No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Fudo PAM vs One Identity Safeguard comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2024

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)
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
5
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
7.0
Number of Reviews
75
Ranking in other categories
User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (3rd), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of Fudo PAM is 2.4%, down from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of One Identity Safeguard is 4.4%, up from 4.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Privileged Access Management (PAM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
One Identity Safeguard4.4%
Fudo PAM2.4%
Other93.2%
Privileged Access Management (PAM)
 

Featured Reviews

TD
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.
Mahesh Malve - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Business Development Executive at DigitalTrack Solutions Ind Pvt Ltd
Centralized control has strengthened privileged security and simplified audit investigations
While One Identity Safeguard is a strong and reliable PAM solution, there are a few areas where it can be further improved to enhance user experience and scalability. Regarding the user interface and experience, the UI, while functional, can be a bit complex for new users. A more intuitive and modern dashboard with simplified navigation would improve adoption, especially for non-technical stakeholders. Regarding integration flexibility, although it supports major integrations, expanding out-of-the-box connectors for more cloud-native apps, DevOps tools, and SaaS platforms would be beneficial. Faster and simpler API-based integrations could reduce deployment efforts. Regarding scalability and performance in large enterprise environments, performance tuning and scaling can require additional efforts. Enhancing seamless scalability and high availability configuration would improve enterprise readiness.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This is a solution that I recommend because it is a simple privileged access management system that is done very well."
"We are convinced that Fudo PAM is better than competing products like WALLIX."
"Session recording and password management are the two main aspects."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"One Identity Safeguard has had a very positive impact on our organization, especially in terms of security, efficiency, and visibility."
"I have seen a clear return on investment with One Identity Safeguard, reducing manual effort for access management by around thirty to forty percent, decreasing audit preparation time by nearly fifty percent, and lowering the risks of costly incidents through improved security controls."
"One of the most important aspects is that it is very easy to use and install. It is also agentless, so all of the operations happen more smoothly than any other product."
"By comparison, Safeguard is much better in terms of performance, networking, and server stability."
"Overall, my experience with One Identity Safeguard has been very positive, as it is a reliable and secure privilege access management solution that effectively protects sensitive accounts and provides full visibility into administrator activity, with minor improvements needed in terms of UI and reporting enhancements."
"The solution transparently integrates into the infrastructure and users do not notice it. I would give this feature the highest rating."
"Now that we're able to audit log and record what is being done, we can play back all the sessions to make sure no type of unattended usage of the privilege or elevated credentials were being used, and from securing the bank standpoint, it has helped tremendously."
"It offers high availability and enables end users to deploy the solution with 99.999 percent uptime, which is crucial in an enterprise environment with a large number of endpoints."
 

Cons

"Professional training and certification would be great."
"I would like to see better server management. You have to know exactly what you're looking for to get the right server."
"The configuration is difficult."
"To tell you the truth, I find that Fudo is not very stable and we had some issues during the implementation."
"Fudo PAM’s scalability is not very strong."
"The configuration is difficult."
"Professional training and certification would be great."
"The stability is not very good."
"One Identity Safeguard can improve by having more integration with multiple devices."
"I think One Identity Safeguard can be improved as it can be slow sometimes."
"I have encountered scalability issues. The system needs to be properly analysed before putting it into production."
"They should provide a faster user interface, as we have noticed that the user interface acts slow when there are a large number of accounts or concurrent sessions going on."
"One Identity Safeguard could be improved with a more user-friendly interface and simpler initial setup, as the learning curve can be somewhat steep."
"One Identity Safeguard can be improved by fixing the documentation, which is very convoluted as of now, and addressing versioning, as some major bugs and issues are not documented well enough in the documentation, along with some patches and fixes."
"For some users, the physical appliance has been a bit buggy."
"We sometimes face issues with configuration and things like that, but we manage to solve them."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is great. We've been given discounts that make it cheaper than using any other solution."
"It is a bit on the pricey side, but you get what you pay for. You don't want to get anything too cheap because then you get cheap stuff and cheap support. That really never helps anybody."
"Safeguard is cheaper than CyberArk."
"The full license is expensive but if you plan to use it in a big organization then it is the best option because it is more flexible."
"As compared to other products, it is reasonable, but the training sessions are too expensive."
"It is cheaper than CyberArk. Its price is fair."
"They have comparable pricing. All identity products are essentially priced in a similar way. It's a per-user base."
"One Identity Safeguard is expensive and the cost goes up as we scale."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
893,915 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
13%
Government
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
University
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business67
Midsize Enterprise25
Large Enterprise32
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for One Identity Safeguard?
One Identity Safeguard is priced at a premium level, typical for enterprise-grade privilege access management solutions. The licensing is generally based on the number of privileged accounts, users...
What needs improvement with One Identity Safeguard?
While One Identity Safeguard is a strong privilege access management solution, there are some areas where improvements can be made. The initial deployment and configuration can be complex, especial...
What is your primary use case for One Identity Safeguard?
In my daily operations, I rely on One Identity Safeguard for administrator requests for access through One Identity Safeguard, which are approved via workflows. Once approved, sessions are launched...
 

Also Known As

Fudo Privileged Access Management
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

KFC, BP, Santander, Burger King, ING, Starbucks, Yahoo, DHL
Cavium
Find out what your peers are saying about Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,915 professionals have used our research since 2012.