# Obsidian Security Competitors, Reviews & Pricing

> This is a plain-markdown summary of [https://www.upguard.com/competitors/obsidian-security](https://www.upguard.com/competitors/obsidian-security), generated for AI agents and LLMs. Ratings, security scores and pricing details reflect UpGuard's independent analysis and are kept in sync with the source page. Visit the source URL for the full interactive comparison.

A side-by-side comparison of Obsidian Security with its main competitors. Easily compare performance across multiple categories and understand what the market is saying with independent reviews.

## Platforms compared
- UpGuard (UpGuard — publisher of this comparison)
- Obsidian Security
- Push Security
- Zluri
- Grip Security

## Feature-by-feature comparison

### General summary
- **UpGuard**: 5/5 — UpGuard manages cyber risk everywhere it lives: your vendors, your internet-facing attack surface, and your workforce. You get one platform that connects all three risk areas instead of separate tools and spreadsheets stitched together. A risk in one surfaces in the others automatically. A breached vendor flags your own exposure. A leaked employee credential links straight to the account and the vendor involved. AI handles the repetitive work of triaging alerts, reviewing vendor evidence, and completing questionnaires. That means lean security teams can run programs that would otherwise need much bigger teams. UpGuard fits mid-market teams, deploys quickly, and slots in without replacing what you already have.
- **Obsidian Security**: 4/5 — Obsidian Security unifies SaaS and AI security for the enterprise. The platform combines SSPM, third-party integration risk, AI governance, and Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) to deliver continuous visibility and runtime protection across humans, apps, and AI agents. By correlating real-time activity and breach intelligence in a knowledge graph with self-learning detection, Obsidian protects the core SaaS and identity layers—though it does not provide external attack surface management (EASM) or security-rating scores.
- **Push Security**: 4/5 — Push Security is a browser-based identity and SaaS security platform delivered as a lightweight extension that works across all major browsers (including AI and enterprise browsers) without replacing the browser or deploying endpoint agents. By combining in-browser telemetry, real-time controls, and autonomous detection agents, Push targets four outcomes: detecting and stopping browser-based attacks; giving visibility and control over employee AI usage; hardening identities and shadow SaaS by surfacing ghost logins, weak or breached credentials, and accounts that bypass SSO/MFA; and preventing data loss across apps and AI tools. It captures attacks and risky activity that network and IdP-based tools miss. Its main limitation is inherent to the model: coverage is limited to in-browser activity on devices where the extension is installed, so threats or apps outside the browser are out of its visibility.
- **Zluri**: 4/5 — Zluri is a next-generation security platform built to manage both human and machine identities across the enterprise. Its core engine, an intelligence layer called IRIS, normalizes data from SaaS, cloud, and on-premises systems into a relationship graph that maps real-world permissions and access paths. Built on this foundation, Zluri delivers three core capabilities: visibility and intelligence (IVIP), governance and administration (IGA), and security posture management (ISPM)—using a universal connector to cover apps lacking native APIs. Additionally, it features SaaS management capabilities for cost control and shadow IT discovery. The platform, however, focuses strictly on compliance and posture rather than active runtime defense, so it does not offer ITDR, external attack surface management, or security ratings.
- **Grip Security**: 4/5 — Grip Security is an identity-centric SaaS security platform that consolidates SSPM, SaaS security, and ITDR into a single control plane to manage SaaS and AI sprawl risk. By analyzing email flows, browser activity, and IdP/SSO data, it continuously inventories all apps, including unsanctioned shadow IT, to prioritize and remediate risks such as exposed credentials, risky OAuth scopes, missing MFA/SSO, and misconfigurations using built-in workflows or existing tools. Purpose-built specifically for the SaaS and identity layer, Grip does not provide external attack surface management, vendor risk management, or security ratings.

### Key strengths
- **UpGuard**: UpGuard unifies vendor, attack surface, and workforce risk in one console. Customers describe finally seeing the whole picture, rather than paying for three tools that each cover only part of it. UpGuard also surfaces exposures that ratings tools and scanners miss, without the multi-week delay of a typical scan cycle. Lean teams can run the entire program without expanding headcount or adding a managed service.
- **Obsidian Security**: Obsidian's core strength lies in its deep detection capabilities. By correlating real-time activity, app configurations, and breach intelligence within a knowledge graph with self-learning detection, it rapidly stops live threats like account takeovers, token compromise, and OAuth abuse (ITDR). The platform also unifies SaaS and AI security, managing posture (SSPM) and governing AI agent usage across human, app, and machine identities. Additionally, its SaaS supply chain security proactively isolates risky third-party integrations before an external vendor breach can cascade into your environment.
- **Push Security**: By operating directly in the browser, Push intercepts evasive identity attacks—such as AiTM phishing, session token theft, and ClickFix—that traditional IdP and endpoint tools miss. Its autonomous agents leverage behavioral signals to actively block threats in real time rather than just triggering alerts. Delivered as a lightweight extension with no endpoint agents, it deploys rapidly across major browsers to protect corporate, BYOD, and Chromebook endpoints alike. The platform uncovers hidden shadow SaaS and ghost logins, using in-browser guardrails to nudge users toward MFA at login, all backed by the company's well-regarded browser-attack threat research.
- **Zluri**: Zluri's primary strength lies in its comprehensive visibility across both human and machine identities, including service accounts and AI agents. Powered by its IRIS intelligence engine and a universal app connector, the platform maps real-world permissions and access paths across SaaS, cloud, and local systems into a single relationship graph. This rich telemetry feeds into its advanced lifecycle automation—seamlessly handling access reviews, joiner/mover/leaver workflows, and segregation-of-duties policies to satisfy major compliance frameworks such as SOC 2, ISO, and HIPAA. Additionally, its posture management features proactively flag risks such as over-privileged or dormant accounts, while retaining tools to optimize software spend and uncover shadow IT.
- **Grip Security**: Grip excels at comprehensive SaaS and AI discovery, combining email, browser, and IdP/SSO signals to surface the full long tail of shadow applications. By mapping every app to access identities and credentials, it streamlines least-privilege enforcement, credential rotation, SSO/MFA extension, and user offboarding. Consolidating SSPM, SaaS security, and ITDR into a single platform reduces tool sprawl, enabling teams to discover, prioritize, and remediate risks through built-in workflows and core integrations with Okta, SailPoint, and ServiceNow.

