Non-human identity management · November 2026 Edition
Aembit vs Token Security
Three of fourteen models named Aembit first on the direct prompt; one named Token Security. Aembit was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Token Security by ten and Aembit carries 35 labels and Token Security 17, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share10%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate6%12%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#8A position in a field of 18; printed, not drawn.
Labels3517A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Aembit reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.JumpCloud was named alongside these two in eight of the fourteen direct answers. JumpCloud vs Aembit · JumpCloud vs Token Security · Akeyless Identity Security Platform vs Aembit
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the non-human identity management page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
AembitFirst choices, of fourteen modelsToken Security
Direct31
Paraphrase00
Comparative00
Budget-constrained101 against Aembit
Scale-constrained10
Negative001 against Aembit · 2 against Token Security
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Aembit and Token Security stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | ||||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | ||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | ||
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | |||
| Grok 4.20 | | | ||||
| Mistral Small | | | ||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | ||
| Llama 4 Maverick | ||||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | |||||
| Kimi K2 | | | ||||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | |||
| MiniMax M2.5 | ||||||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | ||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B |
Aembit Token Security first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Aembit on the left and Token Security on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Aembit and Token Security stood in it.
Aembit first, Token Security not the choice
3 of 14 modelsToken Security was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Grok 4.20Aembit alternatives: Astrix Security, Entro Security, Oasis Security
Kimi K2Aembit alternatives: Clutch Security, Entro Security, SSOJet, WorkOS
GLM 4.7 FlashXAembit alternatives: Defakto, One Identity, Saviynt Identity Cloud
Token Security first, Aembit an alternative
1 of 14 modelsAembit was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.GPT-6 LunaToken Security alternatives: Aembit
Neither was the first choice, one was named
4 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniOasis Security alternatives: Aembit, Rig, SailPoint Machine Identity Security, Veza
Gemini 3.5 FlashOasis Security alternatives: Aembit, Akeyless Identity Security Platform, Entro Security
Perplexity SonarJumpCloud alternatives: Aembit, Astrix Security, Defakto, Entro Security, Microsoft Entra ID, Okta
DeepSeek V4 FlashJumpCloud alternatives: Aembit, Akeyless Identity Security Platform, Clutch Security, Natoma
Neither was named
6 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5JumpCloud alternatives: Entro Security, Natoma, Oasis Security
Mistral SmallCakewalk, JumpCloud alternatives: Akeyless Identity Security Platform, Defakto
Llama 4 MaverickCakewalk alternatives: Identity Confluence, JumpCloud, Saviynt Identity Cloud
Qwen 3.7 FlashAkeyless Identity Security Platform, Cakewalk alternatives: Astrix Security, JumpCloud
MiniMax M2.5JumpCloud alternatives: Cakewalk, Defakto, Entro Security, Identity Confluence
Muse Glimmer 30BJumpCloud alternatives: Cakewalk, Entro Security, GitGuardian NHI Governance
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Aembit leads by ten points.
Aembit10%#4 of 17Token Security0%#– of 17Mid-marketThe figures above
Aembit leads by eight points.
Aembit10%#3 of 18Token Security2%#8 of 18Enterprise
The order flips: Token Security leads at enterprise.
Token Security2%#11 of 19Aembit0%#13 of 19What the models said about Aembit
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“also strong but may be better suited for engineering-led teams or those with more complex needs, as they tend to have enterprise-focused pricing models” Mistral Small · budget prompt · soft negative
“brilliant in AWS/Azure, but if you have on-prem, multi-cloud, or legacy environments, integration depth varies” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“look especially at Aembit, Oasis Security, and Astrix — they've been noted as particularly well-suited for mid-market/cloud-first teams” DeepSeek V4 Flash · scale prompt · first choice
“Aembit stands out as the strongest overall choice for a mid-market B2B company” Grok 4.20 · direct prompt · first choice
“For most mid-market B2B companies, I'd recommend starting with Aembit” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about Token Security
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“Newer or Less Proven Startups (e.g., Oasis Security, Token Security, Clutch Security, Entro Security, Astrix Security)” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · soft negative
“Strong at visibility, but its lifecycle and governance features were less mature compared to leaders.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Token Security is my first shortlist pick for broad NHI governance” GPT-6 Luna · direct prompt · first choice
“strong on discovery, visibility, ownership, dependency tracking, and risk analysis for non-human identities” GPT-5.4 mini · paraphrase prompt · alternative
“A newer entrant focused on AI and bot identity.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · comparative prompt · alternative
Also compared
JumpCloud vs AembitJumpCloud vs Token SecurityAkeyless Identity Security Platform vs AembitAkeyless Identity Security Platform vs Token SecurityAembit vs Oasis SecurityAembit vs HashiCorp VaultAembit vs GitGuardian NHI GovernanceAembit vs SailPoint Machine Identity SecurityOasis Security vs Token SecurityHashiCorp Vault vs Token SecurityGitGuardian NHI Governance vs Token SecuritySailPoint Machine Identity Security vs Token SecurityAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full NHI management standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.