PAIRING · MEASURED SIDE BY SIDE
C1 (formerly ConductorOne) vs Lumos: reach beyond the IdP and IGA
The short answer
On our default weights C1 (formerly ConductorOne) scores higher overall, 6.30 against 6.13 out of 10. C1 scores higher on Reach into apps without APIs or SCIM and Pricing transparency; Lumos scores higher on Accounts inside the app, Executes changes itself and Audit evidence. They tie on Unmanaged app discovery, Orchestrates through the existing stack and Machine, service and agent accounts.
Both are identity governance platforms that surface shadow apps: C1 by monitoring shadow app sign-ups and logins, Lumos through Identity Analytics.
Source: C1: Shadow IT · Read 27 Sep 2026 · Source: Lumos Identity Analytics · Read 27 Sep 2026
By The Credential Desk · IAM Compared · Published 2026-10-08
Desk research from public vendor pages and documentation read in September 2026, updated 2026-10-13. Editorial assessment; we did not test the products.
How do they score on each criterion?
| Criterion | Weight | C1 | Lumos | Higher |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unmanaged app discovery | 18% | 6.0 Monitors shadow app sign-ups and logins to decide whether to bring an app under governance, and lists Shadow AI Discovery. | 6.0 Identity Analytics surfaces shadow IT alongside dormant and over-privileged accounts. | Tie |
| Accounts inside the app | 16% | 6.0 Finds what offboarding missed; mapping of local accounts inside apps is not detailed. | 6.2 Surfaces dormant accounts and revokes local accounts; app-native role mapping is not detailed. | Lumos |
| Reach into apps without APIs or SCIM | 14% | 6.5 Open-source Baton connectors and C1 Bridge for on-prem systems; apps with no connector are not described in detail. | 5.0 Revocation described across custom and on-prem apps; handling of apps with no API is not detailed. | C1 |
| Orchestrates through the existing stack | 14% | 7.0 Connects to existing IdPs and HR systems rather than replacing them. | 7.0 Works across the IdP, HRIS, SaaS and cloud stack already in place, with 300+ integrations. | Tie |
| Executes changes itself | 12% | 7.8 HR systems and directories trigger join, role change and departure workflows. | 8.0 HRIS-triggered joiner, mover and leaver workflows; leavers offboarded with licenses reclaimed. | Lumos |
| Machine, service and agent accounts | 10% | 6.0 Shadow AI Discovery is listed; service account and credential coverage is not detailed. | 6.0 MCP Governance records agent tool calls with the human identity and policy decision; service account coverage is not detailed. | Tie |
| Audit evidence | 10% | 6.5 Records each offboarding action; a framework evidence export is not described. | 7.0 Full audit trail of every grant and revocation. | Lumos |
| Pricing transparency | 6% | 3.0 Publishes the pricing structure but no prices. | 2.0 No published prices. | C1 |
| Total | 100% | 6.30 | 6.13 | C1 |
What shape is each tool's reach?
- DISC
- Unmanaged app discovery
- 6.0
- INAPP
- Accounts inside the app
- 6.0
- NOAPI
- Reach into apps without APIs or SCIM
- 6.5
- ORCH
- Orchestrates through the existing stack
- 7.0
- EXEC
- Executes changes itself
- 7.8
- NHI
- Machine, service and agent accounts
- 6.0
- EVID
- Audit evidence
- 6.5
- PRICE
- Pricing transparency
- 3.0
Each sector is one criterion. The longer the engraved sector, the higher the editorial score. Sectors are equal width, so the picture shows the shape of a tool's reach, not its weighted total.
- DISC
- Unmanaged app discovery
- 6.0
- INAPP
- Accounts inside the app
- 6.2
- NOAPI
- Reach into apps without APIs or SCIM
- 5.0
- ORCH
- Orchestrates through the existing stack
- 7.0
- EXEC
- Executes changes itself
- 8.0
- NHI
- Machine, service and agent accounts
- 6.0
- EVID
- Audit evidence
- 7.0
- PRICE
- Pricing transparency
- 2.0
Each sector is one criterion. The longer the engraved sector, the higher the editorial score. Sectors are equal width, so the picture shows the shape of a tool's reach, not its weighted total.
Which parts of the estate does each document?
| Zone | C1 | Lumos |
|---|---|---|
| Unsanctioned SaaS | Partial Shadow app sign-up and login monitoring | Partial Shadow IT surfaced in Identity Analytics |
| On-prem and legacy apps | Documented C1 Bridge for on-prem systems | Partial Revocation across on-prem systems |
| Custom-built apps | Partial Open-source Baton connectors you can extend | Partial Revocation across custom apps |
| Local accounts in apps | Partial Find what offboarding missed | Partial Revocation across local accounts; dormant accounts surfaced |
| Service accounts and hardcoded credentials | Not documented Not described on the pages reviewed | Not documented Not described on the pages reviewed |
| AI agents | Partial Shadow AI Discovery listed | Partial MCP Governance for agent tool calls |
What do they cost?
C1 (formerly ConductorOne)
Pricing
Pricing structure published (Platform or Flex; Pro or Advanced; 100 to 20,000 managed identities) without prices.
Source: C1 pricing · Read 12 Oct 2026
Deployment
SaaS with hosted or on-prem connectors (C1 Bridge). EU instance with tenant data held in the EU since September 2026.
Frequently asked questions
Which scores higher overall, C1 (formerly ConductorOne) or Lumos?
On our default weights C1 (formerly ConductorOne) scores higher overall, 6.30 against 6.13 out of 10.
Where does C1 (formerly ConductorOne) score higher than Lumos?
C1 scores higher on Reach into apps without APIs or SCIM (6.5 against 5.0) and Pricing transparency (3.0 against 2.0).
Can C1 (formerly ConductorOne) and Lumos be used together?
Usually not. Both are identity governance platforms, so most organizations pick one.