Sweet Security vs Tetragon
| Sweet Security | Tetragon | |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan | No | No |
| Free trial | No | No |
| Paid from | — | — |
| Open source | No | No |
| Platforms | Linux, self-hosted, Web | Linux |
| Container protection | Yes | — |
| Serverless protection | Yes | — |
| Kubernetes protection | Yes | — |
| Deployment model | agent-based | — |
| Response actions | Terminate malicious processes; kill compromised containers; prevent pod scheduling; custom playbooks; webhooks | — |
| Supported host OS | Linux; Windows | — |
| Cloud platforms | AWS; Google Cloud; Azure; private cloud | — |
| Free plan | — | Yes |
Both are listed in Best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms. On Inferse, Sweet Security scores higher on our published basis.