### Key weaknesses
- **UpGuard**: UpGuard focuses on managing live, connected risk, not heavy, standalone compliance software. Full governance features, including policy and controls management, arrive later this year. Teams that need a mature governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) system of record today can run UpGuard alongside one for now. UpGuard also doesn’t translate risk into dollar figures. If financial risk quantification is a must-have, factor that into your evaluation.
- **Obsidian Security**: The most consistently cited product limitation reviewers note is that reporting is limited, and some dashboards are not particularly functional or helpful, though Obsidian is actively improving this area. Relatedly, as a relatively new SSPM entrant, some reviewers note that it lags behind more established tools in certain areas, particularly in its threat catalog and the refinement of some workflows.
- **Push Security**: Push has some maturing feature gaps worth noting. The most substantive issue is alert quality: a reviewer notes that individual alerts can lack context, making it harder to triage critical threats amid the volume of notifications. Reviewers also cite specific gaps, such as no manual way to add apps (for services not accessed via Google or Microsoft SSO), no data export for the app inventory (noted as on the roadmap), and no built-in extension/deployment-health monitoring to confirm coverage.
- **Zluri**: Reviews cite integration and data setup as limitations for Zluri: some application integrations require additional configuration or validation before usage data is fully accurate, adding onboarding time. Contract and spend-related data depend on the quality and completeness of the uploaded source documents, which requires upfront manual effort. Then there is complexity: Zluri is feature-rich, and the sheer number of features and views can feel overwhelming at first. These are largely onboarding and usability-oriented issues rather than fundamental gaps, and they come from a large, mostly positive review base.
- **Grip Security**: Reviewers note that the initial setup and configuration of Grip can be complex, with a learning curve before teams become fully proficient. Another reviewer notes that the reporting center is limited in its ability to build custom reports. And because Grip's value hinges on comprehensive discovery, full coverage depends on feeding it the right telemetry, email flows, IdP/SSO data, and its browser extension, so deployments that omit parts of that data will see reduced visibility.

### Usability and learning curve
- **UpGuard**: 5/5 — Teams deploy quickly and get up and running without an extended onboarding period. New employees can learn the interface without lengthy training. A single console consolidates workflows that would otherwise require multiple tools, reducing the ongoing burden of learning and maintaining separate systems. Operating the platform doesn’t require a professional services engagement.
- **Obsidian Security**: 4/5 — Obsidian is agentless and API-based, so getting started takes minutes with no agents to deploy or rules to write. Day-to-day, users value having SaaS and AI activity correlated in one place, which speeds up investigations. Overall, the learning curve is reasonable for an enterprise security platform, helped considerably by Obsidian's onboarding support.
- **Push Security**: 4/5 — Push deploys as a lightweight browser extension that installs in minutes, often via existing MDM, with no endpoint agents and minimal ongoing maintenance. Because controls and prompts live in the browser, end users receive just-in-time, non-intrusive nudges (and optional Slack/ChatOps messages) rather than friction, which lowers the change-management burden. The administrator's learning curve is modest. The main usability caveat is the console experience, as alerts can lack context, making triage noisier until tuned.
- **Zluri**: 4/5 — Zluri is generally well-regarded for its usability. Onboarding centers on connecting integrations to build the identity and application inventory. Because the platform is broad, spanning visibility, IGA, posture, and SaaS management, reviewers note that the number of features and views can feel overwhelming at first, especially for non-technical users, creating a moderate learning curve to know where to focus. A large, positive review base suggests teams get up to speed effectively, but the main effort is the upfront integration and configuration work.
- **Grip Security**: 4/5 — Grip is designed for fast time-to-value: discovery is largely agentless, drawing on email, IdP/SSO, and API connections to surface an organization's full SaaS and AI footprint within days of a proof of concept. Onboarding is typically guided, with Grip's security team helping prioritize the highest-value risks in the first weeks of deployment. That said, some reviewers describe the initial setup and configuration as complex and requiring a learning curve. Overall, the platform reaches useful visibility quickly, but teams should expect some ramp-up to operate it proficiently and tailor it to their environment.

