{ "$schema": "https://securitystackcompare.com/data/ratings.schema.json", "dataset": "security-stack-compare-open-ratings", "version": "2026-06-02", "lastModified": "2026-06-02", "publisher": "Security Stack Compare", "methodologyUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/methodology", "disclaimer": "Editorial buyer guidance only. The ratings are not certification, legal advice, audit opinion or proof of compliance. Verify legal scope, implementation evidence and current vendor terms directly.", "scoreScale": { "minimum": 0, "maximum": 100, "meaning": "Directional editorial score for buyer fit and evidence quality, not a compliance certificate." }, "scoreDimensions": [ { "key": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness" }, { "key": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness" }, { "key": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage" }, { "key": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow" }, { "key": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality" }, { "key": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity" }, { "key": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK" }, { "key": "region", "label": "Regional Fit" } ], "ratings": [ { "vendorId": "shielda", "vendorName": "Shielda", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/shielda", "overallScore": 93, "confidence": "directional", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "transparencyNoteOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "vendorStatement", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 96, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 98, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 88, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 95, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 92, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 88, "receipts": [ { "type": "vendorStatement", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 95, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 92, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Specialist endpoint, cloud, AppSec or backup tools can go deeper; large teams with budget and security engineers may prefer best-of-breed", "Flat commercial offer, but not independently verifiable on a public pricing page; confirm current terms directly." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "SMBs that want security switched on quickly: all-in-one tools, evidence, tasks and engineer-like guidance without hiring a security team first" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the primary need is specialist EDR, CNAPP, SAST, backup depth or an enterprise SOC instead of a broad evidence and remediation layer." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "Shielda", "url": "https://shielda.ai/" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20Shielda&body=Vendor%3A%20Shielda%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fshielda%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "defender", "vendorName": "Microsoft Defender for Business", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/defender", "overallScore": 71, "confidence": "high", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "pricingPage", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 62, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 78, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 60, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 86, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 92, "receipts": [ { "type": "pricingPage", "confidence": "high" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 60, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Great inside Microsoft, weaker for cross-tool evidence, supplier risk and audit workflow", "Published SMB price is paid yearly and limited to the business plan scope; check user caps, device coverage and taxes." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Microsoft-first SMBs that want a credible endpoint, identity and email baseline from tools they may already own" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the buying problem is audit evidence, supplier risk, backup proof or cross-tool remediation rather than endpoint and XDR coverage." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "Microsoft Defender for Business", "url": "https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/business/endpoint-security/microsoft-defender-business" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20Microsoft%20Defender%20for%20Business&body=Vendor%3A%20Microsoft%20Defender%20for%20Business%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fdefender%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "crowdstrike", "vendorName": "CrowdStrike Falcon", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/crowdstrike", "overallScore": 66, "confidence": "high", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "pricingPage", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 70, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 60, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 88, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 70, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 50, "receipts": [ { "type": "pricingPage", "confidence": "high" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Premium endpoint depth, but not a full compliance, supplier-risk or SMB operating layer", "Public entry price is Falcon Go; larger device counts, Pro/Enterprise tiers and MDR change the bill." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Teams where endpoint breach risk is a board-level worry and budget exists for premium EDR/MDR" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the buying problem is audit evidence, supplier risk, backup proof or cross-tool remediation rather than endpoint and XDR coverage." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "CrowdStrike Falcon pricing", "url": "https://www.crowdstrike.com/en-us/pricing/bundles/falcon-go/" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20CrowdStrike%20Falcon&body=Vendor%3A%20CrowdStrike%20Falcon%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fcrowdstrike%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "sentinelone", "vendorName": "SentinelOne Singularity", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/sentinelone", "overallScore": 66, "confidence": "high", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "pricingPage", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 68, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 58, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 86, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 68, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 58, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "pricingPage", "confidence": "high" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 58, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Strong autonomous endpoint response, weaker as a broad compliance and evidence operating layer", "Published entry price is Singularity Core; higher tiers, MDR and enterprise packaging can move to custom pricing." