Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
Proofpoint ZenGuide Report Suspicious (formerly PhishAlarm) allows users to alert security and incident response teams to suspected phishing emails.
| G License Manager | Report Suspicious | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | images | images |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
Easily manage Google Workspace licenses right from a Google Sheet™
| Metric | G License Manager | Report Suspicious |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | ★ 5.0 ★ | 4.1 ★ |
| Total reviews | 5 | ★ 205 |
| Active installs | 1,106,637+ | 6,473,130+ |
| Free plan | ★ Yes | — |
| Pricing | Free of charge | Paid |
Based on the data on this page, G License Manager is the stronger choice for most Google Workspace Marketplace admins — 5.0★ vs Report Suspicious's 4.1★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base.
On pricing, G License Manager offers a free tier (Free of charge) while Report Suspicious starts at Paid. For early-stage teams validating fit, the free-tier path lets you run the app on real workloads before committing budget.
Report Suspicious has the larger user base (205 reviews vs 5), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. G License Manager's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat.
Recommended by size: small/early-stage admins who need fast install and low risk should default to G License Manager; mid-market and enterprise admins with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Report Suspicious's 205-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than G License Manager's broader-but-shallower coverage.
This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical Google Workspace Marketplace listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: G License Manager audit • Report Suspicious audit
G License Manager is the cheaper option — it offers a free plan (Free of charge). Report Suspicious starts at Paid. Both publish their pricing on the Google Workspace Marketplace; AppRanks mirrors what's listed on each refresh cycle.
G License Manager has the higher average rating (5.0★ from 5 reviews) compared to Report Suspicious (4.1★ from 205 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
G License Manager holds the higher average rating (5.0★ vs 4.1★). That is the one dimension AppRanks can separate them on here — read both apps' detail pages for the feature breakdown and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the Google Workspace Marketplace. Report Suspicious has the deeper published review base (205 vs 5), which often — though not always — accompanies better-tested setup docs. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly: read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for user-reported install experience.
G License Manager typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (5 reviews). Report Suspicious typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (205 reviews). A larger review base generally means the app has been exercised at scale — relevant if you are processing high volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. G License Manager and Report Suspicious both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from G License Manager" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.