### Cyber risk data accuracy
- **UpGuard**: 5/5 — UpGuard’s data remains current. Vendor postures refresh continuously, and users can initiate a scan on demand instead of waiting for a fixed cycle. UpGuard attributes findings accurately, so teams do not spend weeks correcting assets assigned to the wrong company, a common issue with ratings tools. [Threat Monitoring](https://www.upguard.com/product/breach-risk/threat-monitoring) scans the open, deep, and dark web, along with social media, for leaked data, exposed credentials, and brand impersonation. AI filters out noise so the alerts that reach your team are worth acting on.
- **Obsidian Security**: 4/5 — Obsidian's core advantage is its high-fidelity data foundation. By normalizing rich, real-time activity and granular in-app configurations against a massive breach-intelligence dataset, it ensures exceptional data accuracy from the jump. This precise telemetry feeds a knowledge graph and self-learning detection models to deliver high-fidelity, low-noise detections of token abuse and misconfigurations. However, this data fidelity depends entirely on direct, connected integrations rather than external scanning, and its threat catalog is still maturing within the SaaS and identity layers.
- **Push Security**: 4/5 — By instrumenting the browser session directly, Push captures high-fidelity, first-party data: actual login methods, credential reuse and breaches, session tokens, OAuth grants, and real app usage per user that network, IdP, and endpoint-based tools can't see. Detections rely on behavioral signals that attackers struggle to rotate (for example, AiTM-proxy and session-hijacking indicators), supporting accurate, real-time identification of identity attacks rather than after-the-fact log analysis. The main caveats are scope and maturity: telemetry is limited to in-browser activity on devices running the extension, so non-browser or native-app activity isn't captured, and as a newer platform, some detection content and alert context are still being refined.
- **Zluri**: 4/5 — Zluri excels at asset discovery by aggregating signals from direct APIs, identity providers, finance systems, and a browser agent. Its IRIS intelligence layer normalizes these multi-source inputs to map out exact permission paths for both human and machine identities across SaaS, cloud, and custom environments. While this provides high-fidelity visibility into active entitlements, reviewers note that data reliability varies with integration coverage, requiring manual validation for less-supported apps. Additionally, spend insights depend strictly on the completeness of uploaded contract documents, and the underlying data engine is structurally optimized for identity governance rather than live security threat telemetry.
- **Grip Security**: 4/5 — For SaaS and identity risk, Grip's data quality is a core strength. Because it correlates multiple signals rather than relying on a single feed, it builds a comprehensive inventory of known and unknown (shadow) SaaS and AI apps, and emphasizes high accuracy with minimal false positives. It continuously monitors for risks such as exposed credentials, excessive permissions, and misconfigurations, assigning risk levels to prioritize action. This accuracy, however, is specific to the SaaS and identity domain and depends on the telemetry an organization connects; it is not a measure of external attack surface or overall security posture.

### Vendor risk management features
- **UpGuard**: 5/5 — UpGuard runs the complete third-party risk management (TPRM) process in one platform: onboarding, assessing, remediating, monitoring, and reporting on vendors. Each vendor’s live external exposure and any linked leaked credentials appear directly within the vendor program, so teams can act on verified risk instead of relying on paperwork. [AI-powered security questionnaires](https://www.upguard.com/product/vendor-risk/questionnaire-management) read vendor evidence and complete assessments automatically, cutting completion time by up to 95%. Instant risk assessments return a point-in-time report in under a minute, mapped to frameworks like ISO 27001 and NIST CSF 2.0.
- **Obsidian Security**: 2/5 — Obsidian is not a dedicated third-party/vendor risk management (TPRM) platform and lacks core VRM lifecycle workflows such as vendor security questionnaires, formal assessments and scoring, and structured remediation tracking across a vendor portfolio. It does, however, discover and reduce risky third-party SaaS integrations and OAuth grants, surfacing the privileges third parties hold, and detects third-party and supply-chain threats early to contain the blast radius before a vendor breach cascades into the customer's environment. This delivers meaningful third-party risk reduction at the integration and threat layers, but organizations that need full vendor due diligence and lifecycle management would still require a dedicated VRM tool.
- **Push Security**: 2/5 — Dedicated third-party/vendor risk management is not a function of Push, and it lacks common TPRM lifecycle workflows. Its only third-party-risk overlap is at the integration layer: because it sees OAuth grants and app-to-app connections in the browser, Push can surface and flag risky or malicious third-party integrations that have been granted access to corporate data. This reduces one slice of third-party exposure, but organizations needing vendor due diligence and risk assessments would require a dedicated VRM/TPRM tool.
- **Zluri**: 2/5 — Zluri is not a dedicated third-party/vendor risk management (TPRM) platform, and lacks the security-oriented VRM lifecycle of a dedicated solution. Its vendor-related capabilities are operational and governance-focused: it manages SaaS vendor contracts, renewals, and spend, tracks which third-party (and AI) apps are in use, and governs access to them, including surfacing risky or over-permissioned third-party integrations. This provides useful visibility into third-party apps in an environment and helps control access, but organizations that need vendor security due diligence and assessments would require a dedicated VRM/TPRM tool.
- **Grip Security**: 2/5 — Grip is not a dedicated third-party/vendor risk management (TPRM) platform, and it lacks the core VRM workflows found in purpose-built tools. However, there is partial overlap: because Grip discovers and risk-scores every third-party SaaS and AI application in use, it provides teams with visibility into a slice of third-party risk at the application layer and can enrich that view by integrating external security ratings (for example, through its SecurityScorecard integration). For organizations needing full vendor due diligence and lifecycle management, a dedicated VRM solution would still be required.

