Cyolo vs SpiderOak
Cyolo vs SpiderOak, compared side by side on 18 data points: what each one does, how big it is, what it has raised, the tech running each site, and what users report. We score both out of 100 on traction, team and visibility: Cyolo is on 57/100 and SpiderOak on 42/100.
Where each one leads
Cyolo
- our overall score: 57/100 against 42/100
- agent readiness: 50/100 against 40/100
- funding raised: $85.2M against $20.0M
SpiderOak
- domain rating: 71/100 against 57/100
At a glance
| Measure | Cyolo | SpiderOak |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Secure remote privileged access for operational technology and cyber-physical systems. | Secure, private cloud storage and collaboration for individuals and businesses. |
| Category | Cybersecurity, Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA), Privileged Access Management (PAM), Operational Technology (OT) Security | Cloud Storage, Data Security, Collaboration Software, End-to-End Encryption |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2B | B2C |
| Offering | Software | Software | platform |
| Founded | 2019 | 2007 |
| Headquarters | Ramat Gan, Israel | Kansas City, United States |
| Status | Active | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | Cyolo | SpiderOak |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 77 | Not published |
| Headcount growthLast 12 months | +10.5% | Not published |
| Total funding | $85.2M | $20.0M |
| Latest round | Series B | Series B |
| LinkedIn followers | 13,106 | Not published |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | Cyolo | SpiderOak |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 57/100 | 42/100 |
| Traction | 59/100 | 37/100 |
| Team | 70/100 | Not published |
| Community | 8/100 | Not published |
| Search visibility | 32/100 | 13/100 |
| Quality | 58/100 | 58/100 |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | D (50/100) | D (40/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 57/100 | 71/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | Cyolo | SpiderOak |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Self Managed | Self Managed |
| CMS | Not detected | WordPress |
| Frameworks | Alpinejs, Tailwind CSS | Jquery, Bootstrap |
| Analytics | Google Tag Manager, Linkedin Insight | Google Tag Manager |
| Support stack | HubSpot | Not detected |
Cyolo vs SpiderOak: common questions
Which is better, Cyolo or SpiderOak?
On our 0-100 score Cyolo rates higher (57/100 against 42/100). The score weights traction, team, visibility and profile completeness, so it reflects company strength rather than which product suits you. We compare the two on 18 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do Cyolo and SpiderOak compare on the numbers?
Cyolo leads on our overall score (57/100 against 42/100), agent readiness (50/100 against 40/100), funding raised ($85.2M against $20.0M). SpiderOak leads on domain rating (71/100 against 57/100).
Read the full Cyolo review and pricing or the SpiderOak review and pricing. You can also browse other Cyolo alternatives we track.