# push-security-vs-nudge-security Source: https://startwithidentity.com/compare/push-security-vs-nudge-security/ Last updated: 2026-07-24 License: content by Start with Identity. Cite the source URL. --- ## The honest comparison [Push Security](https://startwithidentity.com/vendors/itdr/push-security/) and [Nudge Security](https://startwithidentity.com/vendors/itdr/nudge-security/) both sit in [identity threat detection and response](https://startwithidentity.com/guides/fundamentals/what-is-itdr/), and both are aimed at the SaaS accounts your identity provider never saw. They get there from different places, and the difference is more useful than the scores. Push installs a browser extension. That is the whole architectural bet: authentication happens in a browser, so a tool sitting in the browser can see password reuse across applications, recognize an adversary-in-the-middle phishing page while the user is looking at it, and block a login before a session token exists. Push raised a [30 million dollar Series B led by Redpoint Ventures](https://pushsecurity.com/news/push-security-secures-30-million-series-b-funding) announced on 24 April 2025, which stated deployment across more than 1.5 million endpoints. Nudge deploys nothing to an endpoint. It reads email and OAuth signals and reconstructs an inventory of every SaaS account anyone in the organization ever created, including the ones that never touched single sign-on. Nudge raised a [22.5 million dollar Series A led by Cerberus Ventures](https://www.nudgesecurity.com/press/nudge-security-raises-22-5m-series-a-to-secure-workforce-ai-and-saas) announced on 18 November 2025, and its stated scope now covers AI applications, users, and integrations as well as AI embedded in other SaaS through agents and Model Context Protocol servers. Our rubric separates them by 0.1, which is close to a dead heat: Push 3.9, Nudge 3.8. Push leads authentication 4.5 to 4.0, authorization 4.0 to 3.5, and developer experience 3.5 to 3.0. Nudge leads lifecycle provisioning 3.5 to 3.0, which is its offboarding and orphaned-account workflow. Six dimensions tie. One structural note worth raising with both vendors. Browser-based detection is being absorbed by larger platforms: [Zscaler](https://startwithidentity.com/vendors/zero-trust/zscaler/) [closed its acquisition of SquareX](https://ir.zscaler.com/news-releases/news-release-details/zscaler-acquires-squarex-advance-zero-trust-browser-security-ai), a browser detection and response company, on 5 February 2026. That is not a prediction about Push, and we are not going to make one. It is a reason to ask both companies where they expect to be in three years, and to check what happens to your data and contract if the answer changes. ## When Push Security wins - Credential phishing and session hijacking are the incidents you are actually responding to, and you want them stopped at the login - Password reuse across sanctioned and unsanctioned applications is a known problem and you need to see it, not infer it - You can deploy a browser extension across the fleet, which is the hard prerequisite and the reason some evaluations end here - Detection quality at the authentication step is the criterion, where Push carries the higher score, 4.5 against 4.0 ## When Nudge Security wins - You cannot deploy anything to endpoints, whether for policy, contractor devices, or timeline reasons - Time to first inventory is how success gets measured, and Nudge builds one from email and OAuth signals within minutes of connection - Offboarding hygiene and orphaned accounts are the audit finding, where Nudge leads lifecycle provisioning 3.5 to 3.0 - Shadow AI is the question on the table, and Nudge's stated scope covers AI apps, agents, and Model Context Protocol servers ## Pricing Both publish a price, which is rare enough here to be worth stating plainly, and both start at 5 dollars. Push lists 5 dollars per user per month billed annually up to 500 employees, 6 dollars billed monthly, with custom volume pricing above that. Nudge lists 750 dollars per month flat below 150 active user accounts, 5 dollars per active user account per month from 150 to 2,500, and custom licensing above. Note the unit difference: Push counts employees, Nudge counts active user accounts, and an organization with heavy SaaS sprawl has many more of the second than the first. Both offer a trial, so run both for two weeks rather than reading a datasheet, and model the account counts in the [TCO calculator](https://startwithidentity.com/tools/tco-calculator/). ## Verdict Choose [Push Security](https://startwithidentity.com/vendors/itdr/push-security/) when the outcome you are buying is stopping an account takeover in progress and you can get an extension onto the fleet. Choose [Nudge Security](https://startwithidentity.com/vendors/itdr/nudge-security/) when you cannot see what you have, cannot touch endpoints, or the audit finding is offboarding rather than intrusion. Our assessment is that these two overlap less than the category label suggests and are more often run together than chosen between, with Push covering the moment of attack and Nudge covering the accounts that were never in scope. For adjacent SaaS-identity coverage see [Grip Security](https://startwithidentity.com/vendors/itdr/grip-security/), for the Active Directory side see [Silverfort vs Semperis](https://startwithidentity.com/compare/silverfort-vs-semperis/), and for the wider shortlist see [best ITDR tools](https://startwithidentity.com/rankings/best-itdr-tools/).