Anchore Enforce vs Security-Guard: Side-by-Side Comparison (2026)
Features, pricing, ratings, and pros & cons — compared head-to-head.
Anchore Enforce is a commercial container security tool by Anchore. Security-Guard is a free container security tool. Compare features, ratings, integrations, and community reviews side by side to find the best container security fit for your security stack.
CST VerdictBased on our analysis of NIST CSF 2.0 coverage, core features, company size fit, deployment model, here is our conclusion:
Mid-market and enterprise security teams operating Kubernetes environments need Anchore Enforce for its policy-as-code enforcement model, which closes the gap between vulnerability scanning and actual compliance gates in the pipeline. Pre-built policy packs for FedRAMP, NIST, and DISA compliance plus runtime monitoring of live clusters means you're covering both ID.AM (asset inventory) and DE.CM (continuous monitoring) without bolting on separate tools. Skip this if your organization lacks the infrastructure-as-code discipline to maintain JSON policies or if you need vulnerability remediation guidance; Anchore Enforce is strict enforcement, not hand-holding.
Teams running microservices on Kubernetes who need runtime exploit detection without vendor lock-in will find Security-Guard valuable; it's free and open source, so you can audit the detection logic yourself and avoid subscription creep as you scale. The 67 GitHub stars and active community contributions show it's actually maintained, unlike many abandoned security projects. Skip this if you need integration with your existing SIEM or want a vendor to guarantee SLAs on detection accuracy; Security-Guard is a detection tool, not a managed security service.
