Alternatives to GoPhish for Comprehensive Phishing Simulations

GoPhish is the most widely used free phishing simulation tool, and for good reason. At scale, though, its self-hosted model moves the real cost onto your team: attack infrastructure, scenario design and reporting. This guide compares the open-source and managed alternatives, and what each one suits.

One of the most widely used phishing simulation tools is GoPhish. However, as cyber threats evolve, so too must the tools we rely on. For cybersecurity agencies and enterprises conducting large-scale phishing simulations, it’s essential to explore alternatives that offer greater flexibility, automation, and scalability.

This article examines some notable GoPhish alternatives, helping organizations find the right fit for their security testing needs.

The Importance of Phishing Simulations

In an era where technology drives businesses, the weakest link remains human error.

Phishing simulations not only boost cybersecurity awareness but also expose the gaps in our defenses, especially the human factor.

Furthermore, as industries face tighter regulatory requirements, these simulations assist organizations in achieving compliance, while continuously measuring and enhancing cybersecurity resilience.

The Limitations of GoPhish

While GoPhish has set a high standard in the realm of phishing simulations, it does come with certain limitations, particularly for large-scale enterprises and cybersecurity firms.

💡 To be clear, we appreciate GoPhish and have used it extensively. However, after running numerous phishing simulations, we encountered challenges that led us to seek alternatives.

Infrastructure Management is Time-Consuming

GoPhish is a very good phishing platform but doesn't handle the attack infrastructure you need to build and maintain to execute your simulations.

It comes with a small webserver and SMTP connectors to execute your campaigns, however, at scale, you're going to have a few additional steps.

For instance, if you want to survive Google Safe Browsing's alerts, you'll need to setup redirectors and redirections before routing the traffic to GoPhish. In case your domain or infrastructure get flagged for phishing, you will have to rebuild everything or wait for a validation or manual review.

For cybersecurity agencies conducting large-scale campaigns, these extra steps demand considerable time and effort, and in security operations, time is money.

Limited Pre-Built Phishing Scenarios

Unlike some commercial tools, GoPhish doesn’t come with ready-to-use phishing templates. While open-source templates are available on GitHub, they often require significant customization.

Customization will also be limited as, following up on the point above, the infrastructure isn't managed for you.

So if you want to create a custom campaign with several domain names, you'll need to create separate campaigns, with different sender profiles.

Lack of Built-in Reporting and Progress Tracking

For organizations conducting recurring simulations, tracking behavioral trends over time is critical. However, GoPhish does not offer built-in analytics for long-term trend analysis.

• Users must manually store, organize, and analyze simulation data.
• Over time, maintaining comprehensive reporting becomes an administrative burden.

This is again very time-consuming.

No Coverage Beyond Email

The limitation that matters most in 2026 is one of scope rather than engineering. GoPhish simulates email. It does not place voice calls or run a deepfake video call.

That gap now sits where the attacks are. Google attributes 23% of cloud compromises to voice phishing calls, CrowdStrike recorded a 134% rise in vishing intrusions between 2024 and 2025, and Microsoft reports ClickFix lures as the leading initial access technique at 47%, ahead of phishing at 35%. An email-only simulation programme leaves each of those untested.

See how vishing simulation works →

Exploring Open-Source GoPhish Alternatives

For those looking beyond GoPhish, several powerful alternatives exist, each with distinct strengths and use cases.

Social Engineering Toolkit (SET)

Background: SET, a part of the TrustedSec suite, stands out as a multifaceted tool designed for advanced penetration tests.

Key Features:

• Attack Vector technology for realistic phishing campaigns
• Supports malicious server hosting for credential harvesting
• Highly customizable for red team engagements

Pros and Cons: SET boasts a range of advanced features, but may come with a steeper learning curve for beginners.

Recommendations: Ideal for experts keen on tailoring their attacks.

King Phisher

⚠️ King Phisher is no longer maintained.

Background: This tool offers a platform for creating, managing, and launching advanced phishing campaigns.

Features: Real-time campaign monitoring, adaptable web server configurations, and two-factor authentication stand out.

Pros and Cons: King Phisher offers granularity in campaigns, but might overwhelm those seeking simpler solutions.

Recommendations: Suited for mid to large-scale organizations with a focus on detailed tracking. Given that the project is archived, treat it as a reference implementation rather than a deployment candidate.

How Do the Options Actually Compare?

See the full Arsen vs GoPhish comparison →

What Should You Look for in a GoPhish Alternative?

Most evaluations go wrong by comparing feature lists. The more useful question is what your team will still be doing manually twelve months in. Four criteria separate the options:

• Who owns the infrastructure. Self-hosted tools are free to licence and expensive to run. Budget the engineering hours for domains, redirectors and Safe Browsing remediation before comparing sticker prices.
• Which channels you can test. If your programme cannot place a voice call or run a deepfake video call, it does not cover the techniques currently used against help desks and finance teams.
• Whether results accumulate. Compliance and board reporting need trend data across campaigns, not a spreadsheet per campaign.
• Who builds the campaign. The practical constraint on most programmes is not tooling but the hours needed to design scenarios. A done-for-you model removes that entirely: Arsen designs and runs the calendar, your team approves.

Arsen: A Scalable Alternative

Recognizing the challenges associated with large-scale phishing simulations, we developed Arsen, a streamlined platform designed for efficiency, scalability, and ease of use.

Doing phishing simulations at scale, we needed to speed up the infrastructure management, the campaign creation and the reporting to be able to deliver high-quality risk evaluations and training for our clients.

We built a platform that allows you to:

• Launch one-click campaign deployment
• Fully customize simulations, from sender domains to email content
• Better track and report, eliminating manual data aggregation
• Extend beyond email into voice, QR code and deepfake video-call simulations

💡 For cybersecurity agencies conducting phishing simulations at scale, Arsen eliminates unnecessary friction and optimizes the process from start to finish.

Request a demo →

Choosing the Right Phishing Simulation Tool

SET and King Phisher are free to use and, provided you have the time and skills, are very good alternatives to GoPhish.

If you need to run large-scale phishing simulations efficiently, Arsen provides a turnkey solution, letting you focus on security rather than setup.

Final Thoughts

GoPhish has long been a trusted phishing simulation tool, but cyber threats are constantly evolving. As a result, organizations need adaptable, scalable solutions.

Whether you opt for an open-source alternative like SET, a robust tracking tool like King Phisher, or an integrated phishing platform like Arsen, the key is to prioritize efficiency, automation, and ongoing employee training.

Additional Resources

• SET Official GitHub
• King Phisher GitHub

Frequently Asked Questions