COMPARE · SCORED SEPTEMBER 2026 · CROWDSTRIKE EASM ADDED 13 OCTOBER 2026
Compare attack surface management tools side by side
Quick answer
Pick two to five of the ten ASM tools we score to see every criterion score, its reason, published pricing and deployment in one table. The default view shows the top three on our weights: IONIX (7.70), CyCognito (7.60) and watchTowr (7.50). Every pair also has its own head-to-head page, listed below.
Scored September 2026 · CrowdStrike EASM added 13 October 2026 · Drawn from vendor product pages, docs and public pricing
Which tools do you want to compare?
How do the selected tools compare?
| Item | IONIX Rank 1 · 7.70 | CyCognito Rank 2 · 7.60 | watchTowr Rank 3 · 7.50 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Weighted score | 7.70 | 7.60 | 7.50 |
| Discovery of unknown assets and subsidiaries (20%) | 9 / 10TOP Its Connective Intelligence engine recursively maps internet-facing assets, including shadow IT, subsidiaries and third- and fourth-party assets in the digital supply chain. | 9 / 10TOP Starts from the organization's name with no IP ranges or asset lists and covers subsidiaries, acquired-company infrastructure and third-party-connected systems. | 8 / 10 Reconstructs the external estate from a domain name, including unknown SaaS, subsidiaries and forgotten infrastructure. |
| Attribution accuracy and false-positive handling (15%) | 8 / 10TOP Automatically attributes each asset to the relevant subsidiary or business owner; IONIX's claim of fewer false positives is its own and not verified here. | 8 / 10TOP Every finding carries a trace of how it was found, why it belongs to the organization and who owns it. | 7 / 10 Maps discovered assets to subsidiaries, brands and M&A; the attribution evidence is described in less detail than at CyCognito or IONIX. |
| Exploitability validation (15%) | 8 / 10 Confirms exploitability with non-intrusive exploit simulations; less aggressive than the attack-agent approaches documented by Hadrian and watchTowr. | 8 / 10 Runs more than 100,000 unauthenticated black-box security tests across more than 30 exposure categories, designed not to disrupt production. | 9 / 10TOP Automated red teaming with eight agents: infrastructure, web application, known exploited vulnerabilities, credential stuffing, cloud, sensitive data, third party and supply chain, and DNS. |
| Remediation and mitigation support (20%) | 9 / 10TOP Turns new CVEs into deployable WAF rules for virtual patching, and its Active Protection claims hijackable domains and cloud buckets on the customer's behalf. | 7 / 10 Step-by-step guidance per issue, owner-linked workflows and a retest after each fix; no automated mitigation is documented. | 9 / 10TOP Active Defense deploys mitigation rules to the network edge through WAF and firewall vendors including Cloudflare, Akamai, Imperva, F5, Fortinet, Check Point and Citrix. |
| Integrations and platform reach (10%) | 7 / 10 Names Jira, ServiceNow, Splunk, Microsoft Sentinel, Cortex XSOAR, Slack, Wiz and Prisma Cloud, and identifies WAFs from 50+ vendors; narrower than the platform suites. | 7 / 10 Names ServiceNow, Jira, Splunk and Zendesk among its integrations. | 7 / 10 Ticketing and workflow connections to Atlassian, ServiceNow, Freshworks, Ivanti, Linear, PagerDuty, Torq and Zendesk. |
| Time to value (10%) | 8 / 10 States "immediate time-to-value" with minimal resources; the inputs needed to start are not published on the pages reviewed. | 9 / 10TOP The organization's name is the only required input. | 8 / 10 "Zero install", starting from a domain name. |
| Pricing transparency (10%) | 2 / 10 No list price, pricing basis or trial terms published. | 4 / 10 Publishes its pricing basis (total asset volume for ASM; active IPs and web applications for exposure validation) and a quote form with a stated 24-hour average response; no list price. | 2 / 10 No pricing published. |
| Pricing | Not published. Contact sales. | Quote-based. Pricing basis published: total asset volume (ASM); active IPs and web applications (exposure validation). | Not published. Contact sales. |
| Deployment | SaaS (customer portal at portal.ionix.io); agentless external discovery | SaaS; unauthenticated black-box external testing | SaaS; zero install |
| Best for | Best for multi-subsidiary enterprises that want mitigation, not just a list | Best for the fastest start from a company name | Best for rapid reaction to emerging threats |
| Strongest at | Subsidiary and supply-chain discovery; WAF-based virtual patching; claiming hijackable assets | Seedless discovery; attribution evidence on every finding; large active test library | Automated red teaming; re-testing the hour a threat emerges; edge mitigation rules |
| Watch out for | No published pricing; validation is non-intrusive rather than attack-agent based | Remediation stops at guidance, tickets and retests; list price not published | No pricing published; attribution method described only briefly |
| Owner or subsidiary attributed | Documented | Documented | Documented |
| Exploitability proven | Documented | Documented | Documented |
| Ticket or workflow created | Documented | Documented | Documented |
| Compensating control applied | Documented | Not documented | Documented |
| Fix retested | Not documented | Documented | Partial |
Editorial assessment from public vendor material, scored September 2026, with CrowdStrike EASM added 13 October 2026. TOP marks the highest score among all ten tools on that criterion; ties share it.
Among the selected tools, IONIX has the highest weighted score (7.70).
Head-to-head pages for this selection
Every head-to-head comparison
IONIX
CyCognito
watchTowr
Hadrian
Cortex Xpanse
Tenable ASM
Microsoft Defender EASM
Rapid7 Surface Command
CrowdStrike EASM
Alternatives pages
Frequently asked questions
How many tools can I compare at once?
Between two and five. The selection is saved in the page address, so you can share a link to it.
Where do the scores come from?
From our editorial assessment of each vendor's public product pages, documentation and pricing, scored September 2026, with CrowdStrike EASM added 13 October 2026. Each score has a one-line reason, and the method is on How we score.
Why does the default view show three tools?
It shows the top three on our published weights. Change the selection above, or change the weights in the score calculator.
Why do some prices say 'Not published'?
Because the vendor does not publish a price or pricing basis on the public pages we reviewed. We do not estimate prices.