Agentic Index
DeepKeep vs Zenity (2026)
Zenity and DeepKeep both secure agents, and they enter the problem from different layers.
Zenity is purpose built for the agent layer end to end through Observe, Govern and Defend, which is discovery and observability, AI security posture management, and detection and response, and its depth is in governing agents inside enterprise platforms. DeepKeep starts at the model and works up: red teaming foundation models, applications and autonomous agents across single turn, multi turn and multi session interactions, then an Agent Scanner that maps every LLM, tool and integration in an execution path including the low and no code layer. On documented coverage across the Agentic Index fourteen capabilities DeepKeep is 11.5 and Zenity is 8.0, though that measures breadth of documented capability rather than depth in agent posture specifically. DeepKeep also has no confirmed SOC 2 or ISO 27001 attestation.
Choose DeepKeep if
- Your risk starts at the model layer, not only at the agent that calls it.
- You need pre deployment model scanning and runtime enforcement in one product.
- Agents built in n8n, CrewAI, Make or Dify are in scope and need mapping.
Choose Zenity if
- AI security posture management for agents is the specific job you are buying.
- You want a vendor whose whole product is the agent layer rather than the AI lifecycle.
- Detection and response for agent behaviour is the capability your SOC will actually use.
| At a glance | DeepKeep | Zenity |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Security / SOC agent | Security / SOC agent |
| Entry price | Contact for pricing | Contact sales |
| Free / trial | No free tier or trial published. A Scan your Agent form offers an agent attack surface scan but it routes to a submission form rather than self serve access. | Not published |
| Pricing confidence | contact only | contact only |
| Feature | D DeepKeep |
Z Zenity |
|---|---|---|
| Action & orchestration | ||
|
Integrations & Tool Calling Ability to connect agents to real systems through native integrations, OAuth-authenticated actions, custom tools, APIs, webhooks, or MCP-compatible tools. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
|
Workflow Orchestration Ability to sequence, branch, retry, route, and combine deterministic workflow nodes with autonomous agent steps. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
|
Triggers & Channel Coverage How agents wake up and where they work: schedules, webhooks, message events, CRM events, inbox events, chat, email, voice, and collaboration tools. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
| Knowledge & context | ||
|
Knowledge Grounding & RAG Ability to ground agent behavior in company data through document ingestion, retrieval, external knowledge APIs, semantic search, or RAG layers. |
Partial | Partial |
|
Memory & State Persistence Ability to persist context across a run, conversation, workflow, user, team, or longer-term memory layer. |
Partial | Partial |
| Control & trust | ||
|
Human Oversight & Guardrails Approval steps, consent checkpoints, escalation rules, structured guardrails, policy constraints, and pause/resume controls. |
Full / Explicit | Partial |
|
Security, Identity & Governance RBAC, SSO, auditability, encryption, least-privilege tool access, compliance posture, and data handling policy. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
|
Observability & Auditability Traces, logs, execution histories, metrics, audit events, and debugging detail for production agent behavior. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
|
Deployment & Data Residency Deployment modes and options, including SaaS, dedicated cloud, VPC, on-prem, hybrid, local runtime, and self-hosting. |
Full / Explicit | Partial |
| Solution readiness | ||
|
Prebuilt Agents, Templates & Packs Ready-made workflows, packaged employees, templates, blueprints, industry solutions, and role-specific agents that reduce time-to-value. |
Full / Explicit | Partial |
| Platform extensibility | ||
|
Model Flexibility & Routing Ability to work across multiple foundation models, route tasks to different models, or let buyers bring their own providers and keys. |
Partial | No / Not documented |
|
APIs, SDKs & MCP Extensibility Composability layer: stable APIs, SDKs, MCP tool consumption/serving, custom tools, and integration into internal systems. |
Full / Explicit | Partial |
|
Testing, Debugging & Optimization Testing, debugging, scoring, retries, fallbacks, quality gates, and optimization loops for improving agent workflows before and after deployment. |
Full / Explicit | No / Not documented |
| Specialist automation | ||
|
Browser & Computer Use Browser, desktop, or remote/local computer control for workflows that cannot be handled through stable APIs alone. |
No / Not documented | No / Not documented |
Pricing snapshot
Sourced from the Index pricing dataset · open each vendor's profile for full detail.
| Pricing | D DeepKeep |
Z Zenity |
|---|---|---|
|
Entry price Lowest public entry point |
Contact for pricing | Contact sales |
|
Pricing confidence How public the numbers are |
Contact only | Contact only |
|
Billing Primary billing axis |
Not published. No seat, token, interaction or scan unit disclosed anywhere retrieved. | enterprise contract |
|
Variable cost Workload / overage exposure |
High variable cost | Medium variable cost |
|
Free tier / trial Try before you buy |
No free tier
|
No free tier
|
|
Buying motion Self-serve vs sales call |
Sales call | Sales call |
More comparisons with DeepKeep or Zenity
Other matchups in security and SOC agents
Not the pairing you were after? These compare a different set of security and SOC agents on the same 14 capabilities.