CyberArk vs Transmit Security
Which one do AI engines recommend, and how do they differ on price, fit and features?
The short answer
CyberArk is the stronger AI pick in Identity & Access Management: it has a visibility score of 15.6 versus 0.7 for Transmit Security, and ranks ahead in 50% of the answers that name both.
Choose CyberArk if…
- You want the brand AI engines rank higher (15.6 vs 0.7)
- You need SOC 2 or SOC 3 or ISO/IEC 27001:2022 or ISO/IEC 27017:2015 or ISO/IEC 27018:2019 or ISO 9001:2015 or ISO/IEC 42001:2023 or ISO 22301 or CSA STAR or Cyber Essentials or Cyber Essentials Plus or FedRAMP High or Common Criteria or PCI DSS v4.0.1 or HIPAA or IRAP or GDPR or CCPA coverage
- You prefer a larger, established vendor (1,001–5,000 employees)
- Market leader in privileged access management (PAM)
Choose Transmit Security if…
- AI answers describe it more positively (50% vs 49% positive)
- Innovative player focused on passwordless authentication
- Risk-based fraud prevention capabilities
- Modern platform for customer-facing identity experiences
AI visibility side by side
Latest weekly run · Nov 3
| Metric | CyberArk | Transmit Security |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility score | 15.6% | 0.7% |
| Change vs last week | up+2.1% | up+0.1% |
| Rank in Identity & Access Management | #7 | #33 |
| Share of voice | 6.1% | 0.4% |
| Mentions this run | 19 | 1 |
| Positive in AI answers | 49% | 50% |
The stronger value in each row is marked with a ✓.
Visibility score trend
Weekly runs over the last 60 days
CyberArk +0.5pp · Transmit Security 0pp over 1 weekly runs.
Engine by engine
CyberArk leads on 3 of 3 engines
Head to head in AI answers
2 engine answers name both brands
| Prompt | Engine | CyberArk | Transmit Security |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which Identity & Access Management vendors do analysts recommend? | ChatGPT | #10 | #5 |
| Which Identity & Access Management vendors do analysts recommend? | AI Mode | #4 | #6 |
Features, pricing & fit
| Dimension | CyberArk | Transmit Security |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | — | Usage-based |
| Entry price | — | $50,000 / mo |
| Free plan | — | No |
| Deployment | Self-hosted and SaaS | SaaS |
| Compliance | SOC 2, SOC 3, ISO/IEC 27001:2022, ISO/IEC 27017:2015, ISO/IEC 27018:2019, ISO 9001:2015, ISO/IEC 42001:2023, ISO 22301, CSA STAR, Cyber Essentials, Cyber Essentials Plus, FedRAMP High, Common Criteria, PCI DSS v4.0.1, HIPAA, IRAP, GDPR, CCPA | — |
| Support | Support contact, Knowledge base, Technical community | Enterprise SLA with premium support |
| Founded | 1999 | 2014 |
| Headquarters | Newton, MA, United States | Tel Aviv, Israel |
| Employees | 1,001–5,000 | 201–500 |
| Funding | Post-IPO debt | Series A · $543M raised |
| Best for | Enterprises that need to secure privileged access for human and machine identities. | Large enterprises such as banks and insurers needing combined customer identity and fraud prevention |
Plans side by side
CyberArk
Pricing not available.
Transmit Security
Pros and cons
Themes from the AI answers that mention each brand
CyberArk
- Market leader in privileged access management (PAM)
- Strong identity security and credential risk mitigation
- Security-first approach with strong behavioral analytics
- Bridges standard access management with robust PAM and machine identity security
- Strong for enterprises combining workforce identity with PAM
Transmit Security
- Innovative player focused on passwordless authentication
- Risk-based fraud prevention capabilities
- Modern platform for customer-facing identity experiences
- Noted by Gartner for specialized fraud prevention and CIAM architectures
Data collected ·ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode·coverage 98.8%·next run
Cite as: SlateIndex, “CyberArk vs Transmit Security”, https://slateindex.ai/compare/cyberark-vs-transmit-security, data of Nov 3, 2026. Licence: CC BY 4.0.