### Attack surface management features
- **UpGuard**: 5/5 — UpGuard continuously monitors your internet-facing footprint. It maps assets, flags exposures such as misconfigurations, expired certificates, and open ports, and ranks remediation priorities. The UpGuard platform also detects typosquatting and lookalike domains set up to impersonate your brand before they’re used for phishing. Because attack surface monitoring runs alongside vendor and workforce risk, an exposed asset or leaked credential automatically links to the person and vendor involved. This gives teams visibility into both external exposure and vendor risk in a single view.
- **Obsidian Security**: 2/5 — Obsidian does not perform traditional external attack surface management; it does not scan or monitor internet-facing infrastructure such as domains, IPs, exposed services, or certificates. Its relevance to the attack surface is limited to the SaaS and identity layers. It reduces the SaaS attack surface by discovering shadow SaaS, mapping and curbing risky third-party API integrations and OAuth grants, and identifying excessive privileges and exposed accounts. Organizations needing conventional, internet-facing ASM would still require a dedicated tool.
- **Push Security**: 3/5 — Push maps the identity attack surface from within the browser, uncovering critical gaps that IdPs miss, including shadow SaaS, ghost logins, bypassed MFA, weak credentials, and risky OAuth grants. Unlike management-only platforms, it actively shrinks this exposure using real-time, in-browser guardrails. However, because this approach is strictly identity and browser-centric, Push does not monitor the external, internet-facing attack surface (such as domains, IPs, or certificates). Organizations requiring conventional ASM will still need a dedicated solution.
- **Zluri**: 3/5 — Zluri's Identity Security Posture Management (ISPM) notably minimizes enterprise exposure by mapping access paths across all human and machine accounts. The platform actively surfaces internal risks—such as over-privileged users, toxic access combinations, dormant accounts, and unmonitored shadow apps—before guiding teams through prioritized remediation and access reviews. However, this defense is strictly identity-centric. Zluri does not scan external, internet-facing infrastructure such as domains, IPs, or certificates, so organizations that require traditional attack surface management (ASM) will still need a dedicated tool.
- **Grip Security**: 2/5 — Grip does not perform traditional external attack surface management; it does not scan, inventory, or monitor internet-facing assets such as domains, IPs, exposed services, or certificates. Its relevance to the attack surface lies in the SaaS and identity layers. By continuously discovering shadow SaaS and AI apps, risky OAuth grants, and other exposures, Grip helps teams find and shrink the identity-driven attack surface those apps create. Organizations looking for conventional, internet-facing ASM would need a dedicated tool.

### Security ratings
- **UpGuard**: A grade (947/950), live UpGuard security rating
- **Obsidian Security**: A grade (844/950), live UpGuard security rating
- **Push Security**: A grade (856/950), live UpGuard security rating
- **Zluri**: A grade (872/950), live UpGuard security rating
- **Grip Security**: B grade (799/950), live UpGuard security rating

### Customer support
- **UpGuard**: 5/5 — UpGuard supports every customer across all plan tiers, from the smallest plan to the largest. Support teams assist with both technical setup and larger program decisions. Customers frequently cite [responsive, hands-on support](https://www.upguard.com/customer-support) as a reason they continue with UpGuard.
- **Obsidian Security**: 4/5 — Customer support is one of Obsidian's most consistently praised attributes. Enterprise customers describe it as exceptional, responsive, and proactive. The model is high-touch, with customers supported by dedicated Customer Success Managers, Technical Account Managers (TAMs), and account teams that guide implementation, prioritize feature requests, and work closely with the customer's security organization. The main caveat is that Obsidian does not publicly document standard support tiers or SLAs (these are arranged through enterprise agreements), and its self-service support resources are lighter than those of larger, more established vendors.
- **Push Security**: 4/5 — Customers describe the Push team as responsive, quick to resolve issues, and unusually engaged, actively listening to feature requests and iterating quickly, reflecting the company's product-led, high-touch approach as a fast-growing vendor. Self-service resources include a public help center/documentation and a status page, and the product's in-browser prompts and Slack/ChatOps integration reduce support load by guiding end users directly. The main caveats are that Push does not publicly document formal support tiers or SLAs, and the strongly positive sentiment comes from a relatively small public review base.
- **Zluri**: 4/5 — Customer support is frequently praised across Zluri's large G2 review base, with customers highlighting responsive support and hands-on customer success and onboarding assistance. Self-service resources are well developed: Help Docs, a support portal, Zluri Academy for training and enablement, and a Trust Center. New customers are typically guided through onboarding and integration setup by Zluri's team, which helps offset the platform's breadth and upfront configuration effort. The main caveat is that Zluri does not publicly document formal support tiers or SLAs, so specifics are set during contracting.
- **Grip Security**: 4/5 — Grip pairs customers with a Customer Success/Technical Customer Success Manager who helps prioritize risks, build governance habits, and turn findings into operational controls, reflected in its hands-on, guided onboarding. Day-to-day support is delivered through a customer support portal and a help center/documentation site, with support and maintenance governed by a defined SLA that Grip may fulfill directly or through certified third-party providers. Additional engagements, such as deployment, configuration, integration, and training, are available as professional services.

