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

Safeguard by One Identity vs Stellar Cyber Open XDR comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 20, 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

Safeguard by One Identity
Ranking in User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA)
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
91
Ranking in other categories
Privileged Access Management (PAM) (2nd), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (2nd)
Stellar Cyber Open XDR
Ranking in User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA)
29th
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (42nd), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (55th), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (18th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (25th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (21st), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (34th), Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) category, the mindshare of Safeguard by One Identity is 2.8%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Stellar Cyber Open XDR is 1.9%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Safeguard by One Identity2.8%
Stellar Cyber Open XDR1.9%
Other95.3%
User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA)
 

Featured Reviews

Mahesh Malve - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Business Development Associate 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.
Hrishiraj Bhattacharjee - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder & CEO at Team Karimganj
Correlates incidents, allows for quicker identification and helps prioritize investigations
The only challenge is, and that’s where we come into play, it’s a pretty high-tech platform. So, it’s difficult for small and medium-sized organizations to manage it on their own. It’s a very complex system. It requires a lot of expertise. All my guys who work on it have gone through certification from Stellar itself. There are three different certifications that you need to complete. Only then are you certified by Stellar to work on it. It’s a very complex platform. Not everyone can use it. A simple IT engineer or system admin won’t be able to handle it because it’s quite complex. You need to have an understanding of the industry, the subject, and the tool. So, just purchasing this tool or license and then using it on your own would be very difficult to configure and manage on a day-to-day basis. The pricing model is not suitable for small and medium companies, particularly small companies. The minimum pricing model they have is suitable for companies with more than one thousand users. So, if someone has 50 to 100 users, like typical small companies, it’s difficult for them because the cost involved is high. Stellar would charge you for those thousand users, but you do not need all those users. So what are they going to do? I guess Stellar does not want to target small companies directly and maybe relies on resellers and MSPs like us to sell it. So, that is something I would recommend changing. Otherwise, it’s a great tool, but because of the pricing model, small companies are unable to leverage the advantage of this beautiful tool. So, the pricing model should be suitable for small and medium businesses. The product currently has vulnerability monitoring and everything. But if they could also do something about vulnerability management and maybe patch management, that would be nice.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"We went from our teams complaining about the old product every day to not hearing one complaint at all and, as a matter of fact, I hear compliments about how much they love Safeguard."
"One Identity Safeguard has improved our organization's security posture by providing centralized privileged access management, secure password vaulting, and session monitoring."
"I like that One Identity Safeguard lets you configure the maximum number of connections to the target, a configuration I didn't find in its competitor."
"We were able to take an environment where we had several hosts managed by different people and consolidate that into a single, centrally managed solution."
"One Identity Safeguard has improved security a lot by controlling privileged access, and it also reduced risks since all sensitive activities are monitored and logged."
"Safeguard is a next-generation tool when it comes to privileged access management."
"I give it an eight because of its robust security features, its splendid automated password management, and real-time activity monitoring that stood out to me."
"It was super easy to deploy, not complicated, and did not have the hidden Capex that competitors do!"
"It can integrate with almost any cybersecurity tool available in the market."
"Stellar Cyber Open XDR offers these functionalities at a more affordable price, making it easier for me to position it with price-sensitive customers."
 

Cons

"From a usability perspective, what we are finding out is that our privileged domain admin users, in particular, want functionality for extending a checkout session. So we are working with One Identity support to see if there's an enhancement that can be made to the product."
"One Identity Safeguard is a strong PAM solution, but there are some areas for improvement."
"One Identity Safeguard could be improved by simplifying the user interface and initial configuration process, especially for first-time users."
"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."
"Now, I think the best way to improve it will be to optimize the software, because the software begins to consume more resources (physical)."
"The product uses a lot of resources in current sessions."
"I find it challenging mostly when managing complex work, especially when trying to implement it on a larger scale; sometimes it becomes slow, and the automation process also slows down."
"When we compare One Identity Safeguard with Cyberark, we know CyberArk has other tools or other features that are more complex and more useful for the customers. For example, I have one customer that wants to elevate the permission that is available in CyberArk."
"Support is an issue because they have a limited number of resources."
"I would rate the stability at about five to six. The platform requires some fine-tuning, especially when integrating data sources and creating connectors."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The license is very expensive for us, partly due to inflation and partly because of the exchange rate between the Dollar and the Iranian Rial. We purchased a perpetual license that we've been using up until now, but I believe that we are not going to update it in the future. Instead, we plan to find another third-party to support us with the license, in the sense that we would have access to their license as a shared agreement."
"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."
"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."
"They offer a fair price for a robust solution."
"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."
"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."
"We bought their other products, so it was not that expensive. It is one of those where the more you buy, the cheaper it is."
"It’s a single license platform."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) solutions are best for your needs.
913,076 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
14%
Retailer
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
University
7%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business89
Midsize Enterprise27
Large Enterprise40
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for One Identity Safeguard?
Our experience with the pricing and licensing was generally positive. The initial setup costs were reasonable considering the security and access control benefits we are getting. The licensing mode...
What needs improvement with One Identity Safeguard?
I think Safeguard by One Identity could be improved by making the user interface a little simpler and more intuitive, especially for new administrators. Some configurations and advanced features ta...
What is your primary use case for One Identity Safeguard?
My main use case for Safeguard by One Identity is to manage a secure privileged account and access a critical system. It helps us to control who can access sensitive resources and monitor privilege...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Stellar Cyber Open XDR?
Pricing is a major benefit of Stellar Cyber Open XDR. I rate it between three and four on the cost scale. It offers functionalities at a significantly lower cost than rival products, enabling me to...
What needs improvement with Stellar Cyber Open XDR?
I am currently evaluating Stellar Cyber Open XDR in terms of their support. I do not see any major areas for improvement as of now. Their support is good, and the team is small, enabling them to ca...
What is your primary use case for Stellar Cyber Open XDR?
I use Stellar Cyber Open XDR ( /products/stellar-cyber-open-xdr-reviews ) as a 24/7 security monitoring tool, especially for customers with large and medium networks. It eliminates the need for a d...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cavium
Sumitomo Chemical USA, PlastiPak Packaging, University of Denver, Large California State Agency, Large Midwestern American City
Find out what your peers are saying about Safeguard by One Identity vs. Stellar Cyber Open XDR and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,076 professionals have used our research since 2012.