GreatHorn Mailbox Intelligence vs IronVest InboxGuard: Side-by-Side Comparison (2026)

GreatHorn Mailbox Intelligence

Teams running Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace who need users to actually catch phishing will find GreatHorn Mailbox Intelligence worthwhile, because the visual sender indicators and on-click URL analysis force friction into the attack chain where it matters most. The tool scores across all three NIST Detect and Awareness categories, with particular strength in DE.CM continuous monitoring and real-time risk assessment that surfaces threats before the user opens them. Skip this if your organization has already deployed a mature endpoint detection layer and expects email security to handle lateral movement detection; GreatHorn prioritizes the user reporting loop and initial threat identification, not forensic analysis of compromise.

IronVest InboxGuard

Security teams at startups and SMBs with lean budgets will see immediate ROI from IronVest InboxGuard because it stacks employee training directly into email workflows without requiring a rip-and-replace of existing gateways. The platform covers three distinct NIST CSF 2.0 functions,Awareness and Training, Continuous Monitoring, and Adverse Event Analysis,across 100+ compliance-aligned training modules, which saves you months of building custom curricula from scratch. The real weakness is detection depth; this is a behavioral and training layer, not a replacement for advanced email filtering, so pair it with your current secure email gateway rather than treating it as one.