### Workflow automation
- **UpGuard**: 5/5 — [Risk Automations](https://www.upguard.com/product/risk-automations) turns a risk signal into action across the platform, with no code and no engineering ticket. On the vendor side, it automates onboarding from questionnaire data, triages vendor score drops, schedules recurring vendor reports, and opens remediation tickets in ServiceNow or Jira. On the threat side, a Breach Risk detection can trigger a workflow that alerts Teams or Slack and runs a system-level fix, like blocking a malicious IP or forcing a credential reset. This is the difference between a tool that reports on risk and one that resolves it.
- **Obsidian Security**: 4/5 — Obsidian supports automation across detection, response, and governance. Through its ITDR capabilities, it detects identity threats and enables fast, guided response to contain them before they become incidents, and it applies runtime guardrails and policy enforcement to AI agents and GenAI usage. On the posture side, it offers guided and automated remediation for misconfigurations, excessive privileges, and risky third-party OAuth grants, including the revocation of inappropriate integrations. An action control plane turns its risk intelligence into enforcement, and integrations with tools such as ServiceNow, Jira, and Splunk let teams route alerts, tickets, and evidence into existing workflows. As with any SaaS/identity platform, the reach of automated enforcement depends on the connected apps and downstream tools.
- **Push Security**: 4/5 — Push's autonomous agents continuously analyze browser telemetry and automatically write detections and deploy blocks in real time, stopping phishing pages, AiTM proxies, and malicious OAuth flows at machine speed without waiting on an analyst. Remediation and policy enforcement also happen in-browser: Push can block risky actions, enforce AI-usage policy, restrict logins, and present automated guardrails that prompt users to enable MFA, adopt SSO, or change weak passwords at the moment of risk. Automated Slack/ChatOps notifications loop in both employees and the security team, and telemetry can be forwarded to SIEM/SOAR for downstream response workflows.
- **Zluri**: 4/5 — Zluri leverages a no-code engine to automate the entire identity lifecycle—handling onboarding provisioning, role changes, and access revocation seamlessly. Beyond core lifecycle management, it supports self-service requests and compliance audits with features such as automated reviews, one-click remediation, and segregation-of-duties enforcement. It also extends into posture management by automatically flagging and resolving dormant or over-privileged access. While the absolute reach of these automated workflows is ultimately bound to your target systems, Zluri's universal connector allows teams to easily extend this governance to custom or legacy apps that lack native APIs.
- **Grip Security**: 4/5 — Workflow automation is central to how Grip operationalizes SaaS risk. After discovery and prioritization, teams can remediate using built-in automated workflows or by orchestrating actions within existing tools such as ServiceNow ITSM and identity providers. Common automated plays include enforcing policies on newly discovered shadow SaaS, extending SSO/MFA coverage, and revoking risky access or OAuth grants. Its browser extension and ITDR capabilities support near-real-time response to identity threats. Bear in mind that the reach of automated enforcement depends on the SaaS apps and downstream tools an organization has connected to.

