Compare

Polestead vs UpGuard

UpGuard pairs external scans with questionnaires — but the scan still leads and your context adjusts it. Polestead runs the other way: your exposure leads, and everything external is evidence.

UpGuard
Polestead
Starting point
The vendor's external attack surface, scored; questionnaires layered on top.
Your vendor register and your exposure — six access vectors decide each vendor's tier before any scan runs.
Assessment depth
Questionnaire scope chosen per vendor by the operator.
Depth is derived from tier — full-depth scrutiny where exposure is high, attestation where it isn't.
Non-cyber exposure
Out of scope for scanning — facilities, embedded personnel, and design custody don't appear in attack-surface data.
First-class classification dimensions, per NIST's multidimensional view of supply-chain risk.
Deployment
US-headquartered multi-tenant SaaS.
On-premises, air-gapped, single-tenant EU cloud, or managed single-tenant SaaS.
Choose UpGuard if…

You want an approachable SaaS combining attack-surface monitoring and questionnaires for a moderate vendor portfolio, and data residency isn't a constraint.

Choose Polestead if…

You need whole-register classification driven by your own exposure, depth that follows tier automatically, and deployment your regulator can't argue with.

See your register classified.

Book a demo
FAQ

Common questions.

How is Polestead different from UpGuard?+

UpGuard leads with the external scan and layers questionnaires on top; Polestead leads with your exposure, and everything external is evidence inside it.

Does Polestead cover non-cyber exposure?+

Yes. Facilities, embedded personnel, and design custody are first-class vectors, per NIST’s multidimensional view of supply-chain risk.

What about deployment?+

On-premises, air-gapped, single-tenant EU cloud, or managed SaaS.