CyberArkUnified IAM, PAM, and IGA identity security platform.
vs
ZITADELIdentity infrastructure, simplified for you.
Comparison · Identity & Access Management · weekly run Nov 3
CyberArk vs ZITADEL
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 1.3 for ZITADEL.
Choose CyberArk if…
- You want the brand AI engines rank higher (15.6 vs 1.3)
- You need SOC 2 or SOC 3 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 ZITADEL if…
- AI answers describe it more positively (83% vs 49% positive)
- You need a self-hosted or on-premises option
- You need SOC 2 Type II coverage
- Free cloud tier with core features like MFA and OIDC
AI visibility side by side
Latest weekly run · Nov 3
| Metric | CyberArk | ZITADEL |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility score | 15.6% | 1.3% |
| Change vs last week | up+2.1% | up+0.5% |
| Rank in Identity & Access Management | #7 | #27 |
| Share of voice | 6.1% | 0.4% |
| Mentions this run | 19 | 1 |
| Positive in AI answers | 49% | 83% |
The stronger value in each row is marked with a ✓.
Visibility score trend
Weekly runs over the last 60 days
CyberArk +0.5pp · ZITADEL −1.8pp over 1 weekly runs.
Engine by engine
CyberArk leads on 3 of 3 engines
ChatGPT
AI Mode
Perplexity
CyberArkZITADEL
Head to head in AI answers
0 engine answers name both brands
0CyberArk ranked higher
0ZITADEL ranked higher
Features, pricing & fit
| Dimension | CyberArk | ZITADEL |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | — | Usage-based |
| Entry price | — | Free; paid from $100 / mo |
| Free plan | — | Yes |
| Deployment | Self-hosted and SaaS | Cloud and self-hosted |
| 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 | ISO/IEC 27001:2022, SOC 2 Type II |
| Support | Support contact, Knowledge base, Technical community | Discord community, GitHub, Documentation, Technical Account Manager (Enterprise) |
| Founded | 1999 | 2020 |
| Headquarters | Newton, MA, United States | San Francisco, CA, United States |
| Employees | 1,001–5,000 | 11–50 |
| Funding | Post-IPO debt | Series A · $16M raised |
| Best for | Enterprises that need to secure privileged access for human and machine identities. | Developers building applications that need authentication for consumers, businesses or employees, including multi-tenant B2B apps. |
Plans side by side
CyberArk
Pricing not available.
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
ZITADEL
- Free cloud tier with core features like MFA and OIDC
- Cloud-native, open-source IAM with strong multi-tenancy and audit logging
- Clear usage limits and published monthly pricing
- Good for developer-focused IAM
- Cloud-based IAM without managing infrastructure
Data collected ·ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode·coverage 98.8%·next run
Cite as: SlateIndex, “CyberArk vs ZITADEL”, https://slateindex.ai/compare/cyberark-vs-zitadel, data of Nov 3, 2026. Licence: CC BY 4.0.