Is Liberty91 a direct Feedly alternative?

They sit at different points in the workflow. Feedly is a best-in-class OSINT monitoring layer that helps analysts track open sources and structure what they find. Liberty91 is an end-to-end platform that runs the whole lifecycle, including collection, and then produces and delivers finished, tailored intelligence. If you want monitoring you operate, Feedly is excellent. If you want finished intelligence delivered per organisation, that is where Liberty91 fits.

Does Liberty91 collect from open sources like Feedly does?

Yes. Liberty91 collects continuously from hundreds of sources, including security news, vendor reporting, premium intelligence, dark web, and social. The difference is what happens next: rather than presenting articles for an analyst to read and write up, it assesses each event against the organisation's Intelligence Requirements and turns what matters into finished reporting and detection content.

How does Liberty91 pricing compare to Feedly?

Feedly publishes team plans for its threat intelligence product alongside custom enterprise pricing, billed per seat. Liberty91 is priced per customer organisation, which suits delivering intelligence to many organisations rather than equipping a single analyst team. The model is designed to stay accessible to mid-market budgets and to scale with an MSSP's customer base.

Can an MSSP deliver Liberty91 to its customers under its own brand?

Yes, and this is the main structural difference from a per-seat monitoring tool. Every customer is a separate tenant with its own requirements and its own agents, your branding runs through the sender and the documents, and Mailroom logs every delivery per account.

Looking beyond Feedly for threat intelligence?

Feedly is one of the best OSINT monitoring tools an analyst can use, and Leo is genuinely good at surfacing and tagging what matters. If you want the whole lifecycle, finished intelligence tailored per organisation and delivered to people and tooling, here is how Liberty91 compares.

Start for Free Book a demo

What Feedly is good at.

Feedly for Threat Intelligence is a superb way to stay on top of open sources. Leo, its AI assistant, reads an enormous volume of articles and reports and tags CVEs, malware families, threat actors, and ATT&CK techniques, then lets you export to STIX, MISP, and JSON. For an analyst who needs to monitor the news flow without drowning in it, that is a real productivity win.

If your need is efficient OSINT monitoring that your team curates and acts on, Feedly is a strong pick. The question is whether you want a monitoring layer or the finished intelligence that sits downstream of it.

At a glance.

A fair, side-by-side read of where each one puts its emphasis.

	Feedly	Liberty91
Primary focus	OSINT collection and monitoring across news, blogs, and advisories, with the Leo AI assistant tagging and structuring what it surfaces.	The full lifecycle: collection, analysis, finished production, and delivery, tailored to each organisation it covers.
Best fit for	Analysts and research teams who want to monitor open sources efficiently and keep on top of the news flow.	MSSPs and teams who want finished, tailored intelligence delivered, not just a stream of sources to read and write up.
Operating model	Your analysts read, triage, and turn what Leo surfaces into reporting for stakeholders.	The platform assesses relevance and produces the finished reporting, then dispatches it to the right people and systems.
Per-customer tailoring	Personal feeds and AI feeds tuned by the analyst to the topics they follow.	Self-maintaining Intelligence Requirements per organisation, so relevance is assessed for that specific organisation.
Outputs	Curated articles, tags, and exports such as STIX, MISP, and JSON for use downstream.	Finished reports plus IOC lists, Sigma detection rules, and STIX 2.1 bundles dispatched to people and tooling.
MSSP and white-label	A per-seat SaaS for analyst teams, not prominently positioned for white-label MSSP delivery.	Multi-tenant by design, with white-label sender, email templates, and report PDFs, priced per customer.

Where Liberty91 is different.

From monitoring to finished intelligence

Monitoring open sources well is genuinely valuable, and Feedly is excellent at it. Liberty91 picks the work up from there: it assesses every event against each organisation's requirements and produces finished reports, IOC lists, Sigma rules, and STIX bundles, so the output is ready to act on rather than ready to read.

Tailored to each organisation

Each organisation gets its own self-maintaining Intelligence Requirements derived from its assets, suppliers, sector, and geography. Relevance is decided for that organisation, not for the analyst's general topic list.

Delivered into people and tooling

Liberty91 dispatches reports to stakeholders and machine-readable products to the SIEM, SOAR, firewall, and threat intelligence platform through Mailroom, with an auditable record of every send. Intelligence reaches whatever acts on it, not just the analyst's reading list.

White-label delivery for MSSPs

A monitoring layer is read by your analysts; this is delivered to your customers. Their emails come from your sender address, the templates and report PDFs carry your design, and Mailroom's Sent log records what reached each account.

When Liberty91 is likely the better fit.

Liberty91 is the one to look at when you need finished finished intelligence delivered, not a feed to read. That is usually the case for MSSPs delivering a tailored service to many customers under their own brand, and for teams that want reporting and detection content mapped to their own assets and suppliers without staffing a full intelligence function.

Plenty of teams run both: a monitoring layer for analyst-led research, and a platform that produces and dispatches finished intelligence. They complement each other more than they collide.

See the platform →Threat intelligence as a service →

Frequently Asked Questions.

What reviewers say on G2.

“Automated, Actionable Cyber Threat Intelligence at Scale”

What do you like best?

“Integrating Liberty91’s AI enrichment into the OpenCTI ecosystem feels like a natural fit. It gives our users automated scoring, deduplication, and contextualisation at scale, helping turn raw threat data into prioritised, actionable intelligence without all the manual effort.”

What do you dislike?

“Like many similar platforms it takes a little time to ramp up and become familiar with all of the functions and features available in Liberty91, and to configure and refine from initial deployment.”

What problems is Liberty91 solving?

“Centralisation of intelligence into a single platform from multiple sources and enabling the full analytical lifecycle from ingestion to reporting reduces the need for users to log into multiple tools, increasing operational effectiveness and efficiency.”

Verified user in Information Technology and Services, Mid-Market, 51 to 1,000 employees. October 2026.

“Liberty91: Simplifying Work and Boosting Efficiency”

What do you like best?

“What I like best about Liberty91 is its user-friendly interface, efficient workflow, and ability to bring relevant information together in one platform. It helps streamline day-to-day tasks, improves visibility, and makes it easier to access the information needed to work effectively.”

What do you dislike?

“I don’t have any dislikes about Liberty91. Overall, I’m very satisfied with the platform.”

What problems is Liberty91 solving?

“Liberty91 helps streamline workflows by bringing relevant information and tools together in one platform. This saves time, improves efficiency, and makes it easier to access the information I need, allowing me to work more effectively and focus on important tasks.”

Verified user in Consulting, Mid-Market, 51 to 1,000 employees. October 2026.

Read the reviews on G2

Other comparisons.

Want to see this in your own organisation?

Request a demo, or start for free right away, and you will be looking at actionable, real-time, relevant threat intelligence built around your own organisation instead of generic reporting.