### Artificial intelligence features
- **UpGuard**: 5/5 — UpGuard’s AI performs specific, defined tasks, rather than vague “AI-powered” work. The AI Threat Analyst sorts and scores incoming threats across your attack surface, the dark web, and social media. It clears out approximately 60% of alerts as noise, so your team only reviews what matters. The same triage logic extends to vendor and workforce signals as well. Every AI result carries a citation back to the source, so your team can verify it before acting.
- **Obsidian Security**: 4/5 — Obsidian embeds AI as a core architectural capability rather than an add-on, applying it in two distinct directions. Internally, self-learning detection models leverage network effects to sharpen threat intelligence, while an interactive AI Assistant accelerates analyst triage and investigations. Externally, the platform delivers comprehensive AI governance, including AI-SPM, shadow AI discovery, prompt security, and agent runtime protection, across major enterprise ecosystems such as Microsoft Copilot, ChatGPT, Amazon Bedrock, Google Vertex, Anthropic Claude, and Salesforce Agentforce.
- **Push Security**: 4/5 — Push's approach integrates AI in two main ways. First, Push uses AI defensively: autonomous agents analyze high-fidelity browser telemetry to detect and block AI-enabled attacks in real time, writing detections and deploying blocks at machine speed rather than relying on analysts. Second, it secures employees' AI usage: Push sees which AI tools and agents are in use, what data is being pasted or shared into them, and what permissions are granted, and enforces AI-usage policy in the browser across both human and agentic sessions. The result is meaningful AI capability on both the detection and AI-governance sides, though it does not market a separate branded generative-AI analyst copilot.
- **Zluri**: 3/5 — AI and machine learning underpin Zluri's IRIS identity intelligence layer, which analyzes identity and access signals to detect access anomalies and risk, prioritize issues by impact, and recommend clear remediation actions. AI also powers discovery and classification by automatically identifying and categorizing SaaS and AI apps, including shadow IT, and supports access reviews with recommendations that speed approve/revoke decisions. Zluri also monitors AI apps and helps govern non-human and AI agent identities. These are meaningful, embedded intelligence capabilities oriented toward identity governance and risk, though Zluri positions them as an intelligence and decisioning layer rather than a broad, branded generative AI copilot.
- **Grip Security**: 3/5 — Rather than featuring a proprietary generative AI assistant, Grip focuses entirely on AI governance, ensuring how an organization uses AI across its SaaS estate. The platform discovers shadow AI apps, agents, and embedded capabilities, maps them to human and non-human identities (NHIs), and classifies risks based on authentication, data sensitivity, and OAuth scopes. Teams can then use these insights to recommend and automate remediation actions through Grip's built-in, no-code workflows.

### API and integrations
- **UpGuard**: 4/5 — A well-documented REST API and webhooks let teams pull risk data into their own tools and trigger actions programmatically, without waiting on engineering support. For no-code work, Risk Automations adds more than 100 native integrations, including Jira, ServiceNow, Microsoft Entra, Slack, and Cloudflare. A Universal API Connector Node extends its reach to any open API.
- **Obsidian Security**: 4/5 — Obsidian's agentless, API-based model delivers deep integrations across core SaaS platforms (M365, Google Workspace, Okta, Salesforce, Snowflake, Databricks, GitHub, ServiceNow, Workday) and major AI ecosystems (Bedrock, Claude, ChatGPT, Vertex, Copilot, OpenAI, Agentforce). Identity providers like Okta, Entra, and Google anchor this telemetry, routing alerts to operational tools like Jira and Splunk, while a browser extension extends visibility to track users in transit and compromised accounts. While this ecosystem is deep, it is purpose-built for the SaaS, AI, and identity domains rather than serving as a general-purpose marketplace.
- **Push Security**: 4/5 — Push is built to slot into an existing security stack rather than replace it. It deploys via standard browser-extension management (including MDM) and integrates with identity providers (Okta, Microsoft Entra, Google) to enrich and complement IdP data, with the browser layer adding what the IdP can't see. For operations, Push forwards its detections and telemetry to SIEM and SOAR tools, sends real-time notifications via Slack/ChatOps, and offers an API (and webhooks) to push data into the rest of the stack. The integration set is well-suited to security operations, though, as a focused browser-security tool, its catalog is narrower and more security-stack-oriented than that of a broad SaaS-management platform.
- **Zluri**: 4/5 — Zluri features one of the largest integration catalogs in its category, providing hundreds of deep, bi-directional connectors across identity providers (Okta, Entra, Google), HRMS, finance, and core SaaS apps to power both asset discovery and automated provisioning. To eliminate the blind spots of connector-only platforms, its Universal Identity Connector (part of IRIS) seamlessly extends this governance to custom, cloud, and on-premises applications. While an open API supports broader custom data exchange, user reviews note a key caveat: integration depth varies by app, and certain platforms require extra configuration or validation before returning fully reliable data.
- **Grip Security**: 4/5 — Tailored specifically for identity and SaaS security rather than a broad, general-purpose marketplace, Grip connects directly to core IdPs and IAM systems (Okta, Microsoft Entra, Google Workspace, SailPoint) and major platforms like Microsoft 365, Salesforce, Slack, and Zoom, while capturing the long tail of SaaS via email and browser signals. For orchestration and risk enrichment, it integrates with ServiceNow (ITSM and CMDB) and SecurityScorecard, utilizes a browser extension for near-real-time policy enforcement, and exposes an API for programmatic access.