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Security teams that want strong endpoint response and automation without hand-tuning every incident" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the buying problem is audit evidence, supplier risk, backup proof or cross-tool remediation rather than endpoint and XDR coverage." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "SentinelOne platform packages", "url": "https://www.sentinelone.com/platform-packages/" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20SentinelOne%20Singularity&body=Vendor%3A%20SentinelOne%20Singularity%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fsentinelone%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "sophos", "vendorName": "Sophos MDR / Intercept X", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/sophos", "overallScore": 67, "confidence": "medium", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "vendorStatement", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 64, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 56, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 65, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 78, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 60, "receipts": [ { "type": "vendorStatement", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Good protection bundle, but evidence depth, supplier risk and governance still need a broader workflow", "Sophos routes Endpoint and MDR through a quote flow; ask for users, servers, MDR scope, onboarding and renewal terms." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "SMBs that want endpoint, firewall and MDR help from one practical vendor rather than stitching everything alone" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the buying problem is audit evidence, supplier risk, backup proof or cross-tool remediation rather than endpoint and XDR coverage." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "Sophos Endpoint quote", "url": "https://www.sophos.com/en-us/products/endpoint-antivirus/request-pricing" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20Sophos%20MDR%20%2F%20Intercept%20X&body=Vendor%3A%20Sophos%20MDR%20%2F%20Intercept%20X%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fsophos%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "eset", "vendorName": "ESET PROTECT", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/eset", "overallScore": 65, "confidence": "high", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "pricingPage", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 58, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 50, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 70, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 72, "receipts": [ { "type": "pricingPage", "confidence": "high" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 88, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Endpoint protection is the center; broad compliance operations and proof still need another layer", "Online cart changes with device count, term and region; first-term discounts may not equal renewal cost." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "EU-based SMBs that want dependable endpoint protection with a familiar, low-drama buying motion" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the buying problem is audit evidence, supplier risk, backup proof or cross-tool remediation rather than endpoint and XDR coverage." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "ESET PROTECT Entry", "url": "https://www.eset.com/us/business/entry-protection/" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20ESET%20PROTECT&body=Vendor%3A%20ESET%20PROTECT%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Feset%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "bitdefender", "vendorName": "Bitdefender GravityZone", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/bitdefender", "overallScore": 65, "confidence": "high", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "pricingPage", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 56, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 48, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 70, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 82, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 76, "receipts": [ { "type": "pricingPage", "confidence": "high" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 84, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Strong protection value, but compliance evidence and remediation ownership remain scattered", "Cart pricing depends on selected package, device count, term, discounts and region; over 100 devices can move to sales." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Cost-conscious SMBs that want strong malware prevention quickly without a complex security platform rollout" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the buying problem is audit evidence, supplier risk, backup proof or cross-tool remediation rather than endpoint and XDR coverage." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "Bitdefender business comparison", "url": "https://www.bitdefender.com/en-us/business/compare" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20Bitdefender%20GravityZone&body=Vendor%3A%20Bitdefender%20GravityZone%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fbitdefender%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "acronis", "vendorName": "Acronis Cyber Protect", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/acronis", "overallScore": 64, "confidence": "medium", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "vendorStatement", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 60, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 72, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 58, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 78, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 58, "receipts": [ { "type": "vendorStatement", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 60, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 78, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Great resilience component, but not a full security/compliance operating layer", "Acronis licensing can be per-workload or per-GB through service-provider and partner models; compare protected workloads and storage." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Teams that fear downtime and ransomware recovery as much as the initial attack" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the team expects one tool to cover evidence, remediation, endpoint, cloud, code, backup and supplier risk at once." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "Acronis Cyber Protect Cloud pricing", "url": "https://www.acronis.com/en/products/cloud/cyber-protect/pricing/" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20Acronis%20Cyber%20Protect&body=Vendor%3A%20Acronis%20Cyber%20Protect%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Facronis%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "wazuh", "vendorName": "Wazuh + osquery", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/wazuh", "overallScore": 63, "confidence": "high", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "pricingPage", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 70, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 40, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 50, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 74, "receipts": [ { "type": "pricingPage", "confidence": "high" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 95, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Free software, but not free operations; workflow, reporting and remediation are buyer-owned", "License can be free when self-hosted, but hosting, tuning, triage, reporting and ownership are real operational costs." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Technical teams that want open-source visibility and are willing to own the engineering work" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the team expects one tool to cover evidence, remediation, endpoint, cloud, code, backup and supplier risk at once." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "Wazuh Cloud", "url": "https://wazuh.com/cloud/" }, { "label": "osquery", "url": "https://osquery.io/" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20Wazuh%20%2B%20osquery&body=Vendor%3A%20Wazuh%20%2B%20osquery%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fwazuh%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "gws-m365", "vendorName": "Google Workspace / M365 Security", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/gws-m365", "overallScore": 62, "confidence": "high", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "pricingPage", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 50, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 45, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 60, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 45, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 88, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 90, "receipts": [ { "type": "pricingPage", "confidence": "high" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 50, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Useful baseline controls, but not a complete security program or evidence workflow", "Controls are bundled into Google Workspace or Microsoft 365 plans, so the useful price is the suite you actually own." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Companies that want to squeeze more security from the productivity suite they already run every day" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the team expects one tool to cover evidence, remediation, endpoint, cloud, code, backup and supplier risk at once." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "Google Workspace pricing", "url": "https://workspace.google.com/pricing.html" }, { "label": "Microsoft 365 business pricing", "url": "https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/business/compare-all-microsoft-365-business-products" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20Google%20Workspace%20%2F%20M365%20Security&body=Vendor%3A%20Google%20Workspace%20%2F%20M365%20Security%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fgws-m365%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "wiz", "vendorName": "Wiz", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/wiz", "overallScore": 64, "confidence": "medium", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "vendorStatement", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 72, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 65, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 70, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 50, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 35, "receipts": [ { "type": "vendorStatement", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 60, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Excellent cloud depth, but expensive and not an all-in-one SMB security workflow", "Wiz pricing is modular and quote-led; workloads, developers, log ingestion, sensors and SMB bundles can all change scope." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Cloud-heavy companies that need deep cloud risk visibility and have budget for a serious CNAPP" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the team needs hands-on technical remediation, endpoint/cloud/AppSec protection or backup proof inside the same workflow." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "Wiz pricing", "url": "https://www.wiz.io/pricing" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20Wiz&body=Vendor%3A%20Wiz%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fwiz%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "snyk", "vendorName": "Snyk", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/snyk", "overallScore": 61, "confidence": "high", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "pricingPage", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 58, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 50, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 60, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 60, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 65, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 70, "receipts": [ { "type": "pricingPage", "confidence": "high" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Excellent AppSec signal, but little help for endpoint, suppliers, backup or broad compliance operations", "Team price is per contributing developer, with minimum contributors and products purchased separately." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Developer-led teams that want security to show up inside code, dependencies and CI before release" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when endpoint protection, backup proof, supplier risk or broad compliance evidence are the main pressure." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "Snyk plans", "url": "https://snyk.io/plans/" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20Snyk&body=Vendor%3A%20Snyk%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fsnyk%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "semgrep", "vendorName": "Semgrep", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/semgrep", "overallScore": 59, "confidence": "high", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "pricingPage", "vendorStatement", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 48, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 45, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 50, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 70, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 82, "receipts": [ { "type": "pricingPage", "confidence": "high" }, { "type": "vendorStatement", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "high" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Narrow code-security scope; value depends on rule quality and engineering ownership", "Teams pricing is per contributor and product line; Code, Supply Chain and Secrets have different price points and limits." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Engineering teams that want customizable code scanning and are willing to tune rules around how they build" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when endpoint protection, backup proof, supplier risk or broad compliance evidence are the main pressure." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "Semgrep pricing", "url": "https://semgrep.dev/pricing/" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20Semgrep&body=Vendor%3A%20Semgrep%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fsemgrep%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "vanta", "vendorName": "Vanta", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/vanta", "overallScore": 68, "confidence": "medium", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "vendorStatement", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 84, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 88, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 50, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 78, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 45, "receipts": [ { "type": "vendorStatement", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Strong audit workflow, weaker for hands-on technical remediation and security operations", "Vanta now uses personalized pricing; confirm frameworks, employee count, integrations, add-ons and renewal terms." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Startups and growing companies that need SOC 2 or ISO evidence to look organized quickly" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the team needs hands-on technical remediation, endpoint/cloud/AppSec protection or backup proof inside the same workflow." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "Vanta pricing", "url": "https://www.vanta.com/pricing" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20Vanta&body=Vendor%3A%20Vanta%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fvanta%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "drata", "vendorName": "Drata", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/drata", "overallScore": 68, "confidence": "medium", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "vendorStatement", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 86, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 88, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 52, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 78, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 45, "receipts": [ { "type": "vendorStatement", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Compliance workflow is strong, but technical remediation still depends on connected tools and owners", "Drata packages are quote-led; confirm FTE limits, frameworks, Trust Center, add-ons and renewal assumptions." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Teams that want polished continuous compliance and a cleaner audit room across multiple frameworks" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the team needs hands-on technical remediation, endpoint/cloud/AppSec protection or backup proof inside the same workflow." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "Drata plans", "url": "https://drata.com/plans" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20Drata&body=Vendor%3A%20Drata%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fdrata%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "onetrust", "vendorName": "OneTrust", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/onetrust", "overallScore": 58, "confidence": "medium", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "vendorStatement", "publicDocs" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 82, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 50, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 48, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 35, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 30, "receipts": [ { "type": "vendorStatement", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "publicDocs", "confidence": "medium" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "medium" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Enterprise governance depth, but heavy for SMB security setup and not a technical protection stack", "OneTrust uses value-based usage meters; compare admin users, inventory size, visitors, profiles and data volume before comparing totals." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Large organizations that need privacy, GRC and governance workflows across many teams and regions" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the team needs hands-on technical remediation, endpoint/cloud/AppSec protection or backup proof inside the same workflow." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "OneTrust pricing", "url": "https://www.onetrust.com/pricing/" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20OneTrust&body=Vendor%3A%20OneTrust%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fonetrust%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" }, { "vendorId": "msp", "vendorName": "Typical MSP stack", "vendorUrl": "https://securitystackcompare.com/en/vendors/msp", "overallScore": 62, "confidence": "directional", "lastReviewed": "2026-05-19", "vendorResponseStatus": "notOnFile", "evidenceSourceTypes": [ "editorialInference", "vendorStatement", "practitionerSignal" ], "scoreBasis": "Weighted editorial score across eight visible dimensions: compliance readiness, evidence completeness, operational coverage, remediation workflow, SMB practicality, price clarity, data control and regional fit.", "scoreClaims": [ { "scoreKey": "compliance", "label": "Compliance Readiness", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "practitionerSignal", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "evidence", "label": "Evidence Completeness", "value": 50, "receipts": [ { "type": "practitionerSignal", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "ops", "label": "Operational Coverage", "value": 65, "receipts": [ { "type": "practitionerSignal", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "remediation", "label": "Remediation Workflow", "value": 55, "receipts": [ { "type": "practitionerSignal", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "smb", "label": "SMB Practicality", "value": 80, "receipts": [ { "type": "practitionerSignal", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "price", "label": "Price / TCO clarity", "value": 70, "receipts": [ { "type": "vendorStatement", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "practitionerSignal", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "byok", "label": "Data Control / BYOK", "value": 50, "receipts": [ { "type": "practitionerSignal", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] }, { "scoreKey": "region", "label": "Regional Fit", "value": 75, "receipts": [ { "type": "practitionerSignal", "confidence": "directional" }, { "type": "editorialInference", "confidence": "directional" } ] } ], "knownGaps": [ "Quality varies by provider; evidence, documentation and accountability can be inconsistent", "MSP pricing is only meaningful with a tool list, runbook, response SLA, reporting sample and evidence sample." ], "bestFitUseCases": [ "Small companies that want a human partner to run day-to-day IT and basic security without hiring internally" ], "notEnoughFor": [ "Not enough when the team expects one tool to cover evidence, remediation, endpoint, cloud, code, backup and supplier risk at once." ], "sourceLinks": [ { "label": "Methodology", "url": "https://securitystackcompare.com/methodology" } ], "challengeUrl": "mailto:updates@securitystackcompare.com?subject=Challenge%20open%20rating%3A%20Typical%20MSP%20stack&body=Vendor%3A%20Typical%20MSP%20stack%0APage%3A%20%2Fvendors%2Fmsp%0A%0AWhat%20should%20change%20and%20which%20public%20source%20supports%20it%3F%0A" } ] }