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of Fudo PAM is 2.5%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of One Identity Safeguard is 4.4%, up from 4.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Privileged Access Management (PAM) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
One Identity Safeguard	4.4%
Fudo PAM	2.5%
Other	93.1%

Privileged Access Management (PAM)

Featured Reviews

Taras Dubrova

BDM at Oberig-it

Works with SCTP, STTPS, SQL, and MySQL protocols

There are some areas for improvement in the Fudo PAM cake that we want to improve in terms of scaling. Scaling is an optional feature because we closed some big projects with enterprise customers from different countries, including Ukraine, Kaloxetine, Uzbekistan, and others. We closed projects in different areas with customers of different sizes. When we talk about enterprise customers, we should consider that they have different use cases and desires for Fudo PAM. We compared our options for customers to choose their vendors, and we discovered Fudo PAM has few scaling options. In Fudo PAM, there should be additional features for scaling and organizing remote sessions for remote systems in remote networks.

Read full review

Sindre Toft

Senior Information Technology Consultant at Helse Nord IKT

Centralized privileged access has improved control and now supports secure vendor billing oversight

The transparent mode is a seamless approach when using it. We have some issues with it, but we are working on it to make it work for us. Managing remote access for privileged users with the secure remote access feature is both easy and hard depending on the scenario we face. We have some systems that are easy and take not even a minute to set up, while others take a bit longer. We are in the middle of integrating One Identity Safeguard with the IGA solution, Identity Manager. We have some A2A setups, but it is not optimal. We are using RPA for developers, not actually RPA accounts, but that is something we are working on. We are also using the service account password rotation on the asset to some degree, and we are exploring options there. For integrating One Identity Safeguard, figuring out how password rotation works is a bit difficult because we have to make custom integrations. After that, it was no problem really. For the A2A use, it is not as easy as using something like HashiCorp's password management tools. It is mostly for certain features in One Identity Safeguard that I would like some improvements. Some of the things you can do in entitlements, there is a lot you can do there, but not everything is optimal. You have to have duplicates of a lot of things to make it work the way you want.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Right now we are encouraging our customers to use Fudo PAM because it is the only product in PAM technology that we have to offer them."

"We are convinced that Fudo PAM is better than competing products like WALLIX."

"This is a solution that I recommend because it is a simple privileged access management system that is done very well."

"Session recording and password management are the two main aspects."

"The main benefit of the solution is that it's very easy to set up. It only takes a couple of hours to install everything."

"it's perfect to control and administer computers in our company."

"Fudo PAM was the most flexible and intuitive interface out of all of the products in the PAM sector."

"I think that Fudo Privileged Access Management is a very good program."

"By comparison, Safeguard is much better in terms of performance, networking, and server stability."

"One Identity Safeguard is stable and provides great performance."

"Over four years of use, we have not encountered a single system crash or failure, and the product is stable."

"The most unique and valuable features are the upstream and downstream throughput capacities; the Safeguard platform provides agile integration. In actuality, all the features are valuable. They're good, user-friendly."

"I give it an eight because of its robust security features, its splendid automated password management, and real-time activity monitoring that stood out to me."

"It is generally easy-to-use and install."

"Technical support is brilliant."

"There is ease of implementation."

More One Identity Safeguard pros

Cons

"The stability is not very good."

"Fudo PAM’s scalability is not very strong."

"The configuration is difficult."

"I would like to see better server management. You have to know exactly what you're looking for to get the right server."

"Professional training and certification would be great."

"To tell you the truth, I find that Fudo is not very stable and we had some issues during the implementation."

"The configuration is difficult."

"It is a good solution, but it needs more marketing."

"I just received a question from a customer in regards to a connection with Oracle OID. I tried to integrate Safeguard with the Oracle YAML as well as something else to manage the groups and users from a different system, like AD or LDAP. This one feature could be better. At this moment, the platform system can only use the integration with LDAP or AD. The software for research and development to create a connector to a YAML platform can be very complicated."

"Some of the out-of-the-box reporting isn't that rich."

"One Identity Safeguard could be improved by simplifying the user interface and initial configuration process, especially for first-time users."

"For some users, the physical appliance has been a bit buggy."

"The customer support for One Identity Safeguard was not very good and definitely needs to be improved."

"Monitoring of the platform should be easier and more functional so that you can have a clear picture of the running service."

"Now, I think the best way to improve it will be to optimize the software, because the software begins to consume more resources (physical)."

More One Identity Safeguard cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is great. We've been given discounts that make it cheaper than using any other solution."

"They have comparable pricing. All identity products are essentially priced in a similar way. It's a per-user base."

"They offer a fair price for a robust solution."

"The pricing is about $80,000 per 100 servers. There are few elective costs."

"Safeguard is cheaper than CyberArk."

"It is cheaper than CyberArk. Its price is fair."

"The license is around $3,000 per month."

"The license is very expensive for us, partly due to inflation and partly because of the exchange rate between the Dollar and the Iranian Rial. We purchased a perpetual license that we've been using up until now, but I believe that we are not going to update it in the future. Instead, we plan to find another third-party to support us with the license, in the sense that we would have access to their license as a shared agreement."

"As compared to other products, it is reasonable, but the training sessions are too expensive."

More One Identity Safeguard pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

885,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Government

12%

Comms Service Provider

12%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Computer Software Company

University

11%

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	42
Midsize Enterprise	22
Large Enterprise	22

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for One Identity Safeguard?

We have a separate department that studies setup costs for each product, but as far as my information goes, the pricing and setup costs are very good.

See all answers

What needs improvement with One Identity Safeguard?

The most common improvement needed is for upgrades. One Identity Safeguard's desktop client should have a faster and easier upgrade process that ensures compatibility.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for One Identity Safeguard?

One Identity Safeguard serves as our Privileged Access Management solution to enforce session management for administrators and allow them to access our systems in recorded sessions, which secures ...

See all answers

Comparisons

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs Fudo PAM

Compared 15% of the time

WALLIX Bastion vs Fudo PAM

Compared 12% of the time

CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager vs Fudo PAM

Compared 9% of the time

SSH PrivX vs Fudo PAM

Compared 7% of the time

senhasegura Access Management vs Fudo PAM

Compared 6% of the time

More Fudo PAM Competitors

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 19% of the time

Delinea Secret Server vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 9% of the time

Delinea Privileged Access Service vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 7% of the time

BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 6% of the time

BeyondTrust Password Safe vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 5% of the time

More One Identity Safeguard Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Privileged Access Management (PAM)

March 2026

Download Fudo PAM product report

Buyer's Guide

One Identity Safeguard

March 2026

Download One Identity Safeguard product report

Also Known As

Fudo Privileged Access Management

No data available

Overview

We are the leading vendor of innovative IT security solutions. We focus on privileged access management and privileged session monitoring, combined under the Fudo Security brand. The Fudo product line merges innovation and an intuitive user experience with strong security features. These are the hallmarks of the future designs of the company.

Fudo Security

One Identity Safeguard manages and monitors privileged access, enhancing security with features like automatic session recording, real-time monitoring, and credential rotation. It integrates seamlessly, supports compliance with audit trails, and improves operational efficiency across organizations. This robust platform significantly bolsters security protocols while controlling sensitive operations.

One Identity

Sample Customers

KFC, BP, Santander, Burger King, ING, Starbucks, Yahoo, DHL

Cavium

Buyer's Guide

Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard

March 2026

Free Report: Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard

Find out what your peers are saying about Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

885,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard report.

See our list of best Privileged Access Management (PAM) vendors.

We monitor all Privileged Access Management (PAM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.