### Purchasing & licensing transparency
- **UpGuard**: 5/5 — UpGuard publishes its pricing rather than hiding it behind a sales call. A free tier lets teams monitor up to five vendors and use [Trust Exchange](https://www.upguard.com/product/trust-exchange), UpGuard’s AI-powered questionnaire tool, at no cost. Paid Vendor Risk plans start at USD 1,750 per month, billed annually. Teams can start with one product and add others as they scale. One license covers both monitoring and assessments, so pricing doesn’t fragment across separate products.
- **Obsidian Security**: 3/5 — Obsidian publishes a clear, modular tier structure: Free, Foundations, and Advanced, with detailed feature breakdowns for each. Obsidian offers a free plan (up to 1,000 users) covering SaaS-sprawl and shadow-AI discovery, plus spear-phishing detection, alongside a free trial. However, it does not publish dollar pricing for its paid tiers: both Foundations (discovery and governance) and Advanced (detection, runtime defense, and incident response) are quote-only, so actual cost requires contacting sales. Pricing is generally based on headcount and scales with the modules a team selects.
- **Push Security**: 5/5 — Push is highly transparent about pricing. Its Standard plan (up to 500 employees) is published at $5 per employee per month on an annual 12-month contract, or $6 per employee per month billed monthly, with both monthly and annual options. The first 10 licenses are free, giving teams a no-cost entry point, and organizations with 500+ employees move to an Enterprise plan with volume discounts. Licensing is straightforward and self-managed: admins add or remove employee licenses as headcount changes, and Push accepts card payments (Stripe) or bank transfers, with invoices visible in-app. Only the large-enterprise tier is custom-quoted.
- **Zluri**: 2/5 — Zluri does not publish public pricing. Pricing is quote-based and obtained through a sales demo, typically scaled by organization size and the products/modules selected; third-party marketplaces have estimated roughly $4–8 per user per month and a tiered structure (e.g., Standard/Professional/Enterprise), but Zluri does not confirm these publicly. Zluri's website offers an ROI calculator to estimate value, and evaluation is sales-led (demo/proof of concept) rather than a self-service free trial. Ultimately, cost and packaging are opaque and require a sales conversation.
- **Grip Security**: 4/5 — Grip uses a transparent, per-human-user pricing model billed annually, with final costs determined by employee count, feature choices, and contract length. For organizations with fewer than 1,000 employees, published pricing starts at $8 per user per month and covers AI and SaaS discovery, identity-driven security, threat detection, and governance, while larger organizations receive custom enterprise quotes. Although there is no advertised free plan or free trial, a one-off AI Governance Assessment is available on request, and a proof of concept can be arranged through a product demo.

### Customers
- **UpGuard**: 5/5 — UpGuard customers include Intercontinental Exchange (NYSE: ICE), Morningstar, TDK, PagerDuty, Hopin, and IAG. Read [UpGuard’s customer stories](https://www.upguard.com/customers) to learn more.
- **Obsidian Security**: 4/5 — Obsidian publicly cites a track record with major enterprise and technology brands, listing companies such as Snowflake, T-Mobile, Databricks, S&P Global, and Seagate among its users, as well as organizations such as Wyndham, Algolia, BigCommerce, AAA, and Upwork. This customer base heavily skews toward large-scale, data-centric organizations, reflecting Obsidian's enterprise focus on complex SaaS and AI environments.
- **Push Security**: 4/5 — Push publicly cites well-known technology and security-savvy customers, several of whom provide named testimonials. Examples include GitLab, Ramp, Cribl, GreyNoise, and PortSwigger (others cited include Upvest and Thinkst), with endorsements from security leaders at Flex, Inductive Automation, and Cribl. The customer base skews toward technology companies and security-mature organizations, notably several security vendors themselves, which lends credibility, though the publicly named roster is still modest in size.
- **Zluri**: 3/5 — Zluri publishes an extensive set of named customer case studies across mid-market and enterprise organizations, many with quantified outcomes. Examples include BambooHR, Nuvei, Narvar, Guesty, and Underdog (others featured include Kasada, Tripledot Studios, Pano AI, Radicle Health, and Anzu), with results such as large IT-hour savings, faster provisioning, and reduced audit time. The customer base skews toward technology, fintech, and mid-to-large enterprises managing significant SaaS and identity sprawl. The roster is broad and well-documented, though it leans toward recognizable tech and mid-market names rather than marquee Fortune 100 brands.
- **Grip Security**: 3/5 — Grip publicly lists a range of enterprise and mid-market customers and claims to protect more than 125 million SaaS users. Examples cited include Interpublic Group (IPG), NFP, Alera Group, Pacific Dental Services (PDS Health), and Findlay. The customer base skews toward insurance, professional services, advertising, healthcare, and finance, though it also includes large organizations, such as a Fortune 300 advertising firm with roughly 90,000 employees.

### G2 rating
_Accurate as of March 2025_
- **UpGuard**: 4.5/5 — More than 700 verified reviews give UpGuard a 4.5 out of 5 rating on G2. UpGuard also holds G2’s top ranking as the leader in Third-Party & Supplier Risk Management for 15 consecutive quarters. The 2026 G2 Best Software Awards recognized UpGuard as one of the Top 100 Global Software Companies. Among verified reviewers, 98% give UpGuard four- or five-star ratings, and 94% approve of its product direction.
- **Obsidian Security**: 4/5 — 4.0, based on 3 reviews.
- **Push Security**: 4.8/5 — 4.8, based on 9 reviews.
- **Zluri**: 4.6/5 — 4.6, based on 177 reviews.
- **Grip Security**: 4.4/5 — 4.4, based on 5 reviews.

