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

Query.ai vs Upwind comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

Query.ai
Ranking in AI Security
27th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.3
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Security Analytics (4th), AI Data Analysis (27th)
Upwind
Ranking in AI Security
16th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (36th), Container Security (30th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (19th), API Security (13th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (25th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (15th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the AI Security category, the mindshare of Query.ai is 0.4%. The mindshare of Upwind is 1.2%, down from 7.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
AI Security Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Upwind1.2%
Query.ai0.4%
Other98.4%
AI Security
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2834415 - PeerSpot reviewer
DevSecOps engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Query automation has reduced investigation time and frees our team to focus on complex DevOps tasks
The best features Query.ai offers make anything with queries much easier, and it ensures that it is very optimistically correct with whatever it is doing. It also delivers access throughout real-time and historical data, making it really quick and fast to act upon. The real-time and historical data access from Query.ai helps me in my work by allowing me to go through queries quicker, so even if there are errors anywhere, detection happens pretty fast. Because it is on automation and the investigation is done really quickly, it saves a lot of my time. Query.ai has positively impacted my organization by being very appreciative for what it has done and how there is lesser work task on ourselves, and we could be focusing on more things because as DevOps, we have a lot of work. The reduction in workload due to Query.ai has made things easier, especially every time we need to investigate why an SQL query is not loading or if it is duplicating. It is especially effective during access management to either provision or de-provision access for users.
GF
Head Of Security Operation And Response at a hospitality company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Gaining Confidence in Cloud Security with Improved Vulnerability Management
In general, I think that Upwind as a product makes a disruption in the concept of shift left; they come with a new approach by the runtime sensor that they made, making life for the AppSec team much easier. It's a good question about the best features Upwind offers, but in general, they build a great product. One feature I can think about is their very strong API, allowing us to export most of the data to crunch and work with it. To me, having a wide API to interact with the data is very important. In general, we use the API to export the asset and then compare it with our findings to improve triage, ensuring we are not missing anything. This is one of the main use cases for the API. Having access to this API changes our team's efficiency dramatically; programmability makes everyone's life much easier. The operation reduces because of the time that analysts need to spend on triaging, and it also minimizes friction with developers, which is something Upwind helps us with. Upwind positively impacts our organization overall by helping with the CIS benchmark for Kubernetes, which is definitely one of the strongest parts. Second, by reducing the number of vulnerabilities, we automatically reduce the number of tickets opened with the dev team, which is a big win. It also helps us to tune our vulnerability program better regarding classification and priority.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which AI Security solutions are best for your needs.
902,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Query.ai?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was good. I felt the pricing is somewhat higher.
What needs improvement with Query.ai?
Probably Query.ai could be a little more optimized, but it is good.
What is your primary use case for Query.ai?
Initially, I started by checking out what Query.ai is about, and from there, my main use case has been for data queries and how to edit a query. The main use case for Query.ai that I wish it could ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Upwind?
The pricing, setup cost, and licensing process were pretty reasonable.
What needs improvement with Upwind?
Currently, we are working with Upwind on API security, which is something we want them to keep pushing. We also want them to be able to record SSH sessions; it's a tough request.
What is your primary use case for Upwind?
I have several use cases for Upwind. I will start with our private cloud that is based on Kubernetes, so we're using it also for Cloud Detection and Response and also for vulnerability scanning. We...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

No data available
Upwind Security Upwind Platform for AWS Security Hub, Upwind Security Upwind for AWS Security Hub Extended
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
StockX, Yotpo, bill, Digital Turbine, nanit, CallRail, boomi
Find out what your peers are saying about Query.ai vs. Upwind and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.