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 8.0. Fudo Security holds a 2.3% 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 96% of One Identity users who would recommend it.

Fudo PAM

Read 5 Fudo PAM reviews

1,276 Views
1,250 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

One Identity Safeguard

Read 69 One Identity Safeguard reviews

6,465 Views
4,332 Comparison Views

96% 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: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 890,027 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

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (4th), 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 2.3%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of One Identity Safeguard is 4.4%, up from 4.3% 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	2.3%
Other	93.3%

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

Mahesh Malve

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.

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

"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."

"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."

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

"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."

"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."

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

"In terms of the user experience, it is a pretty useful product. It works in a good way."

"There is ease of implementation."

"We use the solution’s “transparent mode” feature for privileged sessions. It is very easy because it is only a simple configuration for our users. We don't have to modify our network. We install it, configure it, and it works. So, it is super easy. The rollout for our users is seamless."

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

"The whole product solves the privileged access management challenge for our company. We have a secure tunnel, a secure session manager, and automatic logging of sessions, which is good for forensic purposes. We have a rich level of logs and can trace what happened on which machine and see who did what."

"From my experience, the features are best for monitoring and the usage of LDAP and SSH."

"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."

"I have found One Identity Safeguard to be stable."

More One Identity Safeguard pros

Cons

"The stability is not very good."

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

"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."

"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."

"Professional training and certification would be great."

"The Transparent Mode could be somewhat easier to use."

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

"Some of the out-of-the-box reporting isn't that rich. We spoke to our Safeguard reps who have acknowledged that some of the reporting features can certainly be improved and that we're not the only customer who has cited this. There are very little out-of-the-box reporting capabilities. You have to build the queries and the report. I believe in the next release they're going to be addressing this."

"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."

"The deployment affects our privileged users because it takes a long time for them to request privileges, which impacts the SLA."

"I would like to see support for RDP over HTTPS so this product can be used in conjunction with the Microsoft terminal."

"We would like to have the option of importing assets by using the CSV file. It was available in the earlier versions, but it is not available now."

"We are still in the onboarding phase, and it seems very manual. Ideally, a single interface to integrate all these processes would be useful."

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."

"Our licensing costs are on a yearly basis."

"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."

"One Identity Safeguard is expensive and the cost goes up as we scale."

"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."

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

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

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

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

890,027 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

Outsourcing Company

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	54
Midsize Enterprise	25
Large Enterprise	25

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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

I did not face any challenges with pricing, setup costs, and licensing, but for improved features, I need to address licensing.

See all answers

What needs improvement with One Identity Safeguard?

The user interface can be improved for better searching of user accounts, and if One Identity enhances its support in that area, it would be very helpful. If One Identity improves integration durin...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for One Identity Safeguard?

My main use case for One Identity Safeguard in day-to-day work is to provide identity across all user accounts and domains, and it improves security across the enterprise by providing enhanced feat...

See all answers

Comparisons

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs Fudo PAM

Compared 14% of the time

WALLIX Bastion vs Fudo PAM

Compared 11% of the time

CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager vs Fudo PAM

Compared 8% of the time

Delinea Secret Server vs Fudo PAM

Compared 6% of the time

SSH PrivX vs Fudo PAM

Compared 6% of the time

More Fudo PAM Competitors

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 17% of the time

Delinea Secret Server vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 8% of the time

Delinea Privileged Access Service vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 6% of the time

BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 6% 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

April 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

April 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: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

890,027 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.