## Reviews

### Gartner Peer Insights
_Overall ratings for the IT VRM Solutions market. Accurate as of January 2024_
- **UpGuard**: 4.4/5 — 4.4, based on 160 reviews. **Named a Representative Vendor** in the 2022 Gartner Market Guide for IT VRM Solutions
- **Obsidian Security**: 4.9/5 — 4.9, based on 22 reviews.
- **Push Security**: 5/5 — 5.0, based on 3 reviews.
- **Zluri**: 4.7/5 — 4.7, based on 41 reviews.
- **Grip Security**: 4.9/5 — 4.9, based on 21 reviews.

### G2 rating
_Accurate as of March 2025_
- **UpGuard**: 4.5/5 — More than 700 verified reviews give UpGuard a 4.5 out of 5 rating on G2. UpGuard also holds G2’s top ranking as the leader in Third-Party & Supplier Risk Management for 15 consecutive quarters. The 2026 G2 Best Software Awards recognized UpGuard as one of the Top 100 Global Software Companies. Among verified reviewers, 98% give UpGuard four- or five-star ratings, and 94% approve of its product direction.
- **Obsidian Security**: 4/5 — 4.0, based on 3 reviews.
- **Push Security**: 4.8/5 — 4.8, based on 9 reviews.
- **Zluri**: 4.6/5 — 4.6, based on 177 reviews.
- **Grip Security**: 4.4/5 — 4.4, based on 5 reviews.

### Glassdoor
_Accurate as of March 2025_
- **UpGuard**: 4.4/5 — 4.4, based on 95 reviews.
- **Obsidian Security**: 3.4/5 — 3.4, based on 49 reviews.
- **Push Security**: 5/5 — 5.0, based on 21 reviews.
- **Zluri**: 3.6/5 — 3.6, based on 100 reviews.
- **Grip Security**: 4.1/5 — 4.1, based on 8 reviews.

## Obsidian Security pricing overview

Obsidian uses a modular pricing model: "Start free, then expand into the modules your team needs across AI and SaaS security." It offers three tiers: a free plan, Foundations, and Advanced. The paid tiers are quote-only (no public dollar pricing) and generally priced by headcount, with pricing that scales with the selected modules. Prospective buyers can start with the free plan or a free trial, then contact sales for quotes for Foundations or Advanced.

### Here's an overview of Obsidian Security's plans and services:

### Free plan

Yes. Obsidian offers a free plan at $0 for up to 1,000 users, providing visibility into SaaS sprawl (including unsanctioned and shadow AI/SaaS) and spear-phishing detection with no manual tuning.

### Free trial

Yes. Obsidian offers a free trial of the platform on its website, in addition to the free plan.

### Foundations

Foundations focuses on discovery and governance. Discovery spans shadow SaaS, AI, AI agents, integrations, and browser extensions, plus access violations and third-party access, ownership, and activity; governance adds privilege minimization, integration-access right-sizing, agent access optimization, and compliance audit and mapping. Pricing is quote-based.

### Advanced

Advanced adds threat detection and response on top of Foundations: detection of account takeover and session hijacking, insider risk, API/token compromise, and sensitive-data exposure; proactive defense via runtime guardrails and AI security controls; and incident response with threat triage, remediation, and full-chain audit and forensics. Pricing is also quote-based.

### Add-ons and additional costs

- **Modular expansion:** Obsidian is sold à la carte across AI and SaaS security modules, so enabling additional modules increases cost.
- **Headcount scaling:** Pricing generally scales with the number of users/identities covered.
- **Advanced AI security & incident response:** Higher-tier capabilities such as AI agent runtime security and IR/forensics carry additional cost.

## How does Obsidian Security's pricing compare to its competitors?

### UpGuard

UpGuard's pricing starts at USD 1,599 per month. The platform maximizes value by offering out-of-the-box workflows supporting the entire TPRM lifecycle—saving users from having to purchase additional tools to fill TPRM workflow gaps.

It offers a free plan that lets you monitor up to five vendors, with access to assessment and remediation workflows. UpGuard's Trust Exchange tool, which streamlines vendor questionnaires and trust management, is also free.

A 14-day free trial of paid tiers is available.

For a detailed breakdown of UpGuard's pricing packages, visit [UpGuard's pricing page](https://www.upguard.com/pricing).

### Push Security

Push Security publishes transparent, self-serve pricing: the first 10 users are free, then $5 per employee per month, with volume discounts for larger deployments. Like Obsidian, Push offers a free entry point, but it goes further by publishing a clear per-user rate.

[Learn more about Push Security's pricing.](https://www.upguard.com/competitors/push#pricing)

### Zluri

Zluri does not publish public pricing. It uses an employee-count-based model across Standard, Professional, and Enterprise tiers, with third-party sources estimating roughly $4–8 per user per month and custom pricing for larger enterprises; a free trial is available.

[Learn more about Zluri's pricing.](https://www.upguard.com/competitors/zluri#pricing)

### Grip Security

Grip publishes a per-human-user model, billed annually, starting at $8 per user per month for organizations with fewer than 1,000 employees; organizations with more than 1,000 receive custom enterprise pricing, and a once-off AI Governance Assessment is available on request.

[Learn more about Grip Security's pricing.](https://www.upguard.com/competitors/grip-security#pricing)

---
Full interactive comparison: https://www.upguard.com/competitors/obsidian-security