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

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)
25th
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
6.7
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (5th), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 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
ProductMindshare (%)
One Identity Safeguard4.4%
Fudo PAM2.5%
Other93.1%
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.
ST
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.

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."
"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."
"Session recording and password management are the two main aspects."
"it's perfect to control and administer computers in our company."
"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."
"One Identity Safeguard is stable and provides great performance."
"The customer service and technical support are very good."
"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."
"It's one of the best products we've seen. When you start looking at the functionality and use cases and usability of the product, it's straightforward. They designed this product with the end-user in mind, and they also had the sysadmin who is supporting the product in mind. They really did a nice job. Overall, it's a nice product to work with."
"The system is easy to manage, as it is not a system that you will change everything all of a sudden. It evolves most of the time with customer requests."
"There is ease of implementation."
"One of the real benefits of safeguarding here is that the client will have an absolute audit of who is using an administrative interface, whether it's server or network."
 

Cons

"The configuration is difficult."
"Professional training and certification would be great."
"Fudo PAM’s scalability is not very strong."
"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."
"Professional training and certification would be great."
"We have not had any issues with the core product itself, but there is an add-on called SCALUS, which is quite critical to the user experience, and that does not work. They have been having issues with that for quite a long time, like months. That is not great at all."
"One Identity Safeguard could be improved by simplifying the user interface and initial configuration process, especially for first-time users."
"For the A2A use, it is not as easy as using something like HashiCorp's password management tools."
"There is room for improvement in the launch module. They built in a launch button but they don't have effective instructions for configuring it to allow it to launch an RDP session. They're working on that, but the button is in the live product. If they were going to install something that wasn't useful, they should have just disabled it and not rolled it out with the product."
"The deployment affects our privileged users because it takes a long time for them to request privileges, which impacts the SLA."
"It takes some time to understand the features of One Identity Safeguard, and it would be more useful if it was easier to set up."
"I would like to see an adjustment with more enterprise architecture."
"The Transparent Mode could be somewhat easier to use."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is great. We've been given discounts that make it cheaper than using any other solution."
"It was definitely cheaper than the other two products that we evaluated."
"Setup cost, pricing and licensing are all very expensive."
"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."
"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."
"They offer a fair price for a robust solution."
"They have comparable pricing. All identity products are essentially priced in a similar way. It's a per-user base."
"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."
"It is cheaper than CyberArk. Its price is fair."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
13%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
University
12%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise22
Large Enterprise20
 

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.
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.
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 ...
 

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: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.