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 #22, 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 3.9% 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

1,163 Views
1,151 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

One Identity Safeguard

Read 52 One Identity Safeguard reviews

4,892 Views
3,278 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: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 882,160 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)

22nd

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

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (6th), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (3rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of Fudo PAM is 2.5%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of One Identity Safeguard is 3.9%, down from 4.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Privileged Access Management (PAM) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
One Identity Safeguard	3.9%
Fudo PAM	2.5%
Other	93.6%

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

Vyas Shubham

Product Analyst at a computer software company with 11-50 employees

Centralized controls have improved privileged access and simplified compliant audit workflows

We use One Identity Safeguard as a central control point for all our privileged access, which helps standardize the access policies across teams and platforms. We also use it for the approval workflows, which are enforced for high-risk systems and add an extra security layer for production access. I have been using it for one and a half years. The best feature I appreciate is the session proxying and recording. It provides transparent session access for admins without exposing the real passwords. Another valuable feature is automated password rotation, which changes the credentials automatically after each use or on a schedule. It reduces the risk of leakage and reuse of passwords. Additionally, the approval workflow and the access request feature add governance with multi-level approvals for sensitive systems. These are the features that I appreciate the most. When we started using the session proxying and recording features, overall, it was a manageable and fairly smooth process for us. However, like most security platform deployments, it had a few learning curves. Session proxying and recording worked with our major systems including Windows, Linux, and network devices with minimal configuration. Some devices and services required slight changes to firewall rules and configuration to ensure the proxy could connect cleanly. Additionally, our admins needed orientation so they understood they were joining a recorded session, particularly for remote or support use. We spent considerable time adjusting the session filtering, retention settings, and naming conventions so recordings were useful and not overwhelming. These are some areas where we encountered challenges.

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

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

"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."

"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."

"It provides secure and centralized access to both on-prem and cloud servers, which we did not have before. Previously, there were myriad ways to access our servers, so this centralizing feature is beneficial."

"The auditing and approval mechanisms are features we did not have before and are greatly appreciated."

"We deployed it into our company for controlling a client's behavior in our data center. It is very useful to control their connections, such as RDP."

"One Identity Safeguard is a mature, reliable, and secure PAM solution that has significantly improved our privileged access management, compliance, and operational efficiency."

"I like the discovery functionality and the change password feature through the check-in. I also like the bulk import with the help of templates that come with it out of the box. With the help of these few features, my tasks are made easier."

"One Identity Safeguard has positively impacted my organization by improving our security posture, eliminating shared privileged credentials, increasing visibility into admin activity, and making compliance audits faster and more reliable."

"We use the solution’s Approval Anywhere feature which enables us to add an extra layer of security for critical passwords without adding time-consuming approval processes. By using this platform, if someone goes on a vacation, out of office, or needs urgent/planned leave, then our setup will select the functions tied to that person and automatically delegate them to the next person. That person can start performing that duty based on their access. No sharing of passwords is required."

"The transparent mode for privileged sessions is a very good solution."

More One Identity Safeguard pros

Cons

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

"Professional training and certification would be great."

"The stability is not very good."

"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."

"Reporting and dashboards can be made more customized, especially for client-specific views."

"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."

"Transparent mode was too cumbersome, so I don't foresee us being able to use it. On paper when we were initially talking about it, it was definitely going to be the preferred method until we realized the burden it would be on our network guys. Then, we had to step back and reevaluate what we wanted to do. That's when we changed our approach to use the RD Gateway feature."

"We currently have a problem with the Active Directory integrations on Windows. Some of our users need to be logged with Active Directory, but we are having communication issues between One Identity and Active Directory. It seems that Active Directory is not well-integrated."

"The automated change of the passwords, which is now integrated, could be improved to be more flexible regarding different systems."

"The areas for improvement in One Identity Safeguard would be the UI and UX, meaning the admin console can be more intuitive for complex policy and workflow configuration."

"The user interface and navigation can be improved."

"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."

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."

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

"The pricing depends on our perspective, our budget, and, of course, the competitors we are taking into account."

"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."

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

"We have a yearly license. The cost depends on how much a company wants to invest in technology. In our organization, we believe in modern digitization and automation processes so we found it affordable. One Identity was not that much less than other solutions and it is not a cheap solution. There were number of cheaper solutions. However, it's the most effective, according to our evaluation."

"Its subscription cost is too much, and sometimes, it is very difficult to pitch the solution to the management for cost approval. If the cost is reduced a little bit, it would be easier. If its cost was less, many other organizations that currently cannot afford it would be able to use this technology. I'm sure many organizations around the globe are having issues with identity management, and it is a very difficult task for IT to manage privileged accounts."

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

"It is more expensive than Secret Server but way less expensive than CyberArk. As a customer, I would like the pricing to be lower, but it has a good price point."

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

882,160 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

13%

Comms Service Provider

13%

Government

13%

Computer Software Company

10%

University

Comms Service Provider

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	30
Midsize Enterprise	17
Large Enterprise	19

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing has been a good experience overall, as the back and forth with One Identity is something that is acceptable; other tools have options to do thi...

See all answers

What needs improvement with One Identity Safeguard?

One Identity Safeguard could be improved with a password manager and an identity manager as one big access management system. I believe improvements could be made around integrating with other tools.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for One Identity Safeguard?

My main use case for One Identity Safeguard is using only one module for privileged session, which we use for admins and contractors. A quick specific example of how my team uses One Identity Safeg...

See all answers

Comparisons

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs Fudo PAM

Compared 16% of the time

WALLIX Bastion vs Fudo PAM

Compared 14% of the time

CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager vs Fudo PAM

Compared 9% of the time

SSH PrivX vs Fudo PAM

Compared 8% of the time

senhasegura Access Management vs Fudo PAM

Compared 5% 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 10% of the time

BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 8% of the time

Delinea Privileged Access Service vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 8% of the time

SailPoint Identity Security Cloud vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 5% of the time

More One Identity Safeguard Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Privileged Access Management (PAM)

February 2026

Download Fudo PAM product report

Buyer's Guide

One Identity Safeguard

January 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

February 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: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

882,160 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.